The Brexit aftermath thread

[ranzino]

....

I agree with you that another referendum would not be good. It almost feels like the government is trying to keep the UK as attached to the EU as possible in the short term so they don't want to burn any bridges in the future when public opinion may be too overwhelming for them to ignore.

Rejoining EU is a much uglier toad to swallow than tossing Brexit out of the next window. And EEA rules are of course harder to influence than by being EU Member in the fist place. May should be blunt about: UK will never be free in its chosen course, because hard Brexit is off the table.

[Rockyreg]

Rejoining EU is a much uglier toad to swallow than tossing Brexit out of the next window. And EEA rules are of course harder to influence than by being EU Member in the fist place. May should be blunt about: UK will never be free in its chosen course, because hard Brexit is off the table.

I agree to some extent, as a leave voter I see the EEA as a (pragmatic) step on the way to leaving the EU fully. I think the EU itself is at a bit of a crossroads at the moment with a bit of a battle between the commission and member states regarding federalisation etc.

[ranzino]

I agree to some extent, as a leave voter I see the EEA as a (pragmatic) step on the way to leaving the EU fully. I think the EU itself is at a bit of a crossroads at the moment with a bit of a battle between the commission and member states regarding federalisation etc.

Just because iam curious: unless you abandon NI to the care of RoI, UK will never be free; so what is the goal in the end ?
would you risk the sacrifice of the union (NI or even Scotland leaving) so the rest is off the rules of single market ?

[Slant]

well, what was the leave-to-remain margin in the referendum ? bring more voters to the box and sway some of them and a second ref is in favour of remain perhaps, altough by a small margin only.

Yes, most likely Brexit would lose and Remain would win right now. But what then? Are you proposing a new vote every time the British yellow press manages to sway public opinion this way or that way? The UK would come to a complete halt like that. Democracy isn't without errors. And this is one of those errors. It very well means, since the British Government was so outrageously stupid to not define the purpose clearly and the rules accordingly (a simple majority would never fly for such a drastic change of the nation's orientation here...), it means that the British are stuck with it.

I am a fervent opponent of Brexit, because it's stupendously bad for the country, but heck... their country, their way to call a referendum and call it binding all of a sudden, their bed to sleep in. I would welcome a legal and democratically sensible way to prevent this, but after May affirmed her stance, I see no way how they can weasle themselves out of it bar supreme court decisions (of which one already affirmed Brexit in general as well...).

- - - Updated - - -

I agree to some extent, as a leave voter I see the EEA as a (pragmatic) step on the way to leaving the EU fully. I think the EU itself is at a bit of a crossroads at the moment with a bit of a battle between the commission and member states regarding federalisation etc.

Right now the EU isn't talking about federalisation at all. They're still fleshing out the construct they erected 10 years ago. Federalisation would be opposed by all countries, including Germany and France. But when it makes sense to implement a common defense force, why not discuss the how and see how you can practically save everyone some money while getting more Oomph out of the military. At the same time, we're already thinking about harmonizing taxes and such, it absolutely makes sense to speak about a position of a sort of "finance minister" (or commissioner or however they're going to call it with their fancy names) to coordinate that idea.

It looks like a federal state in some areas, but we must not forget that all the sovereignty the EU is perceived to have is on loan only. The EU is still not entitled to any sovereignty beyond what the countries grant it.

[Rockyreg]

Just because iam curious: unless you abandon NI to the care of RoI, UK will never be free; so what is the goal in the end ?
would you risk the sacrifice of the union (NI or even Scotland leaving) so the rest is off the rules of single market ?

When I say 'on the way' I mean a time period of 10-30 years. Lots of things can happen in that time period, for example there is a good chance (I would almost say its a certainty) that in that time period Unionists will not be in the majority in Northern Ireland. The EU itself is a constantly evolving beast.

- - - Updated - - -

NOPE, just because some people make comments about federalisation doesn't mean it's actually a thing.

But is this not the ultimate goal of the EU? Surely the phrase 'ever closer union' means that this is the end goal.

[Deleted]

Yes, most likely Brexit would lose and Remain would win right now. But what then? Are you proposing a new vote every time the British yellow press manages to sway public opinion this way or that way? The UK would come to a complete halt like that. Democracy isn't without errors. And this is one of those errors. It very well means, since the British Government was so outrageously stupid to not define the purpose clearly and the rules accordingly (a simple majority would never fly for such a drastic change of the nation's orientation here...), it means that the British are stuck with it.

I am a fervent opponent of Brexit, because it's stupendously bad for the country, but heck... their country, their way to call a referendum and call it binding all of a sudden, their bed to sleep in. I would welcome a legal and democratically sensible way to prevent this, but after May affirmed her stance, I see no way how they can weasle themselves out of it bar supreme court decisions (of which one already affirmed Brexit in general as well...).

We didn't talk about it when this came up last but what makes this so hard is the fact that for the stability of the UK any new leave/remain vote need to be decisive - However, for the health of the EU, any new referendum has to include markedly worse terms than than the current arrangement, lest it devolve into yet another 'made them vote again to get the result they want'.
These two things will be hard to do simultaneously however - Personally I prioritize the EU, so markedly worse terms means no rebate and an end to the EURO exception, and if that means that they still vote leave, then so be it.

[Noradin]

The main difficulty with that is NI would effectively remain within the EU. As the UK is leaving the EU, the UK will have no representation within EU institutions. This can only mean that NI will be represented by RoI within the EU.

No, they wouldn't be represented by RoI, they would effectively get a deal like Norway.

- - - Updated - - -

Sorry for the late response, I have been swamped with work this week.

I can't imagine a Dutch PM telling the UK's PM to "give it to him" and that he will "give her yogurt".

Why not?
Yes, it would probably be some other regional product but otherwise the exact same exchange could in principle happen anywhere in Europe with comparable likelyhood.

- - - Updated - - -

I agree to some extent, as a leave voter I see the EEA as a (pragmatic) step on the way to leaving the EU fully. I think the EU itself is at a bit of a crossroads at the moment with a bit of a battle between the commission and member states regarding federalisation etc.

Excuse me?
You do know that the commission is made up solely of direct representatives of the member states.
How exactly do you imagine a "battle" between them could ever happen?

- - - Updated - - -

It looks like a federal state in some areas, but we must not forget that all the sovereignty the EU is perceived to have is on loan only. The EU is still not entitled to any sovereignty beyond what the countries grant it.

Lets call it "delegate" instead of "grant".

[Deleted]

Just because iam curious: unless you abandon NI to the care of RoI, UK will never be free; so what is the goal in the end ?
would you risk the sacrifice of the union (NI or even Scotland leaving) so the rest is off the rules of single market ?

This impossibility is at the core of brexit.
refusal to accept it is the cornerstone of it all.

[ranzino]

This impossibility is at the core of brexit.
refusal to accept it is the cornerstone of it all.

given the timeline of 10-30 years by @Rockyreg, it could solve itself.
UK will arrange themselves with the situation and abandon all such ideas of severing all ties with RoI and EU or accept a border in the Irish Sea (which leaves NI off mainland UK) or agree to the very hard border in Ireland to complete Brexit.

[Slant]

Lets call it "delegate" instead of "grant".

Fair enough.

[draykorinee]

Whenever I hear people complain about 'unelected' members I just laugh at the irony that the uk has one of the only governments with an unelected bunch of mostly rich toffs voting on our laws in the world. And they're for life. And they used to be able to hand it down to family.

[Deleted]

Whenever I hear people complain about 'unelected' members I just laugh at the irony that the uk has one of the only governments with an unelected bunch of mostly rich toffs voting on our laws in the world. And they're for life. And they used to be able to hand it down to family.

And the fact that when we had the chance to send our elected MEPs to the EU, we instead overwhelmingly sent UKIP, as nothing more than a joke from what I can fathom.

[Kallisto]

And the fact that when we had the chance to send our elected MEPs to the EU, we instead overwhelmingly sent UKIP, as nothing more than a joke from what I can fathom.

It's mostly down to EU parliament elections has the lowest turnouts in British election cycles. The only one that seemed to have less votes was the voting vote because everyone knew it was a choice between FPTP and FPTP with a sign saying "Not FPTP honest guys." and the votes on police comissioners which shouldn't be voted on anyway. Leaders of police should be professionals not some politician in a police uniform.

But back on track, EU parliament elections were basically where next to no one voted outside the most pro and anti eu groups. Pro EU split their votes between Tories and Labour while there. Anti EU all focused on voting UKIP. (Talking about post coalition) meaning pro eu vote was split so by default UKIP got the most.

[caervek]

If anything the border will be in the Irish Sea and the dup will just have to learn to live with it.

That's not an option, NI won't accept being treated differently to the rest of the UK (which IIRC would be a violation of the CTA treaties anyway), RoI/NI won't accept a closed border between them.

- - - Updated - - -

Doesn't really matter, EU law is above it.

That's not how predating treaties work.

[caervek]

Predating non-binding agreements, not treaties.

Nobody is talking about predating non-binding agreements though I don't think? We were discussing a series of treaties the UK/Ireland have for open borders that predate the EU copies.

[caervek]

There are NO treaties. It's a series of non-binding agreements that have actually at times been rescinded (e.g. during WW2).

Nope, there have been multiple treaties over the years forming/amending the CTA, the last of which was in 2011 IIRC.

And yes the CTA was temporarily altered during WW2 because *shock* there was a war on (you might have heard about it? Was a big thing) and the IRA were executing attacks in mainland UK to aid Nazi Germany.

[caervek]

Can you direct me to one of those treaties?

The 2011 one was called the "Joint Agreement between Ireland and the United Kingdom regarding cooperation on measures to secure the external Common Travel Area border" (Yes I'm serious, that's the name lol). You can prob find that easily on Google.

IIRC the most recent EU treaty that references the CTA was the Amsterdam Treaty (1999), which had exclusions/opt-outs for Ireland/UK for things that clashed with the CTA (I.E The Schengen Agreements).

[Slant]

That's not an option, NI won't accept being treated differently to the rest of the UK (which IIRC would be a violation of the CTA treaties anyway), RoI/NI won't accept a closed border between them.

That's not how predating treaties work.

Nobody really cares about which treaty was there first, mate. That's all fun and jokes on this forum, but really EU legislation does supercede your regional agreement as far as EU members are concerned.

[caervek]

Nobody really cares about which treaty was there first, mate.

The EU/UK/Ireland do hence why Ireland/UK were given an opt on in Schengen in order to pass the Amsterdam treaty without a clash with the CTA treaties.

- - - Updated - - -

really EU legislation does supercede your regional agreement as far as EU members are concerned.

1: International agreements aren't regional, by definition.
2: Nope, the EU was cool with that when everything was signed, it's only now things aren't going their way they are kicking their heels.

[Slant]

The EU/UK/Ireland do hence why Ireland/UK were given an opt on in Schengen in order to pass the Amsterdam treaty without a clash with the CTA treaties.

Yes, and we're all very curious to see how this plays out. Ireland really seems to like Schengen, otherwise they wouldn't make such a fuss about it.

- - - Updated - - -

1: International agreements aren't regional, by definition.
2: Nope, the EU was cool with that when everything was signed, it's only now things aren't going their way they are kicking their heels.

Which definition? Because regional isn't limited to national stuff, you know. But this is just semantics and rather irrelevant. I'll rephrase: Legally binding EU treaties supercede non-binding international letters of intent, oops, sorry, agreements.

The EU was cool with that, the EU isn't even kicking it's heels. It's the UK making a fuss about it. For the EU the matter is rather clear, you lot got yourself into an impossible position, it's your job to get yourselves out of it.