[EU] Brexit negotiations at a standstill

[Slant]

Try and look on the bright(ish) side.

There isn't a majority in Parliament for a hard-Brexit. There is JRM and his 40 or so disciples, but that's about it. The Tory party won't fall into line behind it, Labour would vote against, as would the SNP and Liberals. Hell, even the DUP would come out against it, since it would only work with the border in the Irish sea, which the DUP have already made their "blood red line". Which is the kind of rhetoric that an Irish politician of any persuasion should no better than to use.

On the other hand, is there a majority for a truly soft Brexit, a BINO if you will? The SNP and Labour might back it, although there are certainly some Labour MPs who wouldn't regardless of the whips. Plenty of Tories who wouldn't, and others who wouldn't if supporting it was turned into a "back me or it's General Election time" situation.

So if we can't find a deal that the MPs can actually support, what does that leave us with? Three options, from where I'm sitting. No-deal Brexit, with all the horrifying consequences laid out in the 80 odd government papers (and even worse, a happy Dribbles). Or an extension on the negotiating period beyond that stipulated in Article 50, which the EU are unlikely to agree to (especially since there is no guarantee any more time would make it any more likely to get a deal sorted). Or finally the cancellation of Article 50 entirely, which might be possible unilaterally, if the case before the ECJ agrees, otherwise would need the agreement of 27 countries. Might be possible, if they know the alternative is no-deal, that damages literally everyone.

I have no idea which of those are possible at this point. To say we're in uncharted waters is an understatement. Personally, I think it's only going to happen if one or both of the main parties decide that the damage in being involved in a really damaging Brexit is worse that the damage caused to their party by cancelling it. Or doing a BINO. This is the point where we need politicians that can take a position that might be personally damaging for the sake of the country, because that's the right thing to do. We need big people, for a big time of our political life. Sadly, I'm not sure if we have them.

Diplomats and people "in the know" say that question of unilateracy wouldn't even come up, all 27 member states would agree with the cancellation anyway. Even if the EU had to take the hit with the cost that the negotiations have mounted up, it would be much cheaper to go on and reform the EU properly than deal with Brexit and have a lopsided French/German leadership. The Triumvirate France/Germany/UK worked wonderfully, even if the UK has to acknowledge its own fuckups in the future. No more blaming the EU for No. 10 being silly.

[Nigel Tufnel]

Try and look on the bright(ish) side.

There isn't a majority in Parliament for a hard-Brexit. There is JRM and his 40 or so disciples, but that's about it. The Tory party won't fall into line behind it, Labour would vote against, as would the SNP and Liberals. Hell, even the DUP would come out against it, since it would only work with the border in the Irish sea, which the DUP have already made their "blood red line". Which is the kind of rhetoric that an Irish politician of any persuasion should no better than to use.

On the other hand, is there a majority for a truly soft Brexit, a BINO if you will? The SNP and Labour might back it, although there are certainly some Labour MPs who wouldn't regardless of the whips. Plenty of Tories who wouldn't, and others who wouldn't if supporting it was turned into a "back me or it's General Election time" situation.

So if we can't find a deal that the MPs can actually support, what does that leave us with? Three options, from where I'm sitting. No-deal Brexit, with all the horrifying consequences laid out in the 80 odd government papers (and even worse, a happy Dribbles). Or an extension on the negotiating period beyond that stipulated in Article 50, which the EU are unlikely to agree to (especially since there is no guarantee any more time would make it any more likely to get a deal sorted). Or finally the cancellation of Article 50 entirely, which might be possible unilaterally, if the case before the ECJ agrees, otherwise would need the agreement of 27 countries. Might be possible, if they know the alternative is no-deal, that damages literally everyone.

I have no idea which of those are possible at this point. To say we're in uncharted waters is an understatement. Personally, I think it's only going to happen if one or both of the main parties decide that the damage in being involved in a really damaging Brexit is worse that the damage caused to their party by cancelling it. Or doing a BINO. This is the point where we need politicians that can take a position that might be personally damaging for the sake of the country, because that's the right thing to do. We need big people, for a big time of our political life. Sadly, I'm not sure if we have them.

Yep, I agree with all of this.

But, I think if you had to pick the most likely option, surely it's now hard Brexit? Regardless of the DUP? E.g, as you say an extension to the negotiating period isn't going to help much (even if it was granted) - the issue is lines in the sand. Second referendum / cancellation of Brexit isn't going to happen unless the polls show a substantial swing - they're still not doing so (52% Remain 48% Leave). [Plug: that won't stop me attending: https://www.peoples-vote.uk/march on October 20th. Still worth doing.]

I'm still not sure what we're left with here other than hard Brexit or Labour coming on board with May's Chequers v2 / Canada+++. May isn't offering a BINO?

[Huehuecoyotl]

Diplomats and people "in the know" say that question of unilateracy wouldn't even come up, all 27 member states would agree with the cancellation anyway. Even if the EU had to take the hit with the cost that the negotiations have mounted up, it would be much cheaper to go on and reform the EU properly than deal with Brexit and have a lopsided French/German leadership. The Triumvirate France/Germany/UK worked wonderfully, even if the UK has to acknowledge its own fuckups in the future. No more blaming the EU for No. 10 being silly.

I've bolded the part that I would see as critical to giving the Tories as way out. But I would go so far as to say that any reform would have to include a properly defined and structured Article 50; one that has sensible timeframes, and clearly laid out possible outcomes in line with the 4 freedoms. So that the next time that a country comes along and says they are having a referendum on leaving, any campaign for such an outcome wouldn't be able to lie about what kind of deal was possible.

Oh, and I would make it explicit that activation of the clause has NO means of reversing it. You activate it, you leave. You want to come back later, you have to negotiate as a new entrant.

- - - Updated - - -

Yep, I agree with all of this.

But, I think if you had to pick the most likely option, surely it's now hard Brexit? Regardless of the DUP? E.g, as you say an extension to the negotiating period isn't going to help much (even if it was granted) - the issue is lines in the sand. Second referendum / cancellation of Brexit isn't going to happen unless the polls show a substantial swing - they're still not doing so (52% Remain 48% Leave). [Plug: that won't stop me attending: https://www.peoples-vote.uk/march on October 20th. Still worth doing.]

I'm still not sure what we're left with here other than hard Brexit or Labour coming on board with May's Chequers v2 / Canada+++. May isn't offering a BINO?

May isn't offering a BINO yet. But if it's a choice between making the Chequers deal closer to a BINO or going no-deal, which way do you think she would jump? No point trying a Canada+++ because Labour/SNP/Liberals won't go for it, and she will never get the Europhiles in her own party to back it.

Probably a moot point anyway, since she can't get the votes for any soft Brexit unless Labour back it. And Labour backing it with their 6 tests would make it virtually a BINO anyway.

It's a head-scratcher, certainly. Which is probably why I'm not as worried as I should be yet. If I can see a cliff in front of me, I would be scared. But we're veering around so much that it's cliffs one second, wall the next, then clear road the next. I've no idea where we are going to end up.

[Acidbaron]

EU is already looking at itself on where to reform how to do things differently the UK has been an obstructive factor, why for all that is holy would we want to invite child back on the adults table?

When its still very much apparent that his parents don't have the house in order yet. The UK is not beneficial to any alliance at this point since they are still too consumed by national politics and still very much scapegoat national issues on international actors, being it left or right.

[Deleted]

No, I meant I wasn't being entirely serious about rampaging across the green, fertile fields of Essex with a bazooka.

I am being entirely serious about my gloom regarding the likely outcome (hard Brexit), I am being serious about civil disobedience.

Forgive my skepticism, but I doubt civil disobedience solves national idiocy: the most salient cultural drive behind uk's euroskepticism.
I wish you well, but I suspect the best outcome for me, is to make an example out of the UK. Not to drag the UK into the mud of economic disgrace, but rather exposing their cultural underpinnings, as it regards to brexit stuff, for what they are: smoke and mirrors.

[Nigel Tufnel]

EU is already looking at itself on where to reform how to do things differently the UK has been an obstructive factor, why for all that is holy would we want to invite child back on the adults table?

When its still very much apparent that his parents don't have the house in order yet. The UK is not beneficial to any alliance at this point since they are still too consumed by national politics and still very much scapegoat national issues on international actors, being it left or right.

Forgive my skepticism, but I doubt civil disobedience solves national idiocy: the most salient cultural drive behind uk's euroskepticism.
I wish you well, but I suspect the best outcome for me, is to make an example out of the UK. Not to drag the UK into the mud of economic disgrace, but rather exposing their cultural underpinnings, as it regards to brexit stuff, for what they are: smoke and mirrors.

Yes, yes. Well done & thank you for your input. Duly noted.

[Deleted]

I would just like to point out, every nation has a vast majority of idiots, it's not just us in the UK.

At some point in history every nation has made some mistake led by populism, by people voting against there own interests out of either fear or blind stupidity.

Just because it's happening to us today, doesn't mean it can't happen to you tomorrow.

Something to bear in mind.

[Nigel Tufnel]

I would just like to point out, every nation has a vast majority of idiots, it's not just us in the UK.

At some point in history every nation has made some mistake led by populism, by people voting against there own interests out of either fear or blind stupidity.

Just because it's happening to us today, doesn't mean it can't happen to you tomorrow.

Something to bear in mind.

Yes, exactly.

[Deleted]

I would just like to point out, every nation has a vast majority of idiots, it's not just us in the UK.
Something to bear in mind.

Right. I said it before:
It's a symptom though: politics like an spectacle. And it isn't exclusive to the UK either; just this topic makes it very visible.
If we didn't have our share of idiocy, and populism, I wouldn't be very interested in UK's particular brand of it.

[Nigel Tufnel]

Right. I said it before:
It's a symptom though: politics like an spectacle. And it isn't exclusive to the UK either; just this topic makes it very visible.
If we didn't have our share of idiocy, and populism, I wouldn't be very interested in UK's particular brand of it.

So - what's your point?

Eugenics?

The solution is engagement.

[Deleted]

So - what's your point?
Eugenics?
The solution is engagement.

The point is the gloom of my own.
I'm not offering solutions for the UK: merely skepticism and best wishes. But, for us, this side of the channel, it's increasingly looking as an opportunity to stall this particular kind of idiocy.

[ranzino]

So what is next ? another week of rambings in UK before nothing happens at negotiations ?
or is T. May now in a better position to silence the unruly tories and to get some stuff done ?

[Gibblewink]

From what I've gathered Team Hard Brexit failed to show the strength to unseat May so that should in theory give her more room to maneuver.
It doesn't mean she actually wants to as there is still the good chance she somehow thinks that Chequers is viable, or that she possesses that particular brand of idiocy where she'd rather go down in flames than concede defeat to the EU - Not saying pride is always bad, but personal pride for a leader at the expense of their nation deserves very little respect.

Also she wasn't humiliated at Salzburg.

[Slant]

I've bolded the part that I would see as critical to giving the Tories as way out. But I would go so far as to say that any reform would have to include a properly defined and structured Article 50; one that has sensible timeframes, and clearly laid out possible outcomes in line with the 4 freedoms. So that the next time that a country comes along and says they are having a referendum on leaving, any campaign for such an outcome wouldn't be able to lie about what kind of deal was possible.

Oh, and I would make it explicit that activation of the clause has NO means of reversing it. You activate it, you leave. You want to come back later, you have to negotiate as a new entrant.

The 2 years are a sensible timeframe. The whole point of Article 50 isn't to trigger it and then find out what you want. The whole idea is that you have sensible people in power that prepare your country before they press the trigger. Ideally, the 2 years are the years in which policies are implemented and separation is enacted, not when it is being negotiated. That is the "2 year separation period" that can be extended. It aggravates me to no end that British politicians never read the shit.

[Bodonius]

Wish Sweden leave also

[Acidbaron]

I would just like to point out, every nation has a vast majority of idiots, it's not just us in the UK.

At some point in history every nation has made some mistake led by populism, by people voting against there own interests out of either fear or blind stupidity.

Just because it's happening to us today, doesn't mean it can't happen to you tomorrow.

Something to bear in mind.

Should not have voted that majority in, should not have maintained this majority. Should have opposed it more before, during and afterwards.

I mean its one thing to make a mistake led by populism but this is a mistake of more than 2 years where stubbornness is winning from common sense. If you expect sympathy with these kind of politics the UK population breath life into you are sorely mistaken and yes i'm fully aware a brexit is damaging to both parties involved.

[Nigel Tufnel]

Should not have voted that majority in, should not have maintained this majority. Should have opposed it more before, during and afterwards.

I mean its one thing to make a mistake led by populism but this is a mistake of more than 2 years where stubbornness is winning from common sense. If you expect sympathy with these kind of politics the UK population breath life into you are sorely mistaken and yes i'm fully aware a brexit is damaging to both parties involved.

lol, calm down Mr Schadenfreude. Take a leaf out of your own book. The hatred and vitriol in your posts is comical.

[Deleted]

Should not have voted that majority in, should not have maintained this majority. Should have opposed it more before, during and afterwards.

I mean its one thing to make a mistake led by populism but this is a mistake of more than 2 years where stubbornness is winning from common sense. If you expect sympathy with these kind of politics the UK population breath life into you are sorely mistaken and yes i'm fully aware a brexit is damaging to both parties involved.

Who should we have voted in then? Corbyn and his ilk? Corbyn whose more of a Brexiteer than May? Or perhaps we could have gone with the limp dick Liberal Democrats, who'd have gladly taken up the challenge, and then given up within a month because it's too difficult.

We've been fucked since the referendum result, anyone who thinks otherwise doesn't understand British politics.

This is a mistake leading from the referendum, nothing more. The last general election doesn't matter. The coalition with the DUP doesn't matter.

I don't expect or want sympathy from you, what i'm telling you is that you can't sit there and say "Lol fuck the Brits" whilst also ignoring the fact that every country in the EU is currently experiencing a surge in right wing populism.

I would say you might be next, but who really gives a shit if Belgium leaves anyway.

[Kallisto]

Should not have voted that majority in, should not have maintained this majority. Should have opposed it more before, during and afterwards.

I mean its one thing to make a mistake led by populism but this is a mistake of more than 2 years where stubbornness is winning from common sense. If you expect sympathy with these kind of politics the UK population breath life into you are sorely mistaken and yes i'm fully aware a brexit is damaging to both parties involved.

58% of the nation voted against the conservative party. We're stuck with a voting system in which has happened a few times before as low as 35% of the nation can get you as high as 55% of parliament, effectively full control over how the country is run.

Or even at a local level one area had a person elected MP with less than 25% of the vote.

https://youtu.be/r9rGX91rq5I

[Nigel Tufnel]

58% of the nation voted against the conservative party. We're stuck with a voting system in which has happened a few times before as low as 35% of the nation can get you as high as 55% of parliament, effectively full control over how the country is run.

Or even at a local level one area had a person elected MP with less than 25% of the vote.

https://youtu.be/r9rGX91rq5I

In fairness, Acidbaron's exasperation with the inherent conservatism displayed by the UK electorate is understandable. In 2011, 68% voted no to a system of proportional representation, which, although flawed, would have at least been a step in the right direction.

My problem with Acidbaron's stance is that that the poster seems to reside in a world where: the Austrian Freedom Party, Vlaams Blok, Danish People's Party, National Front (lol Le Pen finished second to Macron), Viktor Orbán, Lega Nord etc. etc. (I'm just listing in alphabetical order of countries) simply don't exist. Nor do the conditions in which they've come into existence and thrived exist either.

Does the poster really want the Nigel Tufnel list of Brexit blame again? Here it is:

Nu Labour’s failure to address localised pressures on infrastructure resulting from large scale economic migration from Eastern Europe in the 00s. 10%
Financial crash & austerity. The failure of trickle-down economics. 20%
UKIP / Farage / right-wing press. 20%
EU’s ever closer union. 10%
Cameron playing party politics. 30%
Corbyn’s Labour’s euroscepticism. 10%

It is not straightforward.

I'm intrigued as to how the bigoted Belgian is going to respond to this.