[EU] Brexit negotiations at a standstill

[Kallisto]

Thing is last year Dribbles wasn't even for no deal, he was for "We get everything and they give us none of the responsibilities or we go to WAR!" posting. Dribbles was literally trying to push war if we didn't get free access to everything in europe while at the same time not have to go with EU law.

[dribbles]

So you are counting on the "brilliant plan" being "make ourselves look like completely incompetent idiots for two years, so that we end up with no-deal". And you are delighted by this, because it will hurt the EU.

As plans go, it's right up there with "I'm going to blow my own brains out right next to this guy, because then he will get blood on his suit and have to pay for the dry-cleaning".

And you STILL don't get it. If it comes down to a choice between no-deal and either cancelling Brexit or second referendum, then no-deal doesn't have a hope. Your ONLY chance of getting any form of Brexit through is if May comes up with something so watered down that the EU and Labour would actually support it. Otherwise the Tories will be calculating whether just cancelling will be more damaging to their party, or accepting a second referendum. Because make no mistake, from day 1 Brexit has all been about preventing damage to the Tories, and a no-deal would destroy them. It would damage the economy so much it would drive them out of power for decades, and it would almost certainly split their party in two. They aren't going to do it, and the reason their bluff isn't working is that nobody believes for one second that they will.

Well, nobody except certain, ahem, special people that seem to think their fascist wet dreams are going to come true some day. So tick and tock all you like, a broken clock may be right twice a day, but that's still at least three times more than you.

It is very nice of you to share your dreamworld with us however unfortunately for you default UK law, by act of parliament, is that we leave the EU in 138 days. (tick tock) Any deviance from this will require further legislation passing through the house. That is your ONLY chance of not getting my Brexit.

Your position is quite hopeless, my position is current UK law.

[Deleted]

The people spoke... it doesn't matter anymore if you believe they are correct or not the fact the plan seems to be to drag it out forever u till people vote the right way is disgraceful.

If someone tells you a bunch of lies that after 2 years none seem to happen, and people made a decision based on that bullshit is it still all that right to rush ahead ?

If the people is that sure of their opinion and future aspects then it wouldn't be a problem to have a second vote ?
It was tight enough between the blocks and seeing as its a massive decision it's weird not having the normal >Vote< followed by a second when the next government takes over to make sure people are on board.

[Omega10]

Thing is last year Dribbles wasn't even for no deal, he was for "We get everything and they give us none of the responsibilities or we go to WAR!" posting. Dribbles was literally trying to push war if we didn't get free access to everything in europe while at the same time not have to go with EU law.

What I notice is: no one defends Brexit anymore. Dribbles actually is the most anti-Brexit poster here. I mean he TRIES to support it, but his posts are so pathetic that he makes Brexit look bad by association. The best way to attack Brexit here is to get Dribbles to start posting a lot, occasionally shooting down his lies just as a reminder that his posts are only partially connected with reality.

I kind of feel sorry for Great Britain. Except they kind of brought this down on themselves by voting for Brexit in the first place. Then again, I don't recall anyone predicting that all the people who pushed for Brexit would bail out of politics once it passed, leaving people who didn't really support it that much to pick up the pieces. And, after all is said and done, I still can't figure out: Who benefits? In Great Britain, there only seem to be losers. No winners.

[Huehuecoyotl]

It is very nice of you to share your dreamworld with us however unfortunately for you default UK law, by act of parliament, is that we leave the EU in 138 days. (tick tock) Any deviance from this will require further legislation passing through the house. That is your ONLY chance of not getting my Brexit.

Your position is quite hopeless, my position is current UK law.

I apologise, you are completely correct. Because as we all know, it's literally impossible to change any law, ever. They came into existence magically some time in the past, and they have remained inviolate ever since. How foolish of me to forget that.

Seriously though, are you even trying any more? I know this whole thing has gone steadily worse for you, especially recently, but this is just dialling it in now. Sad.

[Noradin]

Who benefits?

Putin does, and those businessmen in politics who bet against the UK or think they can exploit the general public in the UK for all its worth when/if it loses the protection of the ECJ. Those in the pocket of US concerns looking to dump their surplus in the UK or buying out the local economy and NHS. (e.g. Farage, Rees-Mogg,...)

[dribbles]

I apologise, you are completely correct. Because as we all know, it's literally impossible to change any law, ever. They came into existence magically some time in the past, and they have remained inviolate ever since. How foolish of me to forget that.

Seriously though, are you even trying any more? I know this whole thing has gone steadily worse for you, especially recently, but this is just dialling it in now. Sad.

When I can see the finish line and your side are way back in runner up mode do I have to try?

Theresa May can't carry her own cabinet let alone the whole house of commons. Tell me how you envisage a new remain friendly law enacted prior to the default EU crashing out of the UK/EU relationship in March? Sir Vince and his 1 or 2 votes are not enough to save you...

Every minute that passes just gets better and better for me and that sweet, by default, no deal Brexit.

[Acidbaron]

What I notice is: no one defends Brexit anymore. Dribbles actually is the most anti-Brexit poster here. I mean he TRIES to support it, but his posts are so pathetic that he makes Brexit look bad by association. The best way to attack Brexit here is to get Dribbles to start posting a lot, occasionally shooting down his lies just as a reminder that his posts are only partially connected with reality.

I kind of feel sorry for Great Britain. Except they kind of brought this down on themselves by voting for Brexit in the first place. Then again, I don't recall anyone predicting that all the people who pushed for Brexit would bail out of politics once it passed, leaving people who didn't really support it that much to pick up the pieces. And, after all is said and done, I still can't figure out: Who benefits? In Great Britain, there only seem to be losers. No winners.

A select few people in certain industries will stand to benefit from a no deal measure, i don't recall which exactly anymore but some rich people do stand to benefit from this disaster. The economy won't and neither will the general population. See it similar to the housing bubble in the US where everybody but a few rich bankers gained from it.

[ranzino]

I can guarantee you right now at this moment of time we are suffering a serious shortage of medicine as the government clamps its coffers shut in prep for brexit when we come to order medication for patients a lot of it is out of stock and pharmacies are no longer able to stockpile, Come Brexit god forbid it goes ahead we will be facing thousends if not hundreds of thousends of people having to live with no medication, I hope you are proud of yourself Brexiteers you just made your country poorer.

if NHS personnel shrinks more and more UK's populace will die from simple ailments and the next flu wave too.

[Omega10]

Putin does, and those businessmen in politics who bet against the UK or think they can exploit the general public in the UK for all its worth when/if it loses the protection of the ECJ. Those in the pocket of US concerns looking to dump their surplus in the UK or buying out the local economy and NHS. (e.g. Farage, Rees-Mogg,...)

I see, says the blind man. Thanks for the info. This is the one of the pieces I was missing.

- - - Updated - - -

A select few people in certain industries will stand to benefit from a no deal measure, i don't recall which exactly anymore but some rich people do stand to benefit from this disaster. The economy won't and neither will the general population. See it similar to the housing bubble in the US where everybody but a few rich bankers gained from it.

This supports the previous reply to this question.

[Omega10]

I think they brought this down on themselves by never caring enough about the EU in the first place, making it so easy to be lied to. Over the past two decades, the majority of fake stories against the EU have originated in the UK yellow press.
Participation in EU elections has been declining for years which in my opinion should have been extremely worrying for the EU. But in almost every country, it started high and then dropped. In the UK it started low and stayed low. Even though they did have their referendum for the EU, the people of the UK as whole never seem to have believed in it as a democratic endeavour.

So the real issue is not whether or not Great Britain should be doing the Brexit thing or not. The real puzzling question is: if this was something that was somewhat desired and inevitable, why are they doing such a bad job of transitioning to their independent ways? The set of tasks was pretty clear from the start: figure out the new trading rules with EU, and replace the trades that get dropped with trades with other countries.

Unless the real reason for Brexit is just for some politically connected businesses to loot their health care system and dump cheap American food on Great Britain, it just does not make any sense. I wish I could just dismiss that first sentence as nonsense, but now I am not so sure. The current actions really do fit in perfectly with creating the conditions necessary for maximum looting and cheap-food-dumping.

[Omega10]

I mean the trade issue was relatively easy for the EU. Ireland is the problem. If not for the Irish border the UK would have got a deal several months ago. But the EU is obligated to do what is best for all its members and Brexit is a catastrophe for the RoI (I dare say, an act of hostile indifference from the UK) so the EU will not budge on being the adult in the room about preserving the GFA and not breaking the economy in Ireland as a whole.

So the Ireland issue was just not dealt with during the referendum? Neither side brought it up? People in Ireland voted on it not knowing how this would effect them?

<BTW thank you for being patient with me and answering my questions. I've read a few articles about Brexit and the problems Great Britain is having, and mostly the articles assume the readers understand the underlying political realities.>

[Omega10]

The Irish issue was scarcely brought up in the referendum. The Leave side had no arguments other than "It won't be a problem". The Remain side underestimated it and honestly because they made their campaign about fear instead of hope, it was just washed away. Imo the Unionists probably wouldn't even mind for things to go badly, they thrive on that. Both the RoI and the EU as a whole did express their concerns but the EU generally did its best not to interfere with the referendum and UK sovereignty.
But when the UK actually appeared at the table months after Article 50 was invoked (and completely unprepared leading to those fabulous images of Barnier showing up with paper upon paper and Davis going with just a small briefcase) it fast became apparent that there is no possible solution to the problem that does not keep NI in the Single Market (because no, even a Customs Union is not enough since there is an issue of services).

This makes sense. I've seen this behavior MANY times. People make decisions without considering the ramifications of issues that should quite obviously be an important factor to take into consideration. Then when the issue pops up, its like SURPRISE.

This gives an explanation as to why May and others are acting the way they are. They are acting … clueless … not because of the trade issues, but because of the Ireland issue, and this cluelessness is partially because this is a really really difficult issue to figure out. And, it is not one that can just brushed aside. And, if I understand correctly, decisions have NOT been made as to how to deal with the Ireland issues. There are no good easy solutions, from what I can tell. Only the kind of decision that is easy for everyone else to make effective attack ads about.

[Omega10]

The EU solution is to move the border to ports on the UK mainland. With a bit of effort and investment it can be seamless and practically invisible to people in NI. If anything it would likely be a boon to the local economy since many companies in the mainland might try to relocate to NI to benefit from being inside the Single Market.
But this hits many snags including:
a) Scotland would go berserk if one province gets this choice and the others don't, especially when it grants that province a major competitive advantage in the national economy
b) The DUP is May's minority partner and prioritizes the Union above the GFA. No border of any form (even if practically invisible) between NI and the rest of the UK is their red line, the GFA is something they want to preserve but not something they present as a red line.
c) May is playing party politics and has put all her chips on her Chequers plan, attacking everything that could present an alternative to the parliament or even the people. This is why she attacked the case in the ECJ on whether the UK can unilaterally revoke Article 50 (which would give her an option to stop Brexit), this is why she is against a referendum and this is why she is against a meaningful vote in Parliament beyond "Take my plan or get nothing". Her plan is so bad that the only way to sell it is to make the alternative the cliff of "No deal". The first part is extremely important because if the UK CAN unilaterally revoke Article 50, they would keep all special treatment while otherwise they would have to drop such treatment and possibly even make further concessions to rejoin. If the ECJ says yes and a referendum happens, Leave has no new argument while otherwise they can argue that staying without the rebate is not worth it.

A lot of things I have been reading make a lot more sense. Or... is a not less non-sensical! Most importantly, I feel I understand better the position that May is in. Not a very good place at all. And if things go badly for her, she could end up being thought of as a national disgrace.

So she is doing her best at pushing her current agenda, while keeping other options open to her in case she needs them. And, she is basically fighting for survival. This also seems to explain Corbyn's absolute refusal to get involved. Now that I have some sense of what is going on there, well May won the election, so she is to be the one to get dragged through the mud. And everyone else, including the main leaders of Brexit in the first place and Corbyn, are telling her "I don't care what you do as long as you DON'T GET ANY MUD ON ME."

[Omega10]

The will of the people can always save you in politics. Giving people a proper referendum (one that has clear margin and participation rate requirements) and then acting on that mandate means there is much less political responsibility or cost. The same is not true for Cameron because:
a) The referendum was ill-defined (no minimum participation, no required margin to form a mandate, no judicial ruling on whether its nature is binding or advisory before the fact)
b) He poorly campaigned for the referendum and even more poorly conveyed the further and critical concessions the EU gave him just before the referendum (most notably, the power to opt out from further consolidation as long as they did not block it, something they had to fight for in the past with e.g. the Euro).

Well if there IS a second referendum, hopefully the details of both sides will be spelled out - or at least hinted at. Remain means this, Brexit means that, and there could conceivably be multiple Brexit scenarios. Creating a second referendum is a very non-trivial work project. Done poorly, a second referendum could make things a LOT worse for Great Britain. Done well, it could lead Great Britain to a fairly soft landing.

"Doing it well", however, is not an easy task.

[Omega10]

here is that thing.
What is fair for a second referendum?
My idea is one that allow for the voice of the people as a whole to be heard as much as possible.

If it was up to me the referendum would be like this:

Should the UK seek to revoke Article 50? (Yes/No)
If the UK seeks to revoke Article 50, how soon should the issue of EU membership be revisited? (In 5 years, in 10 years, in 30 years)
If the UK continues forth with Article 50, what would be your preferred alternative for our relations with the EU? (Norway Model, Customs Union, Canada Model with NI staying in the SM, Canada Model without the GFA, no deal)

Ofc if you choose to revoke and you also choose to revist the issue in 5 years, the EU might as well say no. But this would allow for the voice of both sides to be heard regardless of who wins.

From my limited knowledge of the situation over there, this sounds like a reasonable basis for a possible new referendum. The devil is in the details. I guess putting the details together would be May's responsibility. Although there is a good chance this will sink her, if she puts together a decent referendum, with well defined positions and rules (these percentages of the vote are needed to trigger these actions), and then follows through in a reasonable way, she could end up being the Heroine that Save Great Britain.

She would also need to put some restrictions on false ads and negative advertising. If all of the sides just yell at each other, nothing good will happen period. Not for her, not for Great Britain.

[dribbles]

There's already a shortage of the vaccination for the over 65's, each day I see more and more medications going out of stock from suppliers sadly most patients think we are to blame for poor stock control but if only they saw what we saw when ordering from a supplier it would break their hearts.

In the same way poor people don't have to get a prescription for 50p paracetamol on and at cost to the NHS as many scroungers do though, why don't you just send them down to Boots or any supermarket where some are offering it privately with no shortages for just over a fiver?

Talk of a flu jab shortage is just project fear scaremongering but if anything if our NHS wasn't overrun with millions of health tourists/refugees from the EU there would be no problem or supposed shortages at all.

Hows that for compassionate and caring community advice from a friendly brexiteer?

[Dhrizzle]

A lot of things I have been reading make a lot more sense. Or... is a not less non-sensical! Most importantly, I feel I understand better the position that May is in. Not a very good place at all. And if things go badly for her, she could end up being thought of as a national disgrace.

So she is doing her best at pushing her current agenda, while keeping other options open to her in case she needs them. And, she is basically fighting for survival. This also seems to explain Corbyn's absolute refusal to get involved. Now that I have some sense of what is going on there, well May won the election, so she is to be the one to get dragged through the mud. And everyone else, including the main leaders of Brexit in the first place and Corbyn, are telling her "I don't care what you do as long as you DON'T GET ANY MUD ON ME."

It's worth remembering that when May stood for the Conservative leadership she had very little chance of winning and was a token Remained, in fact she never technically won the leadership race as everyone else just dropped out.

[Pann]

It's worth remembering that when May stood for the Conservative leadership she had very little chance of winning and was a token Remained, in fact she never technically won the leadership race as everyone else just dropped out.

That is not true. May was bookies favourite from the moment Gove announced his intention to run for the leadership and she won both the first and second ballots before Leadsome withdrew before the third; member's vote.

[Slant]

They are acting … clueless … not because of the trade issues, but because of the Ireland issue, and this cluelessness is partially because this is a really really difficult issue to figure out.

That is quite the understatement. It's not difficult to figure out, really. It's impossible. The UK's wish to implement hard borders around the UK towards the EU and control their borders directly is the direct opposite of their obligation in the GFA to maintain no border between the RoI and Northern Ireland.

The EU hasn't even done anything at this point, yet. This is just what the UK has in its head. And then you have the EU step in and say, alright, you want out, but that means our outer border shifts to the RoI. Which means, there has to be a border, from both sides, between RoI and NI. And thus the GFA will be violated and the UK will have to deal with Troubles 2.0.

Believe me, if there was a solution, someone would have suggested it by now. According to the EU timetable, we are at 12:00 right now. Every day delay means less room to somehow wriggle a last minute agreement out of anyone.