Brexit matters

[Chester1]

I can't help but feel a contradiction between the notion of being a bigger fish in this union while at the same time having a "puppet government".

On the point of the euro, the Treaty of Maastricht requires states joining the EU to also join the eurozone once they meet the necessary prerequisites. The actual meeting of those prerequisites is a different matter, which is how Sweden has been studiously managing to avoid adopting the euro for twenty-six years now by simply not participating in the European Exchange Rate Mechanism


There would be need a need for a customs border, in the least, if Scotland joins the EU's customs area. It would need to operate in the same way as the customs border between the UK and France, unless there is an agreement for deviation towards something like the NI Protocol.
An immigration border would be necessary if Scotland were to join the Schengen Area, as is required of new members of the EU - but it could potentially be avoided by a hypothetical special agreement that kept Scotland in the Common Travel Area instead.

But yes, the details of this sort of thing are a bit of a drift for this particular thread.

I doubt the CTA in its current form would survive the break up of the UK. With customs borders there is little benefit of passport less travel and there are security benefits of having passport controls. I think the primary benefit of the CTA (FOM) would survive the break up of the UK but there would be passport controls on the Tweed and across the Irish sea. Wales would be a mess if it went independent, a whole other topic.

Your technically right about the Euro but your missing the need for Scotland to convince EU members that it will join the Euro. UK remainers don't seem to understand that to much of Europe the EU and the Euro are the same thing. One pro Euro country will veto Scotland's application if it doesn't think Scotland is sincere about joining the Euro as soon as it realistically can.

 

[37424]

I think the SNP are in a different posistion. Scotland did not vote for leave.



Agreed - and this is not a good deal.

True but to vote against it when the alternative would be No Deal, ok I suspect the Bill won't be in danger of not passing but even so that makes no sense to me whatsoever.

 

[edwin_m]

A large chunk of brexiteers seem to be reacting to this deal as being in the ball park of what they expected when they decided to vote for Brexit and / or for Tories last year. There is a type of remainer who like to read Guardian, Mirror and Independent articles explaining how Boris has broken most of his promises on brexit. Its that kind of thinking that lost the referendum. They argued against brexit instead of campaigning on an emotionally for the EU and its values. Contrary to popular belief most brexit voters weren't thick and knew Boris says any rubbish he likes, they bought into a general idea of the UK being seperate to Europe and going its own way in the world. The Canada+ FTA the Government has signed will satisfy many. Its in the ball park of what they expected and that will do. They won't be won over by slating the Govermment at every turn for lying.

Some may have thought that. Others may have assumed a campaign would have at least paid some respect to the truth. Some just thought it was someone else's problem. And I do agree the Remain campaign made a total mess of things. Even if the other factions I mention are quite small they were almost certainly enough to turn a 52% majority the other way. And as I repeatedly point out on here but virtually everyone ignores, hundreds of opinion polls since autumn 2017 and including one last week showed a significant preference to remain. I think that counts for more than the evidence-free opinion you put forward here.

As far as I'm concerned reconciliation requires the ejection of the current so-called government and its replacement with people who are at least basically competent and basically honest, and display leadership instead of populism. They can then approach our relationship with the EU based on reality rather than ideology, and get on with solving the real problems that beset this country rather than searching around for distractions and scapegoats.

 

[Journeyman]

I think the SNP are in a different posistion. Scotland did not vote for leave.

Well, over a million people in Scotland did, and without them, Brexit wouldn't have happened. It was a UK-wide vote.

 

[najaB]

Well, over a million people in Scotland did, and without them, Brexit wouldn't have happened. It was a UK-wide vote.

Over 1.6 million people voted to remain. I really don't get your point.

 

[Richard Scott]

Over 1.6 million people voted to remain. I really don't get your point.

The point is that if all of Scotland had voted to remain the that would have been the outcome of the referendum.

 

[Chester1]

Some may have thought that. Others may have assumed a campaign would have at least paid some respect to the truth. Some just thought it was someone else's problem. And I do agree the Remain campaign made a total mess of things. Even if the other factions I mention are quite small they were almost certainly enough to turn a 52% majority the other way. And as I repeatedly point out on here but virtually everyone ignores, hundreds of opinion polls since autumn 2017 and including one last week showed a significant preference to remain. I think that counts for more than the evidence-free opinion you put forward here.

As far as I'm concerned reconciliation requires the ejection of the current so-called government and its replacement with people who are at least basically competent and basically honest, and display leadership instead of populism. They can then approach our relationship with the EU based on reality rather than ideology, and get on with solving the real problems that beset this country rather than searching around for distractions and scapegoats.

You only need to look at Keir Starmer's reaction to the brexit deal to see the flaw in your argument. It doesn't matter how high remain polls if the leader of the Labour party won't touch a soft brexit or another referendum. Boris' deal will stay more or less in place until after the 2029 General election, if not longer. If Labour is elected in 2024 Starmer will build on it but not replace it or call a referendum.

I voted remain but I would never support a campaign to over turn the result because the public were lied to and were thick. Most of my family and about a third of my friends voted leave and the attitude of many unreconciled remainers towards brexit voters makes my blood boil (enough to vote against them). I would never support rejoining without an opt out to the Euro. I doubt we would be given it again. If it were and global Britain fails then I would be inclined to support rejoin in 2030.

 

[Journeyman]

Over 1.6 million people voted to remain. I really don't get your point.

The result was UK-wide, and Scotland's leave voters pushed it over the line.

The point is that if all of Scotland had voted to remain the that would have been the outcome of the referendum.

Exactly. You can get hung up about regional variations if you like, but, unfortunately, those weren't the rules of the game.

 

[najaB]

The result was UK-wide, and Scotland's leave voters pushed it over the line.

That's an overly-simplistic way of thinking. The votes that gave Leave a majority can't be ascribed to any one area or region.

 

[Journeyman]

That's an overly-simplistic way of thinking. The votes that gave Leave a majority can't be ascribed to any one area or region.

Well, they can and they can't. I'm just saying that the number of people who voted Leave in Scotland is not statistically insignificant, and they're instrumental in the vote going the way it did. The way the SNP talk, you'd think the result in Scotland was 99.9% remain.

 

[Chester1]

Well, they can and they can't. I'm just saying that the number of people who voted Leave in Scotland is not statistically insignificant, and they're instrumental in the vote going the way it did. The way the SNP talk, you'd think the result in Scotland was 99.9% remain.

The other reason they are statistically significant is that the 38% of Scots who voted leave provide a good source of voters for the Conservatives to maintain their second place in Scottish politics.

Theresa May's former Chief of Staff (Nick Timothy) has said today in his Telegraph column that he thinks that brexit needs to be followed by constitutional reform to keep UK from breaking up after Brexit. He stated that it should be four national Government's + Parliaments and a Federal Government and Parliament. Its an indirect way of saying that there needs to be an English Government and Parliament to keep the UK together. I agree its the best politically viable option but probably would just delay the inevitable. Creating an English Government and Parliament would be a good way of channeling English nationalism after Brexit into something useful (and away from Foreign Policy).

 

[Journeyman]

The other reason they are statistically significant is that the 38% of Scots who voted leave provide a good source of voters for the Conservatives to maintain their second place in Scottish politics.

Theresa May's former Chief of Staff (Nick Timothy) has said today in his Telegraph column that he thinks that brexit needs to be followed by constitutional reform to keep UK from breaking up after Brexit. He stated that it should be four national Government's + Parliaments and a Federal Government and Parliament. Its an indirect way of saying that there needs to be an English Government and Parliament to keep the UK together. I agree its the best politically viable option but probably would just delay the inevitable. Creating an English Government and Parliament would be a good way of channeling English nationalism after Brexit into something useful (and away from Foreign Policy).

I don't think you can easily align the 38% of leave voters with the Tories - some Scottish nationalists don't want an independent Scotland to be in the EU, and some independence supporters voted Leave in order to create a crisis which would lead to a new Indyref.

Fully agree that England needs devolution. The SNP constantly whine about Scotland being hard done by, but if there's a democratic deficit anywhere in the UK these days it's in England. A federal solution, with more policy issues devolved, is the only thing that will keep the UK together, although I fear it's too late for that now.

 

[Chester1]

I don't think you can easily align the 38% of leave voters with the Tories - some Scottish nationalists don't want an independent Scotland to be in the EU, and some independence supporters voted Leave in order to create a crisis which would lead to a new Indyref.

Fully agree that England needs devolution. The SNP constantly whine about Scotland being hard done by, but if there's a democratic deficit anywhere in the UK these days it's in England. A federal solution, with more policy issues devolved, is the only thing that will keep the UK together, although I fear it's too late for that now.

There was a federalism thread earlier this year and I argued that for it to work long term England would need to be divided up into regions. That simply won't get support in England (unfortunately). Four nation federalism might just about be tolerable to England in the wake of a nationalist landslide in Scotland in May next year. I think it would buy time for the UK but England's sheer size would make unviable in the long term.

My 2 cents on brexit and the break up of the UK is that it has just accelerated something that was already happening. I don't think England would turn away from brexit after the break up of the UK. England is 86% of the UK and would be fine on its own. Its extremely fortunate to only have a very small proportion of its population anywhere near Scotland (there are about 3 million people north of Preston and Leeds out of 56 million). It will just chuck up a big fence, build a couple of customs posts and do what it did for a century with Ireland (mostly forget it existed). I think Wales would probably hang around for a generation. Most brexiteers don't want the UK to act like a great power, a sovereign England (or England and Wales) as mid sized country in the world would welcomed. It will leave unionists in Scotland in a very difficult position and many Scots in England feeling like foreigners. Unfortunately thats the flip side of Scottish independence - notions of keeping British Citizen (as claimed by SNP in 2014) are a joke. Break up the UK and England becomes its own country with its own Citizenship and national identity. I suspect that would an eccentric, brexity, global Switzerland!

 

[Starmill]

the attitude of many unreconciled remainers towards brexit voters makes my blood boil (enough to vote against them).

We know. You either say this directly or hint at it in almost every post on the subject that you've made, for a year or more now.

those weren't the rules of the game.

Indeed not. This is, of course, the argument of the nationalists. What's your point?

 

[Chester1]

We know. You either say this directly or hint at it in almost every post on the subject that you've made, for a year or more now.

Do you think the majority of views come from people who know the details of what regular posters think? Most regular posts repeat themselves a lot on the same topic. There are still plenty of times they are misunderstood. Its inevitable unless peoples views chop and change. If you find my posts repeatative to the point of boredom why not use the ignore feature!

 

[21C101]

A large chunk of brexiteers seem to be reacting to this deal as being in the ball park of what they expected when they decided to vote for Brexit and / or for Tories last year. There is a type of remainer who like to read Guardian, Mirror and Independent articles explaining how Boris has broken most of his promises on brexit. Its that kind of thinking that lost the referendum. They argued against brexit instead of campaigning on an emotionally for the EU and its values. Contrary to popular belief most brexit voters weren't thick and knew Boris says any rubbish he likes, they bought into a general idea of the UK being seperate to Europe and going its own way in the world. The Canada+ FTA the Government has signed will satisfy many. Its in the ball park of what they expected and that will do. They won't be won over by slating the Govermment at every turn for lying.

Quite. It is better than I expected it to be, but only because we finally had a government that was willing to no deal, thus giving us negotiation leverage.

 

[birchesgreen]

Most brexiteers don't want the UK to act like a great power

Well i'm not sure about that, quite a lot seem to want to return to the days of imperial glory

 

[najaB]

Quite. It is better than I expected it to be, but only because we finally had a government that was willing to no deal, thus giving us negotiation leverage.

What are you on about? This is basically what was in offer two years ago, other than fishing (0.1% of GDP).

 

[21C101]

What are you on about? This is basically what was in offer two years ago, other than fishing (0.1% of GDP).

And the lack of any ECJ oversight and various other things.

 

[birchesgreen]

The myth of "walking away" persists i see, amazing some people think national and supranational bodies negotiate the same as market traders.

 

[21C101]

The myth of "walking away" persists i see, amazing some people think national and supranational bodies negotiate the same as market traders.

The remainers did a lot of good work in going round shrieking that Boris was a madman set on no deal, it helped convince the EU side he was serious about it.

 

[Senex]

As far as I'm concerned reconciliation requires the ejection of the current so-called government and its replacement with people who are at least basically competent and basically honest, and display leadership instead of populism. They can then approach our relationship with the EU based on reality rather than ideology, and get on with solving the real problems that beset this country rather than searching around for distractions and scapegoats.

I agree with you, but what likelihood is there of the present government being ejected before 2024? Barring a total melt-down of the Tory party, their 80 majority seems certain to keep them in power for their full term if that is what they want to do. And they can easily manage a change of PM when it suits them to do so. In their remaining time they can still do a great deal more damage, both to our relations with the EU states (the ones ministers keep referring to as "our friends and partners" whilst dealing with them in an openly hostile fashion) and to our domestic economy and society. The real problems are there and have been identified, and they need solutions. But who can this see government as being one of solution and reconciliation?

 

[class ep-09]

And the lack of any ECJ oversight and various other things.

The deal outlines 19 specialised committees and four working groups set up to implement the deal and prevent problems from escalating .

Above all these is the arbitration tribunal , which has one UK representative , one EU ( ECJ judge) and a chair who is not citizen of UK nor EU country .

The agreement is carefully worded to ensure that 19 committees cannot overrule decisions made by ECJ

Sovereignty my a....se .

You have been had all along .

 

[Dave1987]

The remainers did a lot of good work in going round shrieking that Boris was a madman set on no deal, it helped convince the EU side he was serious about it.

Come off it. He was never serious about no deal. He always knew the cost to the UK of no deal. As many of the EU diplomats said "We are all part of the Boris Johnson pantomime whether we like it or not". I think you mistake the EU caving in for the EU wanting a pragmatic deal but not at any cost. BoJo continually threatening to walk away, which the EU never took seriously. After he threatened to walk away twice in mid-2020 and never did. It was all a great big pantomime which BoJo is renowned for. If at any point the UK start slashing workers' rights or such like the deal is off anyway. The deal struck suits the EU. Any major divergence to the EU on animal welfare, workers rights and such like at the tariffs will start. Is BoJo ready going to destroy the UK economy over pleasing the ERG and right-wing extremists?

 

[21C101]

The deal outlines 19 specialised committees and four working groups set up to implement the deal and prevent problems from escalating .

Above all these is the arbitration tribunal , which has one UK representative , one EU ( ECJ judge) and a chair who is not citizen of UK nor EU country .

The agreement is carefully worded to ensure that 19 committees cannot overrule decisions made by ECJ

Sovereignty my a....se .

You have been had all along .

Rot. It does no such thing. The EU are free to send whoever they wish as a delegate, as are we. The balance is held by a third neutral member as is usual on trade arbitration boards, who will act in accordance with interational trade rules, not EU law.

We are also free to pull out of the agreement and trade with the EU on the basis of WTO rules.

 

[edwin_m]

You only need to look at Keir Starmer's reaction to the brexit deal to see the flaw in your argument. It doesn't matter how high remain polls if the leader of the Labour party won't touch a soft brexit or another referendum. Boris' deal will stay more or less in place until after the 2029 General election, if not longer. If Labour is elected in 2024 Starmer will build on it but not replace it or call a referendum.

I voted remain but I would never support a campaign to over turn the result because the public were lied to and were thick. Most of my family and about a third of my friends voted leave and the attitude of many unreconciled remainers towards brexit voters makes my blood boil (enough to vote against them). I would never support rejoining without an opt out to the Euro. I doubt we would be given it again. If it were and global Britain fails then I would be inclined to support rejoin in 2030.

My post that you quoted was about reconciliation, not about forward policy. I didn't suggest that a future government should commit to taking us back into the EU and I agree that's probably impossible as it is currently formulated. That's one reason I'm so angry about it, that we probably can't ever get back to the UK's position before 2016 which was close to the best of both worlds and could have been made better by a more constructive engagement. One of the other reasons is those who blindly accept the will of the people to accept what you presumably consider to be a bad policy, ignoring all the flaws and deliberate deception that led to that result. A bad policy adopted for bad reasons should be opposed, and people who blatantly advance false arguments to support it (presumably because genuine ones aren't convincing) aren't fit to govern.

I don't think you can easily align the 38% of leave voters with the Tories - some Scottish nationalists don't want an independent Scotland to be in the EU, and some independence supporters voted Leave in order to create a crisis which would lead to a new Indyref.

Fully agree that England needs devolution. The SNP constantly whine about Scotland being hard done by, but if there's a democratic deficit anywhere in the UK these days it's in England. A federal solution, with more policy issues devolved, is the only thing that will keep the UK together, although I fear it's too late for that now.

We're in the strange situation that the English regions are crying out for investment, but there's little public support for the sort of regional government that might actually be effective in securing it. While I support English regional government in principle, in our current febrile times it might actually be seen by some Scots as increasing England's power over them.

I agree with you, but what likelihood is there of the present government being ejected before 2024? Barring a total melt-down of the Tory party, their 80 majority seems certain to keep them in power for their full term if that is what they want to do. And they can easily manage a change of PM when it suits them to do so. In their remaining time they can still do a great deal more damage, both to our relations with the EU states (the ones ministers keep referring to as "our friends and partners" whilst dealing with them in an openly hostile fashion) and to our domestic economy and society. The real problems are there and have been identified, and they need solutions. But who can this see government as being one of solution and reconciliation?

I also don't think it will happen, and if it does then looking at the current crop of "talent" within the Tory party it's unlikely any replacements will be either untainted by Brexit or significantly more able to address this country's various problems.

 

[nlogax]

The deal outlines 19 specialised committees and four working groups set up to implement the deal and prevent problems from escalating .

Above all these is the arbitration tribunal , which has one UK representative , one EU ( ECJ judge) and a chair who is not citizen of UK nor EU country .

The agreement is carefully worded to ensure that 19 committees cannot overrule decisions made by ECJ

Sovereignty my a....se .

You have been had all along .

Excellent summary. Your final point sums up why this entire exercise has been a comedy of BS.

Rot

Why? Is it untrue?

 

[37424]

Come off it. He was never serious about no deal. He always knew the cost to the UK of no deal. As many of the EU diplomats said "We are all part of the Boris Johnson pantomime whether we like it or not". I think you mistake the EU caving in for the EU wanting a pragmatic deal but not at any cost. BoJo continually threatening to walk away, which the EU never took seriously. After he threatened to walk away twice in mid-2020 and never did. It was all a great big pantomime which BoJo is renowned for. If at any point the UK start slashing workers' rights or such like the deal is off anyway. The deal struck suits the EU. Any major divergence to the EU on animal welfare, workers rights and such like at the tariffs will start. Is BoJo ready going to destroy the UK economy over pleasing the ERG and right-wing extremists?

Not so sure about that if Trump had got in again and Boris was confident of a desperate deal with Trump I think he might well have gone for No Deal I suspect that's what the ERG wanted until all those illegal votes for Biden.

If we do manage to get some trade deals with other countries that does bring significant trade and jobs inbound over the next few years and that's a very big IF in my view I wouldn't be surprised to see the Tory's and/or the Farage party fight the next election on ending the EU relationship for No Deal. I don't believe Farage for a moment when he says the war is over, its a cease fire for the next couple of years to see how things pan out

 

[najaB]

We are also free to pull out of the agreement and trade with the EU on the basis of WTO rules.

We hold a gun to our head and threaten to pull the trigger. That gives us a lot of power in this relationship. Not.

 

[class ep-09]

Rot. It does no such thing. The EU are free to send whoever they wish as a delegate, as are we. The balance is held by a third neutral member as is usual on trade arbitration boards, who will act in accordance with interational trade rules, not EU law.

We are also free to pull out of the agreement and trade with the EU on the basis of WTO rules.

Has it occurred to you that WTO is “unelected bunch of bureaucrats” making rules that UK has no control over??

Moreover - WTO has its own tribunal that UK can’t control ?
These are judges / arbiters not elected / appointed by any of us...

At least ECJ had UK judges ( not anymore), and was guarding rules that were approved by UK Parliament and / or Government, as none or very little of the EU’s rules could be introduced without each member’s approval .