Politics POLL: Brexit Withdrawal Agreement

[DaGaffer]

"We could do this"
"no"
"We could do this"
"no"
"How about this"
"no"
"look - the backstop isn't going to be a thing, we're never going to accept it, there's got to be movement on your side or we definitely leave with no deal"
"don't care - you're getting it from all sides and we want the backstop"
"How about this"
"no, we want the backstop, we don't really want you to leave tbpfh, it's inconvenient and you know damn well it's probably going to be worse for the people of your country"
"yes, we know all that, but we've chosen a course, and we can't back down without trashing the party - and as you know: power first, governing in the people's interest second"
"Yes, we're no different, power first, government second - at least there's something we agree on"
"Agreed - so you can see - we can't have the backstop"
"Tough titties - removing it weakens our grip"
"I know, but having it weakens ours, makes us your bitch"
"We know"
"So how about this?"
"No"
"Just saying "no" to everything isn't negotiating"
"True, but we've got the deal we want, you can't have what you want - so you potentially crash out, we get to blame you and the rest of the EU looks at your pathetic-ness and the economic result of you leaving, as you also drive to the bottom in terms of environment, workers rights and health - and the other countries in the EU think 'jeez, better stay in'"
"True, but you'll hurt too..."
"Yep, but we don't care - look at what we did to the greek people, despite it not being their actual fault. We clearly don't give a fuck"

Johnson: "We're trying to get a deal" (knows he probably won't)
EU (pick one): "They're not even trying to come up with proposals" (knows we can't because they're not going to budge)

If one's opening position is to demand mutually incompatible things, it not really the job of the people you're negotiating with to help you achieve that. The EU have been clear they have to protect the single market first, everything else, second. The UK wants its cake, to eat it, and own the bakery while they're at it.

 

[Wij]

Even though the Supreme Court in Norn Irn decreed last week that even no Deal wouldn't violate the GFA?

Northern Irish court dismisses case against no-deal Brexit

So the UK aren't going to be putting border posts up any time soon, the Irish Government won't be putting any up any time soon - so where is this friction on the border that is going to give some braindead morons in the North an excuse to get the Semtex out again coming from?

High court, not supreme. Wait for the appeal.

The GFA expects the removal of security infrastructure and that no change to NI's status can occur without the approval of a majority of its citizens. The RoI will absolutely consider a hard border reneging on the GFA and the EU will support it. Congressmen in the US will think the same too.

And the UK government made a commitment in 2017 that whatever deal was agreed it would not create the need for border checks.

The Irish government will have to put up infrastructure in a no deal scenario regardless of posturing now. If they don't then other EU countries would have to put checks on their goods as they can't guarantee regulatory alignment of the goods in their country. Tariff non-alignments would mean massive profits for smugglers.

 

[Scouse]

Describe the fudge.

Excuse me @Wij whilst I put my fist up my ass and pull out a potential future.

If one's opening position is to demand mutually incompatible things, it not really the job of the people you're negotiating with to help you achieve that. The EU have been clear they have to protect the single market first, everything else, second. The UK wants its cake, to eat it, and own the bakery while they're at it.

But it seems that you two are forgetting that.

But frankly, it doesn't matter who killed who. What matters is what politicians decide. And, like shares, past performance is no indication of future. Leave, deal, no deal. Who knows. Anything's possible.

 

[DaGaffer]

Excuse me @Wij whilst I put my fist up my ass and pull out a potential future.





But it seems that you two are forgetting that.

But frankly, it doesn't matter who killed who. What matters is what politicians decide. And, like shares, past performance is no indication of future. Leave, deal, no deal. Who knows. Anything's possible.

Don't be a smart-arse.

It absolutely does matter "who killed who" because this is the UK's choice, the UK's special place in Hell. There's also the practical point that UK can fix all of these issues if it had the will (border in the Irish Sea fixes everything, and arguments about breaking up the union are disingenuous posturing; NI is already governed by a myriad of unique laws); but instead the UK wants everyone else to fix its problems.

 

[Scouse]

Not being a smart arse @DaGaffer - I'm being pragmatic.

Morally, yes, of course it matters. But practically speaking? Fuck no.

 

[DaGaffer]

Not being a smart arse @DaGaffer - I'm being pragmatic.

Morally, yes, of course it matters. But practically speaking? Fuck no.

Practically speaking as well, the UK is one country and actually has a structure (the Union) that explicitly lets it apply different laws to its four parts. The EU, by internal treaty and WTO rules, cant break the integrity of the single market. The UK also simply has more to lose from no deal (unless you're sitting on a hedge fund) and therefore UKGov has the greater obligation to its people not to fuck this up.

 

[Scouse]

Practically speaking as well, the UK is one country and actually has a structure (the Union) that explicitly lets it apply different laws to its four parts. The EU, by internal treaty and WTO rules, cant break the integrity of the single market. The UK also simply has more to lose from no deal (unless you're sitting on a hedge fund) and therefore UKGov has the greater obligation to its people not to fuck this up.

Don't really disagree with much of that.

But define "not fucked up" at the end of this process.

I'm not sure I can.

 

[Gwadien]

Don't really disagree with much of that.

But define "not fucked up" at the end of this process.

I'm not sure I can.

Not fucked up would mean that the PM has actually properly tried to get a decent deal, but he's only pretending it to try and please Parliament and to show everyone there's no alternative.

Boris wants a no deal, because lots of his mates have hedge funds.

 

[Bodhi]

Not fucked up would mean that the PM has actually properly tried to get a decent deal, but he's only pretending it to try and please Parliament and to show everyone there's no alternative.

Boris wants a no deal, because lots of his mates have hedge funds.

If you'd said Farage I would have agreed with you, as he is blatantly wanting No Deal - Boris I think is a bit more pragmatic. From the sounds of things he is going after the one option that Parliament have already agreed to - May's Deal minus the backstop. Apparently the DUP are softening their stance on things, and it could be an excellent opportunity for Norn Irn - and one they would lose as part of a United Ireland.

 

[caLLous]

DUP election broadcast farmer 'regrets' voting for Brexit

 

[Gwadien]

DUP election broadcast farmer 'regrets' voting for Brexit

Good, just a couple more need to own up that it was a silly idea.

 

[Job]

So pisshead Junkers is saying that a deal can be worked out around the backstop.

What a fucking surprise eh...
Mainly because its an invented problem and the EU are entering the final phase where hyperbole runs out and common sense takes over.

Just an endless tirade of fucking bullshit from the remainers, now will have its reckoning as we watch the real powers in the game play their hands.

Pantomime, thats all its been for three years and what is clear is that there is an entire army of political fashion police in this country and a willing class of people who just agree with what ever gets them kudos at the dinner party.

 

[caLLous]

So pisshead Junkers is saying that a deal can be worked out around the backstop.

What a fucking surprise eh...
Mainly because its an invented problem and the EU are entering the final phase where hyperbole runs out and common sense takes over.

Just an endless tirade of fucking bullshit from the remainers, now will have its reckoning as we watch the real powers in the game play their hands.

Pantomime, thats all its been for three years and what is clear is that there is an entire army of political fashion police in this country and a willing class of people who just agree with what ever gets them kudos at the dinner party.

the so-called backstop, which he said he was prepared to remove from a withdrawal agreement, so long as "alternative arrangements [are put in place] allowing us and Britain to achieve the main objectives of the backstop. All of them".

What's new there? They've been saying for months that, if there's a satisfactory alternative to the backstop, they'll listen to it.

Asked if that meant that the backstop could go, he answered: "If the objectives are met - all of them - then we don't need the backstop. It was a guarantee, not an aim by itself."

 

[Scouse]

What's new there? They've been saying for months that, if there's a satisfactory alternative to the backstop, they'll listen to it.

Yeah - they'll "listen" to it.

How is that not playing politics? They know they have to be involved in the solution if there's going to be a deal on it.

Yes, they didn't cause the shitstorm, but they need to be actively involved in solving it rather than waiting for us to magic a solution (when they say no other solution is acceptable) - if they don't just want no deal.

But meh. What will be will be.

 

[dysfunction]

Yeah - they'll "listen" to it.

How is that not playing politics? They know they have to be involved in the solution if there's going to be a deal on it.

Yes, they didn't cause the shitstorm, but they need to be actively involved in solving it rather than waiting for us to magic a solution (when they say no other solution is acceptable) - if they don't just want no deal.

But meh. What will be will be.

If there was another viable solution they would accept it. Why wouldn't they? I'm sure they have come up with many ideas.

You're starting to sound like @Job

We're really the ones causing the most issue here so it really is up to us to stop posturing and actually start doing something constructive.

 

[Scouse]

If there was another viable solution they would accept it. Why wouldn't they? I'm sure they have come up with many ideas.

You're starting to sound like @Job

We're really the ones causing the most issue here so it really is up to us to stop posturing and actually start doing something constructive.

I'm starting to sound like @Job because I think it's incumbent on *both* sides to find a solution?

I agree that this is a problem entirely of the UK's making. It's 100% our fault. I'm neither leave nor remain - the loss of freedom of movement is uttetly disgusting to me, they way we've treated and are treating EU migrants is also abhorrent, but I see clear need for EU reform.

I also 100% see that the language being used by the EU during these negotiations, whilst understandable, isn't the pragmatic language of politicians who want to reach a deal - regardless of fault (because "who killed who" is childish and immaterial at this point - damage reduction should be paramount). They're playing to their own crowd and to UK remain. (Fair enough maybe - they're politicians after all, but it means they lose *some* of the moral high ground).

When I point that out I get accused of being like Job?

Nope - what I can also see is that, as we get closer to leaving, the accusation that remainers are acting like whiny little bitches is more and more apt.

 

[caLLous]

So what are the EU going to do? They want to protect their border and their remaining members, they're absolutely not going to drop the backstop as part of the agreement on the pinky promise that it will be addressed before December next year (which Stephen Barclay seemed to think was how it should work). No amount of blustering from the government is going to change that.

 

[Scouse]

I agree @caLLous.

I'm objecting to the EU dick-suck language amongst remainers - who seem to be objecting to anyone pointing out that the EU isn't perfect, and aren't sounding as pragmatic as they could - i.e. pointing out that they're still politicians acting like politicians.

I get it - remainers have picked a side - but get tae fuck with yee who will compare me to job just because I point out the (quite obvious) that it takes two to tango.

Pick your side, by all means, but don't throw away your critical objectivity. The EU is NOT an angelic institution.

 

[Scouse]

pinky promise that it will be addressed before December next year (which Stephen Barclay seemed to think was how it should work). No amount of blustering...

Actually - there's (one) fudge right there, if you think about it.

The can could potentially be kicked down the road in a way that makes the EU look extraordinarily gracious and gives time for the partners to work on final solutions whilst avoiding "disastrous" consequences on both sides.

It doesn't solve the problem, of course, but gives political beathing space, whilst satisfying leave voters (because we leave) and the EU and remain voters (because there's a deal).

Not sayimg it will happen - but all this talk of the EU not having to give, being unwilling to give, that it's *all* down to the UK to magic up solutions is bullshit. Utter utter bullshit.

This is politics. Politicians will be pragmatic if they can spin it in a way that doesn't make themselves look weak.

 

[DaGaffer]

I agree @caLLous.

I'm objecting to the EU dick-suck language amongst remainers - who seem to be objecting to anyone pointing out that the EU isn't perfect, and aren't sounding as pragmatic as they could - i.e. pointing out that they're still politicians acting like politicians.

I get it - remainers have picked a side - but get tae fuck with yee who will compare me to job just because I point out the (quite obvious) that it takes two to tango.

Pick your side, by all means, but don't throw away your critical objectivity. The EU is NOT an angelic institution.

The EU spent years suggesting solutions, only to find the UK still didn't have a collective opinion on what they wanted at the end of it. You're now saying they should continue that...it actually makes no sense, because a. Any EU suggestions will be rejected by Brexiteers for the simple reason that they were suggested by the EU in the first place (don't deny it, pragmatism left the building a long time ago, we're in the world of ideology now), and b. The EU has already set its stall out as transparently as it can, protect the integrity of the single market.

So long as the UK has a solution that does that, fill your boots. The EU cant unpick the UK's internal problems (minority government, the DUP, self-imposed red lines, GFA obligations), only the UK can do that

 

[caLLous]

 

[Scouse]

The EU spent years suggesting solutions, only to find the UK still didn't have a collective opinion on what they wanted at the end of it. You're now saying they should continue that...it actually makes no sense, because a. Any EU suggestions will be rejected by Brexiteers for the simple reason that they were suggested by the EU in the first place (don't deny it, pragmatism left the building a long time ago, we're in the world of ideology now), and b. The EU has already set its stall out as transparently as it can, protect the integrity of the single market.

So long as the UK has a solution that does that, fill your boots. The EU cant unpick the UK's internal problems (minority government, the DUP, self-imposed red lines, GFA obligations), only the UK can do that

Gaff - I don't disagree with much of the above really.

However you seem to be discounting politics and how you know it works. That's why the government wants to keep things hidden - because politicians will be pragmatic given the possibility of being pragmatic if they can avoid looking bad.*

Red lines etc etc. - they can always be brushed aside. There's no such thing as red lines anyway - the term red lines is a marketing term to ensure politicians don't get lots of shit off sections of public.

It's all bullshit and up for grabs Gaff. You know it. Given breathing space they'll come up with some bullshit fudge that allows them to look good. And looking good is the name of the game.

If they don't get the breathing space - no deal.



*(On your point about no pragmatism being left - Keeping things hidden doesn't give "Brexiteers" a chance to reject suggestions put forward by the EU - because if "Brexiteers" don't know in the first place then the governments are free to get on and fucking do what they think they can. And the EU knows this - which is why all their bullshit about "publish your proposals" is just that - bullshit. It's political posturing designed to turn up the heat on Boris and his very weak government. If they could get a remain-heavy government in who'd sign off on some make-the-UK-our-bitch proposals then they'd love that - but pragmatically they don't want a damaging no-deal Brexit. So they'll be working behind the scenes on a fudge of some kind. Ideology? Yep. They'll lean a certain way. But if they can work a fudge out behind closed doors and present it as "look how clever we are" they'll do it).

 

[DaGaffer]

Gaff - I don't disagree with much of the above really.

However you seem to be discounting politics and how you know it works. That's why the government wants to keep things hidden - because politicians will be pragmatic given the possibility of being pragmatic if they can avoid looking bad.*

Red lines etc etc. - they can always be brushed aside. There's no such thing as red lines anyway - the term red lines is a marketing term to ensure politicians don't get lots of shit off sections of public.

It's all bullshit and up for grabs Gaff. You know it. Given breathing space they'll come up with some bullshit fudge that allows them to look good. And looking good is the name of the game.

If they don't get the breathing space - no deal.



*(On your point about no pragmatism being left - Keeping things hidden doesn't give "Brexiteers" a chance to reject suggestions put forward by the EU - because if "Brexiteers" don't know in the first place then the governments are free to get on and fucking do what they think they can. And the EU knows this - which is why all their bullshit about "publish your proposals" is just that - bullshit. It's political posturing designed to turn up the heat on Boris and his very weak government. If they could get a remain-heavy government in who'd sign off on some make-the-UK-our-bitch proposals then they'd love that - but pragmatically they don't want a damaging no-deal Brexit. So they'll be working behind the scenes on a fudge of some kind. Ideology? Yep. They'll lean a certain way. But if they can work a fudge out behind closed doors and present it as "look how clever we are" they'll do it).

May’s red lines were explicit, published, and left little room for maneuver, and the place for behind the scenes bargaining is in Westminster and Stormont; not Brussels, because at this stage Brussels can’t assume the UK negotiators are even empowered to offer anything! Any deal has to go back to Parliament anyway, and the way politics works is to do all the wheel greasing and trade-offs before you put your thinking in front of the Commons; by all accounts May didn’t even attempt this, and Johnson is doubling down on the idea even as parliament continues to exercise its supremacy over the Executive. The UK has to figure out what 323 MPs will accept, that protects the integrity of the single market. A bit of consensus, “good of the nation” politicking is required, but sadly the both the PM and Leader of The Opposition are not the men to do that.

 

[Exioce]

It doesn't solve the problem, of course, but gives political beathing space, whilst satisfying leave voters (because we leave) and the EU and remain voters (because there's a deal).

This right here is the cause of the current problems. The assumption that only no-deal will satisfy leavers, and is what they wanted all along.
Completely false, and the opposite of what was promised during the referendum.

 

[Wij]

This right here is the cause of the current problems. The assumption that only no-deal will satisfy leavers, and is what they wanted all along.
Completely false, and the opposite of what was promised during the referendum.

Many Leave voters won't be happy with any deal because any kind of deal with the EU will be denounced as a betrayal by Farage. 'They've signed something with the EU so we haven't really left!!!'

Other Leave voters will be horrified by the alternative, No Deal, because it's insane and is completely not what was promised in 2016.

It's impossible.

 

[DaGaffer]

Many Leave voters won't be happy with any deal because any kind of deal with the EU will be denounced as a betrayal by Farage. 'They've signed something with the EU so we haven't really left!!!'

Other Leave voters will be horrified by the alternative, No Deal, because it's insane and is completely not what was promised in 2016.

It's impossible.

It’s impossible from a public opinion pov, but it shouldn’t be from a parliamentary POV. 323 MPs. That’s all it needs.

No matter what deal is done (or not done), Britain will remain divided, so just get it done. I’m convinced border in the Irish Sea is the answer because no one really cares about NI anyway.

 

[Wij]

It’s impossible from a public opinion pov, but it shouldn’t be from a parliamentary POV. 323 MPs. That’s all it needs.

No matter what deal is done (or not done), Britain will remain divided, so just get it done. I’m convinced border in the Irish Sea is the answer because no one really cares about NI anyway.

Hard Brexiteer MPs will use NI to veto such a deal so it wouldn’t pass.

 

[Job]

I'm starting to sound like @Job because I think it's incumbent on *both* sides to find a solution?

I agree that this is a problem entirely of the UK's making. It's 100% our fault. I'm neither leave nor remain - the loss of freedom of movement is uttetly disgusting to me, they way we've treated and are treating EU migrants is also abhorrent, but I see clear need for EU reform.

I also 100% see that the language being used by the EU during these negotiations, whilst understandable, isn't the pragmatic language of politicians who want to reach a deal - regardless of fault (because "who killed who" is childish and immaterial at this point - damage reduction should be paramount). They're playing to their own crowd and to UK remain. (Fair enough maybe - they're politicians after all, but it means they lose *some* of the moral high ground).

When I point that out I get accused of being like Job?

Nope - what I can also see is that, as we get closer to leaving, the accusation that remainers are acting like whiny little bitches is more and more apt.

Thats where we are, the remainers and the liberal left have made discussion so polarised and toxic that if scouse doesnt 100% disagree with me, then hes labelled as a traitor.

Brexit has become a class/status war, the remainers again and again attack northerners, old and the uneducated...there is no recourse, it shameless bigotry and social elitism being encouraged by the mainstream media.
The BBC 'journalist' who was told by Trump that the bbc are fake news, was on morning TV, plugging a book, defacto reading for the middle class coffee tables...given carte blanche to tell his side of the story, riducule the very notion of bias...oh they all chuckled.

Trump is correct..the bbc is systematically biased, every day..everything it does is adjusted to fit its agenda.
Which is great if you agree, if youre a signed up believer, but what happens when they turn their guns on you.

 

[Scouse]

@Job - if the BBC is biased it's biased hugely towards the right wing.

As per @Wij's post. Tory takeover.

 

[DaGaffer]

Hard Brexiteer MPs will use NI to veto such a deal so it wouldn’t pass.

It would if you can get enough opposition MPs onside; Labour plus SNP plus plaid Cymru and some independents and you could do without the Tories at all. The ERG aren't kingmakers if you can develop a broad consensus elsewhere; like I said, "good of the nation" stuff.