Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why are the Eurosceptics not kicking up more of a fuss?

SystemSystem Posts: 5,841
edited December 2017 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why are the Eurosceptics not kicking up more of a fuss?

The Conservative whips are doing their job well. Evening after evening, the government records consistent majorities in the teens or twenties as it protects its Brexit Bill unamended through the Commons. More innovatively, we saw this morning a flurry of tweets and statements from Tory MPs and ministers lauding Theresa May for her tough diplomacy in delivering a good interim Brexit deal. That helped set the news agenda.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • Yes, you've expressed very eloquently what I was trying to get at in my comments at the end of the last thread. We are now committed to a choice between an ultra-light Brexit of terms dictated by the EU or, as you put it, the nuclear option. There is, and presumably never could have been, any middle option.

    Oh, and my first first?
  • Second! Again.....
  • It also means that we should be looking to 2019-21 as the period when the Tories change their leader, with the summer of either 2019 or 2020 being most likely.

    I wonder what the PMs view is.....Tories deposing lady leaders never ends well....
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 2,025
    edited December 2017
    Second. Like the Ultras on both sides.
    Maybe they are as bored of it as everybody else? To them, as to anyone on the right side of sanity, "a bad deal is better than no deal."
    Perhaps there is just the slightest possibility that the UK could start worrying about our chronically low productivity, poor skills, lack of affordable training, housing dysfunction, transport infrastructure, absence of reliable broadband coverage, the feeling that the young are getting a raw deal, and the myriad of other problems obscured by a rush to scapegoat the EU or Brexiters?
    Or is that a bit too optimistic?
    EDIT: Oprtimistic like my claim of second!
  • The history of the EU suggests that a narrow interpretation will not be their favoured one. Just about anything could be considered to “support North-South cooperation, the all-island economy and the protection of the 1998 Agreement”.

    Surely that will be a bilateral matter between the British & Irish governments (and Stormont if it’s functioning?) The EU was not a signatory to either of the agreements.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 20,386
    edited December 2017
    Greetings from Shanghai airport. Flying home after an extraordinary week in China. I might talk about it sometime...

    Mr Herdson's analysis is correct (though I don't believe we will ever rejoin the EU, because 1 you'd have to call and win a referendum, and they don't happen very often, and 2, the EU will be a different more Federalist beast very soon - if it continues to exist).

    What has happened is Reality Dawning on Brexiteers: you've seen it in the mien of Davis, Bojo, Fox, they have genuinely realised that A No Deal Brexit would be shite at best and the apocalypse at worst, so they have very sensibly decided a softly softly Brexit is our optimum bet for now.

    The main thing is simply to quit. To escape. Just quietly get out. Take the hit, but with the least pain possible (lest the electorate REALLY change their minds and the threat of a 2nd vote looms)

    We will end up in a Norway-ish situation (which I predicted the day after the vote), though they will all call it something else to save face. Both sides will claim victory, life will go on.

    THAT is when the eurosceptics will start work again: aiming to pivot us slowly and carefully ever further from the EU.

    It is, by the by, absolutely the best strategy, long term, for the UK. It took us 40 years to get us so painfully enmeshed in the EU we were almost trapped forever; if it takes a decade or two to be truly free, so be it.

    Yesterday was a good day for TMay and a good day for the UK. It was a shit day for hardcore Remoaners and ultra Leavers.

    Xie Xie.
  • David Herdson

    Let me offer you an alternative perspective. Tory 'eurosceptics' have been selling the UK out to the EU for 50 years. The UK didn't get the referendum because of the Tories, they got it because of UKIP. The public instructed you to regain control of our laws, borders and trade. And their first action is to engage in another sellout.

    The funny thing is that Tories think that these 'compromises' with the EU are popular. In fact, when they threw Thatcher under the bus and replaced her with 'eurosceptic' Major who sold out in one of these 'compromises', they were thrown out of power for 13 years.

    Now, we have Tory Eurosceptics again lying through their teeth to support their leader in another sellout. Both Gove and Johnson have tried to spin 'full regulatory alignment' as proof that we will have control of our own laws. How stupid do they think people are?

    Older Tory voters (eg most of them) who voted Leave have very little to fear from Corbyn - they are pensioners with assets who don't really care if the economy is tanked by a Marxist. I can promise you that these people will desert the Tories in droves. They are absolutely bloody minded enough to vote Corbyn to punish the Tories for ignoring the clear instruction they were given.

    Gove, Johnson and Davis are all finished as potential Tory leaders. They have two choices - keep May, complete the sellout and get annihilated at the next election, or choose a new leader who actually is prepared to break the long tradition of Tory euro-treachery. Have fun!
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 27,651
    edited December 2017

    I can promise you that these people will desert the Tories in droves.

    When do you expect to see this in the opinion polls?
  • I can promise you that these people will desert the Tories in droves.

    When do you expect to see this in the opinion polls?
    It sort of depends if anyone steps forward to lead the deal opposition. If JRM or IDS stand up it will focus people on the sellout (in the same way that Boris leading Leave had the effect of focussing people that Leaving was possible).

    Given the MSM whitewash, I expect a small short term bounce followed by a very significant decline the moment trade talks begin next year.
  • AlsoIndigoAlsoIndigo Posts: 1,850

    I can promise you that these people will desert the Tories in droves.

    When do you expect to see this in the opinion polls?
    If it happens it will be two weeks before the next GE, just like any other time before, because most of the public are not paying attention before then. Personally I find the belief in mid-term opinion polls inexplicable.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 3,792
    This well written header chimes with many of my thoughts.

    I’m still struggling with the idea that those who have essentially campaigned for Brexit for their entire political lives are going to accept this. Some of these people argued the EU should pay us to leave.

    But Mr. Herdson is right so far - other than predictable chat from Farage (comeback on the cards?) - very little from the Brexiteers...
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 1,409
    rkrkrk said:



    But Mr. Herdson is right so far - other than predictable chat from Farage (comeback on the cards?) - very little from the Brexiteers...

    Even thick leavers realise it's this or On the Beach.
  • AlsoIndigoAlsoIndigo Posts: 1,850
    I think there is plenty of scope for it all to come crashing down still, most specifically because of Para. 96 of the draft agreement which states that the draft agreement is only comes into force as part of an overall agreement, its the concrete implementation of "Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed", if the trade talks don't go well, or the EU attempts to tell us to piss off and force a wholesale alignment under Para. 50, TM will be dumped in favor of a solid Leaver and we will be back to no deal again.
  • I think there is plenty of scope for it all to come crashing down still,.

    Of course - but three things were clear yesterday:

    - The EU wants a deal (that hadn’t been clear)
    - They have decided they prefer Mrs May to any of the alternatives
    - Euro fudge is alive & well and residing on one side or other of the Irish border (which isn’t there....)
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,639
    Because they have had a real glimpse of how vulnerable their project is.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,639
    edited December 2017

    And because their lives only have meaning if they can continue to rail against the EU and find the status quo unsatisfactory. Take that away, and their lives would be empty.

    Both getting Brexit, and still being able to campaign for Brexit, is the ultimate cake and eat it.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    edited December 2017
    I have drawn more or less the same conclusions as David Herdson. Para 49 more or less tells us what the government seeks in the final deal. I will also quote the relevant sentences of that paragragh.

    Should this not be possible, the United Kingdom will propose specific solutions to address the unique circumstances of the island of Ireland. In the absence of agreed solutions, the United Kingdom will maintain full alignment with those rules of the Internal Market and the Customs Union which, now or in the future, support North-South cooperation, the all-island economy and the protection of the 1998 Agreement.

    We want to be in the Single Market and the Customs Union in all but name. If one thinks about it, it is not a million miles from Kier Starmer's August proposals [ agreed by the shadow cabinet ]. The reasons are obvious. Both the government and Labour have spoken to business, industry and have been spoken to by them. Both have recognised what is needed.

    So, the negotiations will be about this: how much of the single market and the customs union can the UK be in [ without actually be in it! ] ? The EU's position is that the UK cannot be in the single market without Freedom of Movement. There are two fudges possible [ possibly more ]:

    1. Instead of "freedom" there would be a generous system of work permits, free travel etc.

    2. The UK actually pays an annual contribution like Norway.

    or, both. There is, of course, also the separate negotiations for the "financial passport".

    It might seem , at first glance, that #2 will be contentious. I doubt it. Theresa has called the headbanger's bluff and found there was not even a whimper when the EUR 45bn was agreed [ where are those who said we should walk away ? . not a penny etc. ].

    It is possible that the DUP made Theresa show her hands more than she would have wanted to at this stage. I go back to the italics above:

    In the absence of agreed solutions, the United Kingdom will maintain full alignment with those rules of the Internal Market and the Customs Union

    I doubt if she really wanted to tie the rUK to this. But while the DUP kind of forced her hands, she may have thought that this was after all, close to her end game. She also may have gathered by now that whistling Boris, and Gove liked their red boxes too much to cause trouble. Fox has now effectively been made a Minister without Portfolio. Davis has become a bit of an embarrassment.

    Theresa, after all, turned out to be a Remainer.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,639
    Even actual Brexit won't end the divisions within the Tory party about EU. The extremists will continue to be unhappy and continue to plot to undermine the status quo for another generation.
  • IanB2 said:

    Even actual Brexit won't end the divisions within the Tory party about EU. The extremists will continue to be unhappy and continue to plot to undermine the status quo for another generation.

    Isn’t it healthy to have different points of view within a party (unless you’re the SNP.....)
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    IanB2 said:

    Even actual Brexit won't end the divisions within the Tory party about EU. The extremists will continue to be unhappy and continue to plot to undermine the status quo for another generation.

    The headbangers cannot be headbangers unless they bang their heads against something. That's what they get their satisfaction from. Like the loony Left in the Labout Party of the 80's. Some became Blairites, and some now are in the Shadow cabinet.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,639

    IanB2 said:

    Even actual Brexit won't end the divisions within the Tory party about EU. The extremists will continue to be unhappy and continue to plot to undermine the status quo for another generation.

    Isn’t it healthy to have different points of view within a party (unless you’re the SNP.....)
    It is hard to see anything healthy about the Tory party's internal divisions over the EU. Go ask the previous leaders.
  • IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Even actual Brexit won't end the divisions within the Tory party about EU. The extremists will continue to be unhappy and continue to plot to undermine the status quo for another generation.

    Isn’t it healthy to have different points of view within a party (unless you’re the SNP.....)
    It is hard to see anything healthy about the Tory party's internal divisions over the EU. Go ask the previous leaders.
    In the end, they played a part in giving the people their say - isn’t that a good thing?
  • felixfelix Posts: 7,214
    edited December 2017

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Even actual Brexit won't end the divisions within the Tory party about EU. The extremists will continue to be unhappy and continue to plot to undermine the status quo for another generation.

    Isn’t it healthy to have different points of view within a party (unless you’re the SNP.....)
    It is hard to see anything healthy about the Tory party's internal divisions over the EU. Go ask the previous leaders.
    In the end, they played a part in giving the people their say - isn’t that a good thing?
    It's clear that 2 main groups are seething over this deal. Arch Brexiteers whose desire to return to the 50's or earlier makes them irreconcilable to any compromise. In truth many remain suspicious about the 1832 Reform Act and the 1845 Repeal of the Corn Laws. The other are hard core Remainers - a masochistic group who view Britain as xenophobic villains in an otherwise enlightened Europe who merit punishment for their sins.
    Fortunately the vast majority of people live thankfully on a different planet with a much more nuanced view of the world where shopping, SCD, sport, family and friends play the biggest part in their daily lives. They simply want to move on.
  • nielhnielh Posts: 1,041
    Varadhkar played a blinder.

    Good article.
  • felixfelix Posts: 7,214
    IanB2 said:

    Even actual Brexit won't end the divisions within the Tory party about EU. The extremists will continue to be unhappy and continue to plot to undermine the status quo for another generation.

    Maybe the wish is father to your thoughts?
  • On topic, there are plenty of indications that they're not happy. The usual journalist outriders for the headbanger Leave Right, Tim Montgomerie and Isabel Oakeshott, are disgusted. But the Conservative hardline Leave politicians are quiescent for now. My guess why is that, like George Osborne, they think they haven't got the numbers to stop this. Rather than display their impotence now, they'll wait for battles they can win.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,130
    surbiton said:

    I have drawn more or less the same conclusions as David Herdson. Para 49 more or less tells us what the government seeks in the final deal. I will also quote the relevant sentences of that paragragh.

    Should this not be possible, the United Kingdom will propose specific solutions to address the unique circumstances of the island of Ireland. In the absence of agreed solutions, the United Kingdom will maintain full alignment with those rules of the Internal Market and the Customs Union which, now or in the future, support North-South cooperation, the all-island economy and the protection of the 1998 Agreement.

    We want to be in the Single Market and the Customs Union in all but name.

    I think you are misinterpreting the key paragraph, guilty of seeing what you want to see. (Equally, I could be suffering from the same condition).

    My focus would be as follows:

    Should this not be possible, the United Kingdom will propose specific solutions to address the unique circumstances of the island of Ireland.In the absence of agreed solutions, the United Kingdom will maintain full alignment with those rules of the Internal Market and the Customs Union which, now or in the future, support North-South cooperation, the all-island economy and the protection of the 1998 Agreement.

    So it is limited, by a natural reading of the words, to a subset of the rules "those rules" which support various aspects of the relationship between NI and RoI.

    Free movement of people, for example, does not - that is already dealt with under the CTA, so there is no need for there to be "full alignment" between the UK and the IM/CU to address that concern.

    My interpretation would be that - on a sector by sector basis - the UK government can pick and choose.

    So, for example, we may chose to maintain "full alignment" in agriculture or in other sectors where there is significant cross border trade.

    This is not the same as remaining in or close to the SM as a whole.

    I think we will end up with Canada Plus, which would be a good outcome overall, and I think would satisfy most. There will also be a long transition.
  • nielhnielh Posts: 1,041

    I can promise you that these people will desert the Tories in droves.

    When do you expect to see this in the opinion polls?
    It sort of depends if anyone steps forward to lead the deal opposition. If JRM or IDS stand up it will focus people on the sellout (in the same way that Boris leading Leave had the effect of focussing people that Leaving was possible).

    Given the MSM whitewash, I expect a small short term bounce followed by a very significant decline the moment trade talks begin next year.

    Of course there will be some deal opposition, but it will have no traction with the wider population. They want to block immigration and english self rule. They dont for the most part understand or have any real interest in trade.
    So we will sign up to a punitive, expensive, restrictive deal and brexiteers will have to suck it up.
    Aaron banks will still have his african diamond mine and the wetherspoons guy will moan about it on his beermats. Life will go on.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 16,269
    In an odd we we are ending up with a very british compromise whch probably reflects where the nation as a whole is.

    Were out but not so far out as to be fully out so a 52-48 solution
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,439
    edited December 2017
    felix said:

    In truth many remain suspicious about ... the 1845 Repeal of the Corn Laws.

    They wouldn't be the only ones suspicious about that. I would be, for example. Not least because the Corn Laws were actually repealed in 1846.
  • Thankyou.

    It didn't take them long to get from €20 to €100! Then there was the €60 lunch!

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/08/worlds-expensive-lunch-financial-times-nearly-cost-uk-extra15/

    I think it would be fair to say they didn't have much of a clue......
  • Charles said:

    surbiton said:

    I have drawn more or less the same conclusions as David Herdson. Para 49 more or less tells us what the government seeks in the final deal. I will also quote the relevant sentences of that paragragh.

    Should this not be possible, the United Kingdom will propose specific solutions to address the unique circumstances of the island of Ireland. In the absence of agreed solutions, the United Kingdom will maintain full alignment with those rules of the Internal Market and the Customs Union which, now or in the future, support North-South cooperation, the all-island economy and the protection of the 1998 Agreement.

    We want to be in the Single Market and the Customs Union in all but name.

    I think we will end up with Canada Plus, which would be a good outcome overall, and I think would satisfy most. There will also be a long transition.


    With the 'plus':

  • nielh said:

    Varadhkar played a blinder.

    Good article.


    I'm happy you think so......everyone a winner!
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,294
    In other news, another England cricketer accused over 'incident'.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/42291541

    I'm bemused of the idea of a midnight curfew. They're meant to be top sportsmen, not inebriated fools. If they cannot be professional then we should just capitulate the series and return to England.

    (And I'm not just saying this because I hate cricket).
  • Thankyou.

    It didn't take them long to get from €20 to €100! Then there was the €60 lunch!

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/08/worlds-expensive-lunch-financial-times-nearly-cost-uk-extra15/

    I think it would be fair to say they didn't have much of a clue......
    It would be fair to say that the Leavers are rewriting history like mad. A year ago 20bn was utterly unacceptable. Today 40bn is a brilliant deal for them.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,417
    edited December 2017
    "One other feature of continued regulatory alignment ought to be mentioned: it will make rejoining a lot easier."

    Which Tory is going to agitate to rejoin? Signing up to the Euro, to Schengen, to harmonised taxes, to the United States of Europe. After a "softish Brexit"? Ken Clarke? Ann Soubry? Likely neither will be MPs after the next election. Who is the standard-bearer for the failed experiment of Europhilia? Who is going to say, "You know what, this country really needs to be writing a cheque to Brussels for £10 billion a year..." For membership fees of a club that doesn't want us in it. No-one with career ambitions in politics for a start.

    You can just about imagine Chuka Umunna sounding it out. On a tour of Northern Working Mens Clubs. The once. But Labour won't sign up to rejoining any time soon - not under Corbyn. And as the world keeps turning once we are out, it will just seem quite quaint. If not bat-shit crazy. An idea that can safely reside in the Liberal Democrats.

    Equally, who is going to agitate for another campaign for "a better deal", for Brexit 2 - "thus time, we'll REALLY make them give us back our decades of contributions..."? Come March 2019, name me a single supposed Tory Headbanger who is going to make that their career. The Conservative Party will stand shoulder-to-shoulder behind the final settlement reached on Brexit. Because it does the job. It really will lance the decades long Euro-boil that has so riven Tory politics. The flapping of white coats will be no more. And you can see how that notion terrifies many on the left: a Conservative Party with only one thing to focus on - beating Labour.

    Farage might try and continue his career built on piss and wind - but UKIP is dead, its aim achieved. We are now a United Kingdom that is independent. All that is left of UKIP is a party, to be held in March 2019.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 16,269

    nielh said:

    Varadhkar played a blinder.

    Good article.


    I'm happy you think so......everyone a winner!
    suddenly everyone appreciates the DUP veto

    https://www.independent.ie/business/brexit/solution-to-appease-dup-triggered-better-outcome-for-ireland-36392272.html

    at this rate it will be Arlene for Taoiseach
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 16,269

    Thankyou.

    It didn't take them long to get from €20 to €100! Then there was the €60 lunch!

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/08/worlds-expensive-lunch-financial-times-nearly-cost-uk-extra15/

    I think it would be fair to say they didn't have much of a clue......
    It would be fair to say that the Leavers are rewriting history like mad. A year ago 20bn was utterly unacceptable. Today 40bn is a brilliant deal for them.
    some did some didnt

    it's simply you picking on the bits you want and ignoring the wider picture
  • I'm looking forward to the polling on this stage of the deal. Will the public be pleased that things are progressing or horrified at 40bn? My straw poll of one mentioned both, so a lot could depend on the phrasing of questions.
  • Thankyou.

    It didn't take them long to get from €20 to €100! Then there was the €60 lunch!

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/08/worlds-expensive-lunch-financial-times-nearly-cost-uk-extra15/

    I think it would be fair to say they didn't have much of a clue......
    It would be fair to say that the Leavers are rewriting history like mad. A year ago 20bn was utterly unacceptable. Today 40bn is a brilliant deal for them.
    some did some didnt

    it's simply you picking on the bits you want and ignoring the wider picture
    The wider picture is that Britain is heading for a crap Brexit. This is considerably better than I was expecting but it's still crap. The country is going to be rule-taking not rule-making, with far inferior access to its biggest market in many sectors and having become far more divided, narrow-minded and fearful in the process.

    And for why? So a few obsessives can tell themselves that they're able to exercise theoretical sovereignty about the curvature of bananas.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,294

    I'm looking forward to the polling on this stage of the deal. Will the public be pleased that things are progressing or horrified at 40bn? My straw poll of one mentioned both, so a lot could depend on the phrasing of questions.

    Firstly I'd like to say that my scepticism of last week has thankfully been proved unfounded, and this deal *appears* better than I had hoped, at least in my far-from-expert view.

    As for your comment: I expect the deal itself to be well received, particularly so after the troubles of the last week. Putting on my negative hat though, I expect a heck of a lot of whinging and complaining down the line in two areas: the details of the deal and trade agreements, and then the continued payments.

    I expect Eurosceptic newspapers and others to have headlines like: "we're still paying the EU xxx million", even if those payments are agreed or even sensible. Because that's the way they've behaved in the past, and it'll sell.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 27,651
    edited December 2017


    a few obsessives

    All 17.2 million of them?

    You're not a fan of this democracy lark, are you?
  • Good morning, everyone.

    Bit chilly, again. Where's this Mediterranean climate we were promised?
  • As I've been banging on about for ages, the harsh reality was that no deal Brexit would crash the economy. Every time one industry or another stood up and said "we're fucked with no deal and when we say 'we're fucked' we mean 'you're fucked'" I would post it, and be accused of Cassandra behaviour.

    And now here we are. The sectoral analyses the Labour Party demanded released and various people insisted was "us showing our hand" was us facing reality. Davis absurdly claimed they didn't exist after banging on and on about them and so didn't release them, but the entire episode forced the government to look again and conclude that they either protect the economy or they are finished.

    Para 49 is clear. Unless there is an alternative deal we are in effect staying in both the SM and CU. That is good because the city needs to keep the 4 freedoms, it's also bad because that also means we keep Freedom of Movement. It won't be called FoM, the Tories will insist it's stopping, but like it's insistence that it's getting net migration down nothing practical will change.

    Brexit was never about fact or practicality or detail for the nutters. It was at best about "taking control" on which front we've failed, or at worst about "getting rid of foreigners" on which front we've failed. The "we'll win votes" view I keep reading from Tories is absurd. Your vote relies on these nutters, you have by your own definition failed on every measure to avoid "betrayal" and they will destroy you.
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,063
    Gove realised how crap the deal is:

    "Voters can use the next general election to have their say on a final Brexit deal, Michael Gove has said.
    The environment secretary praised Theresa May's "tenacity and skill" in securing a last-minute deal to end phase one negotiations on Friday.
    But, writing in the Daily Telegraph, he said if British people "dislike the arrangement", they can change it."

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42291191
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,439
    I wonder if any Brexiteer will be cheeky enough to say of this deal that it offers 'the freedom to win freedom.'

    Invoking the great Michael Collins would really annoy Varadhkar and Foster, but it would be quite funny.

  • a few obsessives

    All 17.2 million of them?

    You're not a fan of this democracy lark, are you?
    The 17.2 million voted to stop millions of Turks descending and for 350million a week to be spent on the NHS. They were led by the nose by malign clowns.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,130

    As I've been banging on about for ages, the harsh reality was that no deal Brexit would crash the economy. Every time one industry or another stood up and said "we're fucked with no deal and when we say 'we're fucked' we mean 'you're fucked'" I would post it, and be accused of Cassandra behaviour.

    And now here we are. The sectoral analyses the Labour Party demanded released and various people insisted was "us showing our hand" was us facing reality. Davis absurdly claimed they didn't exist after banging on and on about them and so didn't release them, but the entire episode forced the government to look again and conclude that they either protect the economy or they are finished.

    Para 49 is clear. Unless there is an alternative deal we are in effect staying in both the SM and CU. That is good because the city needs to keep the 4 freedoms, it's also bad because that also means we keep Freedom of Movement. It won't be called FoM, the Tories will insist it's stopping, but like it's insistence that it's getting net migration down nothing practical will change.

    Brexit was never about fact or practicality or detail for the nutters. It was at best about "taking control" on which front we've failed, or at worst about "getting rid of foreigners" on which front we've failed. The "we'll win votes" view I keep reading from Tories is absurd. Your vote relies on these nutters, you have by your own definition failed on every measure to avoid "betrayal" and they will destroy you.

    You keep saying this, but it's not a true. A textual analysis doesn't support what you wish it did.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 16,269

    Thankyou.

    It didn't take them long to get from €20 to €100! Then there was the €60 lunch!

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/08/worlds-expensive-lunch-financial-times-nearly-cost-uk-extra15/

    I think it would be fair to say they didn't have much of a clue......
    It would be fair to say that the Leavers are rewriting history like mad. A year ago 20bn was utterly unacceptable. Today 40bn is a brilliant deal for them.
    some did some didnt

    it's simply you picking on the bits you want and ignoring the wider picture
    The wider picture is that Britain is heading for a crap Brexit. This is considerably better than I was expecting but it's still crap. The country is going to be rule-taking not rule-making, with far inferior access to its biggest market in many sectors and having become far more divided, narrow-minded and fearful in the process.

    And for why? So a few obsessives can tell themselves that they're able to exercise theoretical sovereignty about the curvature of bananas.
    well thats your view

    but in 40 years Remain never convinced of the benefits of being in

    as I said yesterday the toxic legacy of the vote isnt whatever deal we come out with, but that people like yourself cannot bringthemselves to understand why they lost

    youre like the Bourbons in 1815
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,294
    JonathanD said:

    Gove realised how crap the deal is:

    "Voters can use the next general election to have their say on a final Brexit deal, Michael Gove has said.
    The environment secretary praised Theresa May's "tenacity and skill" in securing a last-minute deal to end phase one negotiations on Friday.
    But, writing in the Daily Telegraph, he said if British people "dislike the arrangement", they can change it."

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42291191

    This is the way reasonable people can read the same thing and get different messages. I read this as Gove trying to stifle criticism by the hard Brexiters ...
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 16,269


    a few obsessives

    All 17.2 million of them?

    You're not a fan of this democracy lark, are you?
    The 17.2 million voted to stop millions of Turks descending and for 350million a week to be spent on the NHS. They were led by the nose by malign clowns.
    so back to the argument your side was so thick even Nigel Farage was smarter

    I agree
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,639

    JonathanD said:

    Gove realised how crap the deal is:

    "Voters can use the next general election to have their say on a final Brexit deal, Michael Gove has said.
    The environment secretary praised Theresa May's "tenacity and skill" in securing a last-minute deal to end phase one negotiations on Friday.
    But, writing in the Daily Telegraph, he said if British people "dislike the arrangement", they can change it."

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42291191

    This is the way reasonable people can read the same thing and get different messages. I read this as Gove trying to stifle criticism by the hard Brexiters ...
    And in any event people are most unlikely to vote for changing it in any direction that he might want. Quite possibly the precise opposite will occur.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 29,606
    SeanT said:

    Greetings from Shanghai airport. Flying home after an extraordinary week in China. I might talk about it sometime...

    Mr Herdson's analysis is correct (though I don't believe we will ever rejoin the EU, because 1 you'd have to call and win a referendum, and they don't happen very often, and 2, the EU will be a different more Federalist beast very soon - if it continues to exist).

    What has happened is Reality Dawning on Brexiteers: you've seen it in the mien of Davis, Bojo, Fox, they have genuinely realised that A No Deal Brexit would be shite at best and the apocalypse at worst, so they have very sensibly decided a softly softly Brexit is our optimum bet for now.

    The main thing is simply to quit. To escape. Just quietly get out. Take the hit, but with the least pain possible (lest the electorate REALLY change their minds and the threat of a 2nd vote looms)

    We will end up in a Norway-ish situation (which I predicted the day after the vote), though they will all call it something else to save face. Both sides will claim victory, life will go on.

    THAT is when the eurosceptics will start work again: aiming to pivot us slowly and carefully ever further from the EU.

    It is, by the by, absolutely the best strategy, long term, for the UK. It took us 40 years to get us so painfully enmeshed in the EU we were almost trapped forever; if it takes a decade or two to be truly free, so be it.

    Yesterday was a good day for TMay and a good day for the UK. It was a shit day for hardcore Remoaners and ultra Leavers.

    Xie Xie.

    Had a week in China myself, in fact I think we were at Beijing airport the same day earlier in the week - I did my best to travel the sean t way.
  • Am I right in thinking that Gibraltar is being put in the too difficult box and not really addressed...? Interesting that the Spanish PM was in London meeting with T May this week - but very little media interest into that other EU border that will be created come 2019?
  • alex.alex. Posts: 2,802

    Thankyou.

    It didn't take them long to get from €20 to €100! Then there was the €60 lunch!

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/08/worlds-expensive-lunch-financial-times-nearly-cost-uk-extra15/

    I think it would be fair to say they didn't have much of a clue......
    It would be fair to say that the Leavers are rewriting history like mad. A year ago 20bn was utterly unacceptable. Today 40bn is a brilliant deal for them.
    some did some didnt

    it's simply you picking on the bits you want and ignoring the wider picture
    The wider picture is that Britain is heading for a crap Brexit. This is considerably better than I was expecting but it's still crap. The country is going to be rule-taking not rule-making, with far inferior access to its biggest market in many sectors and having become far more divided, narrow-minded and fearful in the process.

    And for why? So a few obsessives can tell themselves that they're able to exercise theoretical sovereignty about the curvature of bananas.
    It depends on how the EU develops in future, innit? If it continues on a path towards further integration, more bailout for suffering countries, or even if it implodes under internal contradictions, the U.K. will be able to look at it contentedly and say “better off out”. And is still being (effectively) in single market/customs union REALLY a problem? When the mainstream Eurosceptic position has always been “we only joined the EEC for the trade”? We are just in the process of manufacturing a two speed Europe by another name, with both the positives and the negatives that entails. And once it all settles down there will still be enough allies within the EU for the British outlook that we can work to influence the Regulations that affect us. And we will still be too big a trading partner to be completely ignored. We just won’t have any voting rights.

  • The Sun, The Mail and the Express are all delighted. Tells you all you need to know really.
  • felixfelix Posts: 7,214
    ydoethur said:

    felix said:

    In truth many remain suspicious about ... the 1845 Repeal of the Corn Laws.

    They wouldn't be the only ones suspicious about that. I would be, for example. Not least because the Corn Laws were actually repealed in 1846.
    Oops - I've been retired too long. Maybe the bill was read earlier?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,639

    Am I right in thinking that Gibraltar is being put in the too difficult box and not really addressed...? Interesting that the Spanish PM was in London meeting with T May this week - but very little media interest into that other EU border that will be created come 2019?

    It appears to require a separate agreement with Spain. Good luck with that.
  • Thankyou.

    It didn't take them long to get from €20 to €100! Then there was the €60 lunch!

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/08/worlds-expensive-lunch-financial-times-nearly-cost-uk-extra15/

    I think it would be fair to say they didn't have much of a clue......
    It would be fair to say that the Leavers are rewriting history like mad. A year ago 20bn was utterly unacceptable. Today 40bn is a brilliant deal for them.
    some did some didnt

    it's simply you picking on the bits you want and ignoring the wider picture
    The wider picture is that Britain is heading for a crap Brexit. This is considerably better than I was expecting but it's still crap. The country is going to be rule-taking not rule-making, with far inferior access to its biggest market in many sectors and having become far more divided, narrow-minded and fearful in the process.

    And for why? So a few obsessives can tell themselves that they're able to exercise theoretical sovereignty about the curvature of bananas.
    well thats your view

    but in 40 years Remain never convinced of the benefits of being in

    as I said yesterday the toxic legacy of the vote isnt whatever deal we come out with, but that people like yourself cannot bringthemselves to understand why they lost

    youre like the Bourbons in 1815
    Oh it's clear why Remain lost. Few were enthused with the EU. I certainly am not.

    Evil lies stirring up xenophobic fears were more than enough to overwhelm cerebral arguments for staying in.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 6,926


    a few obsessives

    All 17.2 million of them?

    You're not a fan of this democracy lark, are you?
    The 17.2 million voted to stop millions of Turks descending and for 350million a week to be spent on the NHS. They were led by the nose by malign clowns.
    Just think you had all the party leaders with most MP's on side,US president,tv news media ,half print media ,bank of England, all the government workings and you still lost.
  • felixfelix Posts: 7,214

    Thankyou.

    It didn't take them long to get from €20 to €100! Then there was the €60 lunch!

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/08/worlds-expensive-lunch-financial-times-nearly-cost-uk-extra15/

    I think it would be fair to say they didn't have much of a clue......
    It would be fair to say that the Leavers are rewriting history like mad. A year ago 20bn was utterly unacceptable. Today 40bn is a brilliant deal for them.
    some did some didnt

    it's simply you picking on the bits you want and ignoring the wider picture
    The wider picture is that Britain is heading for a crap Brexit. This is considerably better than I was expecting but it's still crap. The country is going to be rule-taking not rule-making, with far inferior access to its biggest market in many sectors and having become far more divided, narrow-minded and fearful in the process.

    And for why? So a few obsessives can tell themselves that they're able to exercise theoretical sovereignty about the curvature of bananas.
    Yup the obsessives on both sides hum the same tune.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,294

    The Sun, The Mail and the Express are all delighted. Tells you all you need to know really.

    For the moment. Normal service will be resumed soon. ;)
  • felixfelix Posts: 7,214
    IanB2 said:

    Am I right in thinking that Gibraltar is being put in the too difficult box and not really addressed...? Interesting that the Spanish PM was in London meeting with T May this week - but very little media interest into that other EU border that will be created come 2019?

    It appears to require a separate agreement with Spain. Good luck with that.
    Spain is actually pretty close to the UK and has more serious problems than Gibraltar to worry about.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 2,802

    Thankyou.

    It didn't take them long to get from €20 to €100! Then there was the €60 lunch!

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/08/worlds-expensive-lunch-financial-times-nearly-cost-uk-extra15/

    I think it would be fair to say they didn't have much of a clue......
    It would be fair to say that the Leavers are rewriting history like mad. A year ago 20bn was utterly unacceptable. Today 40bn is a brilliant deal for them.
    some did some didnt

    it's simply you picking on the bits you want and ignoring the wider picture
    The wider picture is that Britain is heading for a crap Brexit. This is considerably better than I was expecting but it's still crap. The country is going to be rule-taking not rule-making, with far inferior access to its biggest market in many sectors and having become far more divided, narrow-minded and fearful in the process.

    And for why? So a few obsessives can tell themselves that they're able to exercise theoretical sovereignty about the curvature of bananas.
    well thats your view

    but in 40 years Remain never convinced of the benefits of being in

    as I said yesterday the toxic legacy of the vote isnt whatever deal we come out with, but that people like yourself cannot bringthemselves to understand why they lost

    youre like the Bourbons in 1815
    Oh it's clear why Remain lost. Few were enthused with the EU. I certainly am not.

    Evil lies stirring up xenophobic fears were more than enough to overwhelm cerebral arguments for staying in.
    Although in order to combat the lies, Remain had to effectively disown official U.K. government policy. So you could fully accept the assertion that Turkey would never join the EU and still see it as a reason to leave. Because if the official EU/U.K. position on Turkey could not be believed how could any statements about how the EU would develop in future. Especially with the evident history of “red lines” one year becoming reality several years down the line.

  • Mr. Meeks, the idea there was a dividing line between a cerebral desire to remain and a xenophobic desire to leave is to draw a fictional picture placing the clever on one side and the bigoted on the other.

    Do you genuinely believe there were no sound reasons to want to leave?

  • a few obsessives

    All 17.2 million of them?

    You're not a fan of this democracy lark, are you?
    The 17.2 million voted to stop millions of Turks descending and for 350million a week to be spent on the NHS. They were led by the nose by malign clowns.
    Just think you had all the party leaders with most MP's on side,US president,tv news media ,half print media ,bank of England, all the government workings and you still lost.
    The entire country lost because of the way that Leave fought its campaign. Britain is more divided, weaker, more irrelevant, more fearful and will be less prosperous. All because of a toxic alliance of xenophobes and obsessives.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    Thankyou.

    It didn't take them long to get from €20 to €100! Then there was the €60 lunch!

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/08/worlds-expensive-lunch-financial-times-nearly-cost-uk-extra15/

    I think it would be fair to say they didn't have much of a clue......
    It would be fair to say that the Leavers are rewriting history like mad. A year ago 20bn was utterly unacceptable. Today 40bn is a brilliant deal for them.
    some did some didnt

    it's simply you picking on the bits you want and ignoring the wider picture
    The wider picture is that Britain is heading for a crap Brexit. This is considerably better than I was expecting but it's still crap. The country is going to be rule-taking not rule-making, with far inferior access to its biggest market in many sectors and having become far more divided, narrow-minded and fearful in the process.

    And for why? So a few obsessives can tell themselves that they're able to exercise theoretical sovereignty about the curvature of bananas.
    Surely this is not right?

    We have to maintain alignment with the curvature of eurobananas, without even being able to express an opinion on preferred radius.
  • Mr. Meeks, the idea there was a dividing line between a cerebral desire to remain and a xenophobic desire to leave is to draw a fictional picture placing the clever on one side and the bigoted on the other.

    Do you genuinely believe there were no sound reasons to want to leave?

    There was an entirely coherent case to Leave the EU, one I could have been persuaded by. It was not made and instead the Leave campaign chose to frighten people with lies about millions of Turks descending on Britain.
  • felixfelix Posts: 7,214

    Thankyou.

    It didn't take them long to get from €20 to €100! Then there was the €60 lunch!

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/08/worlds-expensive-lunch-financial-times-nearly-cost-uk-extra15/

    I think it would be fair to say they didn't have much of a clue......
    It would be fair to say that the Leavers are rewriting history like mad. A year ago 20bn was utterly unacceptable. Today 40bn is a brilliant deal for them.
    some did some didnt

    it's simply you picking on the bits you want and ignoring the wider picture
    The wider picture is that Britain is heading for a crap Brexit. This is considerably better than I was expecting but it's still crap. The country is going to be rule-taking not rule-making, with far inferior access to its biggest market in many sectors and having become far more divided, narrow-minded and fearful in the process.

    And for why? So a few obsessives can tell themselves that they're able to exercise theoretical sovereignty about the curvature of bananas.
    well thats your view

    but in 40 years Remain never convinced of the benefits of being in

    as I said yesterday the toxic legacy of the vote isnt whatever deal we come out with, but that people like yourself cannot bringthemselves to understand why they lost

    youre like the Bourbons in 1815
    Oh it's clear why Remain lost. Few were enthused with the EU. I certainly am not.

    Evil lies stirring up xenophobic fears were more than enough to overwhelm cerebral arguments for staying in.
    There is no place in the world pure enough for the ivory tower in your head.
  • Thankyou.

    It didn't take them long to get from €20 to €100! Then there was the €60 lunch!

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/08/worlds-expensive-lunch-financial-times-nearly-cost-uk-extra15/

    I think it would be fair to say they didn't have much of a clue......
    It would be fair to say that the Leavers are rewriting history like mad. A year ago 20bn was utterly unacceptable. Today 40bn is a brilliant deal for them.
    some did some didnt

    it's simply you picking on the bits you want and ignoring the wider picture
    The wider picture is that Britain is heading for a crap Brexit. This is considerably better than I was expecting but it's still crap. The country is going to be rule-taking not rule-making, with far inferior access to its biggest market in many sectors and having become far more divided, narrow-minded and fearful in the process.

    And for why? So a few obsessives can tell themselves that they're able to exercise theoretical sovereignty about the curvature of bananas.
    Surely this is not right?

    We have to maintain alignment with the curvature of eurobananas, without even being able to express an opinion on preferred radius.
    To be discussed in Stage Two. Boris Johnson is going to start by telling M Barnier where he can shove his banana and end by peeling it for him while he reclines on a chaise longue.
  • AnExileinD4AnExileinD4 Posts: 138
    edited December 2017

    Thankyou.

    It didn't take them long to get from €20 to €100! Then there was the €60 lunch!

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/08/worlds-expensive-lunch-financial-times-nearly-cost-uk-extra15/

    I think it would be fair to say they didn't have much of a clue......
    It would be fair to say that the Leavers are rewriting history like mad. A year ago 20bn was utterly unacceptable. Today 40bn is a brilliant deal for them.
    some did some didnt

    it's simply you picking on the bits you want and ignoring the wider picture
    The wider picture is that Britain is heading for a crap Brexit. This is considerably better than I was expecting but it's still crap. The country is going to be rule-taking not rule-making, with far inferior access to its biggest market in many sectors and having become far more divided, narrow-minded and fearful in the process.

    And for why? So a few obsessives can tell themselves that they're able to exercise theoretical sovereignty about the curvature of bananas.
    well thats your view

    but in 40 years Remain never convinced of the benefits of being in

    as I said yesterday the toxic legacy of the vote isnt whatever deal we come out with, but that people like yourself cannot bringthemselves to understand why they lost

    youre like the Bourbons in 1815
    Oh it's clear why Remain lost. Few were enthused with the EU. I certainly am not.

    Evil lies stirring up xenophobic fears were more than enough to overwhelm cerebral arguments for staying in.
    When has the mass of voting public/lumpen proletariat* ever really paid attention to cerebral argument? This is the country where an effective slur is “too clever by half”.


    *delete according to choice.
  • An excellent article. Whether by accident or design, May has got the Brexiteers to a point where they largely understand this is as good as it gets. My guess is that if yesterday’s agreement had been signed six months ago the howling from Brexiteers would have been much, much louder. Obviously, the loons will never be satisfied, and the usual mob will emerge over the coming months to scream betrayal, but it turns out that for most the cliff edge was not a tantalising prospect. Thus, Liam Fox will not get to agree a trade deal dictated by Donald Trump, the CANZUK Empire 2.0 brigade will have to carry on doing nothing but dream and there’ll be no bucaneering for Boris. A tragedy, of course, but one we’ll all learn to live with.

    The big loser in all of this, it seems to me, is Corbyn Labour. A soft Brexit removes the fears of many about leaving the EU. It’s not ideal for Remainers, but it’s so much better than it could have been. Is the incentive to hold their noses and vote for Labour among middle class, pro-Remain electorates in places like Leamington Spa, Canterbury and some of the London constituencies still as strong now that there’ll be no cliff edge or Hard Brexit? I wonder. I guess it depends on who the next Tory leader is. If they can tack back to the centre and avoid anyone too closely associated with Brexit I’d say they now have a big chance to win in 2021/22
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 29,606
    edited December 2017

    It ceptable. Today 40bn is a brilliant deal for them.
    some did some didnt

    it's simply you picking on the bits you want and ignoring the wider picture
    And then jumping to a different point as though it's irrelevant once that is pointed out to be wrong. Leavers not the only ones who like to rewrite history, or at least focus on only those aspects which support a predetermined argument I see.

    It's so blatant and falls apart so quickly too, it's pretty funny. 'Everyone did x' 'not everyone' 'that doesn't matter you fool' 'don't call me a fool' 'aha, now you're angry which means I must have won right?' 'Er'

    It's not even worth acknowledging the flaws or outright problems with the leave campaign since it never mollifies and 'everyone' is always stated to have the most ultra view, no matter that is demonstrably untrue. Usually with the lame excuse that because some were all were. It's the extreme logic of a child.

    But what else can be expected of ultras? By definition they don't permit information to alter their worldview, even when directly contradicted you just move on. Sorry to be so harsh, but ultras are ultras - there will be correct and fair points made, but they are incidental to the emotional venting. It's amazing how much leaver and remain ultras have in common, a few quick edits to switch the direction 180 and you could be looking at the same person in style and tone.

    Above the line always better than below though, that's true of everyone.

    On the wider point, people cannot really grasp things this complex. Unfortunately that includes the government. But it means good deal or not is less important than if people think it is good or bad, and that depends entirely on presentation and reaction. For now that is fairly muted, so I think it right to predict the big party ruckus to be in a year or so as the situation is still in can kicking mode for much of it.

    As it is I would like to pay less, obviously, but I also preferred a very soft Brexit and that wouldn't happen without a lot paid, so it is what it is. Reading how much there is still to go and how far apart the sides still are does make me question if this was all worth it, and I can't believe the cabinet still have not got unity on the end state, but hopefully no deal can be avoided.

    Pleasant day all, it's time for early Xmas - family up early due to Xmas travelling. Good stuff.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,400
    The regulatory alignment required by art 49 is essentially restricted to the terms of the 1998
    GFA. These can be as wide or as narrow as we agree to make them outside the scope of security, policing and common institutions. I therefore do not agree with David that this ties us in as much as he says.

    I also don’t agree that it is a free standing unilateral guarantee independent of art 5 which says nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.

    But I do agree it is highly indicative of the direction of travel. The government has looked over the cliff edge and not fancied the jump. We are heading towards a soft Brexit where we will tip toe away from the EU over time as it itself evolves away from us. That seems perfectly sensible to me.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 6,926


    a few obsessives

    All 17.2 million of them?

    You're not a fan of this democracy lark, are you?
    The 17.2 million voted to stop millions of Turks descending and for 350million a week to be spent on the NHS. They were led by the nose by malign clowns.
    Just think you had all the party leaders with most MP's on side,US president,tv news media ,half print media ,bank of England, all the government workings and you still lost.
    The entire country lost because of the way that Leave fought its campaign. Britain is more divided, weaker, more irrelevant, more fearful and will be less prosperous. All because of a toxic alliance of xenophobes and obsessives.
    Obsessives Mr meeks,you on here every day whining on the same subject ;-)

    Ok you lost to a 2 posters,one on a side of a bus and one showing a queue .
  • alex.alex. Posts: 2,802
    edited December 2017

    Mr. Meeks, the idea there was a dividing line between a cerebral desire to remain and a xenophobic desire to leave is to draw a fictional picture placing the clever on one side and the bigoted on the other.

    Do you genuinely believe there were no sound reasons to want to leave?

    Underneath it all I think it is quite likely that Alistair is actually a leaver. Contrary to the caricature, he hints at it all the time. I reckon in a U.K. of two people (he and RCS) the vote would have been a 2-0 landslide. It’s just he only wanted leave on his terms and was hugely sceptical that that would be delivered. I expect many voted remain for that reason. I think I probably did.

    Where I would slightly disagree is his fundamental belief (I think) that the referendum has created huge division in the country. I think the referendum was the symptom not the cause. It’s just brought the undercurrent into the open. Which in the long run could be both positive or negative.
  • felixfelix Posts: 7,214

    An excellent article. Whether by accident or design, May has got the Brexiteers to a point where they largely understand this is as good as it gets. My guess is that if yesterday’s agreement had been signed six months ago the howling from Brexiteers would have been much, much louder. Obviously, the loons will never be satisfied, and the usual mob will emerge over the coming months to scream betrayal, but it turns out that for most the cliff edge was not a tantalising prospect. Thus, Liam Fox will not get to agree a trade deal dictated by Donald Trump, the CANZUK Empire 2.0 brigade will have to carry on doing nothing but dream and there’ll be no bucaneering for Boris. A tragedy, of course, but one we’ll all learn to live with.

    The big loser in all of this, it seems to me, is Corbyn Labour. A soft Brexit removes the fears of many about leaving the EU. It’s not ideal for Remainers, but it’s so much better than it could have been. Is the incentive to hold their noses and vote for Labour among middle class, pro-Remain electorates in places like Leamington Spa, Canterbury and some of the London constituencies still as strong now that there’ll be no cliff edge or Hard Brexit? I wonder. I guess it depends on who the next Tory leader is. If they can tack back to the centre and avoid anyone too closely associated with Brexit I’d say they now have a big chance to win in 2021/22

    I concur except there seems little sign of anyone emerging beyond RD. Unclear that the members are on board. Both the main parties are a mess and riding high in the polls. It's pretty weird.
  • Mr. L, how do you think this might affect things in Scotland, particularly regarding the SNP and the highly variable SNP-approved lifespan of a generation?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,639
    edited December 2017
    alex. said:

    Mr. Meeks, the idea there was a dividing line between a cerebral desire to remain and a xenophobic desire to leave is to draw a fictional picture placing the clever on one side and the bigoted on the other.

    Do you genuinely believe there were no sound reasons to want to leave?

    Underneath it all I think it is quite likely that Alistair is actually a leaver. Contrary to the caricature, he hints at it all the time. I reckon in a U.K. of two people (he and RCS) the vote would have been a 2-0 landslide. It’s just he only wanted leave on his terms and was hugely sceptical that that would be delivered. I expect many voted remain for that reason. I think I probably did.

    Where I would slightly disagree is his fundamental belief (I think) that the referendum has created huge division in the country. I think the referendum was the symptom not the cause. It’s just brought the incurrent into the open. Which in the long run could be both positive or negative.
    The troubles being that the division is only peripherally to do with Europe, and that the reality of Brexit will make it worse rather than better. May knew all this on the steps of no. 10, but has utterly failed to do anything about it.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    An excellent article. Whether by accident or design, May has got the Brexiteers to a point where they largely understand this is as good as it gets. My guess is that if yesterday’s agreement had been signed six months ago the howling from Brexiteers would have been much, much louder. Obviously, the loons will never be satisfied, and the usual mob will emerge over the coming months to scream betrayal, but it turns out that for most the cliff edge was not a tantalising prospect. Thus, Liam Fox will not get to agree a trade deal dictated by Donald Trump, the CANZUK Empire 2.0 brigade will have to carry on doing nothing but dream and there’ll be no bucaneering for Boris. A tragedy, of course, but one we’ll all learn to live with.

    The big loser in all of this, it seems to me, is Corbyn Labour. A soft Brexit removes the fears of many about leaving the EU. It’s not ideal for Remainers, but it’s so much better than it could have been. Is the incentive to hold their noses and vote for Labour among middle class, pro-Remain electorates in places like Leamington Spa, Canterbury and some of the London constituencies still as strong now that there’ll be no cliff edge or Hard Brexit? I wonder. I guess it depends on who the next Tory leader is. If they can tack back to the centre and avoid anyone too closely associated with Brexit I’d say they now have a big chance to win in 2021/22

    Buy Hammond. He is the voice of Soft Brexit. I rather like his kind side too. Despite all the bile against him, and rumours that May wanted to sack him, he has not retaliated in kind. Indeed his response to May's coughing fit showed real personal compassion.

    Corbyn has never banged on about Europe, he bangs on about austerity. His unexpected success in this years election was to not accept that it was a Brexit election. The next one will not be either, it will be on the subject of austerity, falling living standards, emaciated public services and generational inequality.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    edited December 2017
    Charles said:

    surbiton said:

    I have drawn more or less the same conclusions as David Herdson. Para 49 more or less tells us what the government seeks in the final deal. I will also quote the relevant sentences of that paragragh.

    Should this not be possible, the United Kingdom will propose specific solutions to address the unique circumstances of the island of Ireland. In the absence of agreed solutions, the United Kingdom will maintain full alignment with those rules of the Internal Market and the Customs Union which, now or in the future, support North-South cooperation, the all-island economy and the protection of the 1998 Agreement.

    We want to be in the Single Market and the Customs Union in all but name.

    I think you are misinterpreting the key paragraph, guilty of seeing what you want to see. (Equally, I could be suffering from the same condition).

    My focus would be as follows:

    Should this not be possible, .........the 1998 Agreement.

    So it is limited, by a natural reading of the words, to a subset of the rules "those rules" which support various aspects of the relationship between NI and RoI.

    Free movement of people, for example, does not - that is already dealt with under the CTA, so there is no need for there to be "full alignment" between the UK and the IM/CU to address that concern.

    My interpretation would be that - on a sector by sector basis - the UK government can pick and choose.

    So, for example, we may chose to maintain "full alignment" in agriculture or in other sectors where there is significant cross border trade.

    This is not the same as remaining in or close to the SM as a whole.

    I think we will end up with Canada Plus, which would be a good outcome overall, and I think would satisfy most. There will also be a long transition.
    Sorry ! I cannot agree with you. I will use David Herdson's words as he is more eloquent.

    "It is true that a narrow interpretation of the provision would mean that only a few areas would be affected by the need for alignment. The history of the EU suggests that a narrow interpretation will not be their favoured one. Just about anything could be considered to “support North-South cooperation, the all-island economy and the protection of the 1998 Agreement”. I strongly suspect that across large sectors of the economy and beyond, the UK will continue to be a rule-taker from the EU".

    That is why I laid emphasis on DUP insistence [ that all areas of the UK is covered ] and May's tacit acceptance. In the end, May realised that by agreeing to the DUP, she effectively also gets Single Market lite and Customs Union lite. Of course, if everything else falls into place. There is no doubt in my mind that that is where May is heading. Business leaders have let her know about the real world.
  • The other problem that Corbyn Labour will have with regulatory alignment is that it will tie any far left Labour government’s hands. The strategy the party’s leadership had been following of waiting for the Tories to implode on the back of a cliff edge Brexit and for the British people to turn left in response has been blown out of the water.
  • Mr. Alex, I agree with you on division. And had Remain won with 52% of the vote there would've been a massive campaign to just ignore that division.

    Of course, there are plenty of others too (young and old, snowflake and sensible etc etc).
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,639
    surbiton said:

    Charles said:

    surbiton said:

    I have drawn more or less the same conclusions as David Herdson. Para 49 more or less tells us what the government seeks in the final deal. I will also quote the relevant sentences of that -island economy and the protection of the 1998 Agreement.

    We want to be in the Single Market and the

    I think you are misinterpreting the key paragraph, guilty of seeing what you want to see. (Equally, I could be suffering from the same condition).

    My focus would be as follows:

    Should this not be possible, .........the 1998 Agreement.

    So it is limited, by a natural reading of the words, to a subset of the rules "those rules" which support various aspects of the relationship between NI and RoI.

    Free movement of people, for example, does not - that is already dealt with under the CTA, so there is no need for there to be "full alignment" between the UK and the IM/CU to address that concern.

    My interpretation would be that - on a sector by sector basis - the UK government can pick and choose.

    So, for example, we may chose to maintain "full alignment" in agriculture or in other sectors where there is significant cross border trade.

    This is not the same as remaining in or close to the SM as a whole.

    I think we will end up with Canada Plus, which would be a good outcome overall, and I think would satisfy most. There will also be a long transition.
    Sorry ! I cannot agree with you. I will use David Herdson's words as he is more eloquent.

    "It is true that a narrow interpretation of the provision would mean that only a few areas would be affected by the need for alignment. The history of the EU suggests that a narrow interpretation will not be their favoured one. Just about anything could be considered to “support North-South cooperation, the all-island economy and the protection of the 1998 Agreement”. I strongly suspect that across large sectors of the economy and beyond, the UK will continue to be a rule-taker from the EU".

    That is why I laid emphasis on DUP insistence [ that all areas of the UK is covered ] and May's tacit acceptance. In the end, May realised that by agreeing to the DUP, she effectively also gets Single Market lite and Customs Union lite. Of course, if everything else falls into place. There is no doubt in my mind that that is where May is heading. Business leaders have let her know about the real world.
    Yes, it's a way of getting to what she probably wanted all along, whilst keeping the majority of her extremists quiet in the meanwhile.
  • An excellent article. Whether by accident or design, May has got the Brexiteers to a point where they largely understand this is as good as it gets. My guess is that if yesterday’s agreement had been signed six months ago the howling from Brexiteers would have been much, much louder. Obviously, the loons will never be satisfied, and the usual mob will emerge over the coming months to scream betrayal, but it turns out that for most the cliff edge was not a tantalising prospect. Thus, Liam Fox will not get to agree a trade deal dictated by Donald Trump, the CANZUK Empire 2.0 brigade will have to carry on doing nothing but dream and there’ll be no bucaneering for Boris. A tragedy, of course, but one we’ll all learn to live with.

    The big loser in all of this, it seems to me, is Corbyn Labour. A soft Brexit removes the fears of many about leaving the EU. It’s not ideal for Remainers, but it’s so much better than it could have been. Is the incentive to hold their noses and vote for Labour among middle class, pro-Remain electorates in places like Leamington Spa, Canterbury and some of the London constituencies still as strong now that there’ll be no cliff edge or Hard Brexit? I wonder. I guess it depends on who the next Tory leader is. If they can tack back to the centre and avoid anyone too closely associated with Brexit I’d say they now have a big chance to win in 2021/22

    Buy Hammond. He is the voice of Soft Brexit. I rather like his kind side too. Despite all the bile against him, and rumours that May wanted to sack him, he has not retaliated in kind. Indeed his response to May's coughing fit showed real personal compassion.

    Corbyn has never banged on about Europe, he bangs on about austerity. His unexpected success in this years election was to not accept that it was a Brexit election. The next one will not be either, it will be on the subject of austerity, falling living standards, emaciated public services and generational inequality.

    This does look like a huge victory for Hammond. It’s pretty much everything he wanted.

    I agree about the terms of the next election. It all depends on who leads the Tories into it. But a soft Brexit takes away one very big reason for voting against the Tories - if their next leader is not a high profile Brexiteer.

  • alex.alex. Posts: 2,802
    IanB2 said:

    alex. said:

    Mr. Meeks, the idea there was a dividing line between a cerebral desire to remain and a xenophobic desire to leave is to draw a fictional picture placing the clever on one side and the bigoted on the other.

    Do you genuinely believe there were no sound reasons to want to leave?

    Underneath it all I think it is quite likely that Alistair is actually a leaver. Contrary to the caricature, he hints at it all the time. I reckon in a U.K. of two people (he and RCS) the vote would have been a 2-0 landslide. It’s just he only wanted leave on his terms and was hugely sceptical that that would be delivered. I expect many voted remain for that reason. I think I probably did.

    Where I would slightly disagree is his fundamental belief (I think) that the referendum has created huge division in the country. I think the referendum was the symptom not the cause. It’s just brought the incurrent into the open. Which in the long run could be both positive or negative.
    The troubles being that the division is only peripherally to do with Europe, and that the reality of Brexit will make it worse rather than better. May knew all this on the steps of no. 10, but has utterly failed to do anything about it.
    The counter argument is that by removing the scapegoat/convenient bogeyman Governments in future will actually have to start thinking a bit more about how to address the divisions. That’s the advantage of bringing it into the open. Contrast with the EU elite sticking their fingers in their ears and hoping the problems go away.

  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    An excellent article. Whether by accident or design, May has got the Brexiteers to a point where they largely understand this is as good as it gets. My guess is that if yesterday’s agreement had been signed six months ago the howling from Brexiteers would have been much, much louder. Obviously, the loons will never be satisfied, and the usual mob will emerge over the coming months to scream betrayal, but it turns out that for most the cliff edge was not a tantalising prospect. Thus, Liam Fox will not get to agree a trade deal dictated by Donald Trump, the CANZUK Empire 2.0 brigade will have to carry on doing nothing but dream and there’ll be no bucaneering for Boris. A tragedy, of course, but one we’ll all learn to live with.

    The big loser in all of this, it seems to me, is Corbyn Labour. A soft Brexit removes the fears of many about leaving the EU. It’s not ideal for Remainers, but it’s so much better than it could have been. Is the incentive to hold their noses and vote for Labour among middle class, pro-Remain electorates in places like Leamington Spa, Canterbury and some of the London constituencies still as strong now that there’ll be no cliff edge or Hard Brexit? I wonder. I guess it depends on who the next Tory leader is. If they can tack back to the centre and avoid anyone too closely associated with Brexit I’d say they now have a big chance to win in 2021/22

    Buy Hammond. He is the voice of Soft Brexit. I rather like his kind side too. Despite all the bile against him, and rumours that May wanted to sack him, he has not retaliated in kind. Indeed his response to May's coughing fit showed real personal compassion.

    Corbyn has never banged on about Europe, he bangs on about austerity. His unexpected success in this years election was to not accept that it was a Brexit election. The next one will not be either, it will be on the subject of austerity, falling living standards, emaciated public services and generational inequality.
    But I do agree with SO that some wind will have been taken away from Corbyn's sail. Ironically, there is very little Labour [ Starmer ] can disagree with what has been cleverly engineered by May [ deliberately or, by accident, acceding to Arlene's insistence ].

    Corbyn, as Dr.Fox says, will be about austerity etc. The 30-40s will still be without a home of their own. Corbyn is not pro-Brexit as many Tory headbangers here insist. But neither is he an enthusiastic Remainer.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 10,210
    Charles said:



    Should this not be possible, the United Kingdom will propose specific solutions to address the unique circumstances of the island of Ireland.In the absence of agreed solutions, the United Kingdom will maintain full alignment with those rules of the Internal Market and the Customs Union which, now or in the future, support North-South cooperation, the all-island economy and the protection of the 1998 Agreement.

    So it is limited, by a natural reading of the words, to a subset of the rules "those rules" which support various aspects of the relationship between NI and RoI.

    Free movement of people, for example, does not - that is already dealt with under the CTA, so there is no need for there to be "full alignment" between the UK and the IM/CU to address that concern.

    My interpretation would be that - on a sector by sector basis - the UK government can pick and choose.

    So, for example, we may chose to maintain "full alignment" in agriculture or in other sectors where there is significant cross border trade.

    This is not the same as remaining in or close to the SM as a whole.

    I think we will end up with Canada Plus, which would be a good outcome overall, and I think would satisfy most. There will also be a long transition.

    All the serious observers are focusing on this section, and IMO it's a deliberate fudge, which probably needs to be clarified in stage 2. The issue is that there's no indication of who decides what are "those rules which...". I don't think the UK will be able to arbitrarily pick and choose as you suggest, but equally I doubt if they can be imposed. They will need to be negotiated, not just with Brussels but with Eire and the DUP.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,639
    alex. said:

    IanB2 said:

    alex. said:

    Mr. Meeks, the idea there was a dividing line between a cerebral desire to remain and a xenophobic desire to leave is to draw a fictional picture placing the clever on one side and the bigoted on the other.

    Do you genuinely believe there were no sound reasons to want to leave?

    Underneath it all I think it is quite likely that Alistair is actually a leaver. Contrary to the caricature, he hints at it all the time. I reckon in a U.K. of two people (he and RCS) the vote would have been a 2-0 landslide. It’s just he only wanted leave on his terms and was hugely sceptical that that would be delivered. I expect many voted remain for that reason. I think I probably did.

    Where I would slightly disagree is his fundamental belief (I think) that the referendum has created huge division in the country. I think the referendum was the symptom not the cause. It’s just brought the incurrent into the open. Which in the long run could be both positive or negative.
    The troubles being that the division is only peripherally to do with Europe, and that the reality of Brexit will make it worse rather than better. May knew all this on the steps of no. 10, but has utterly failed to do anything about it.
    The counter argument is that by removing the scapegoat/convenient bogeyman Governments in future will actually have to start thinking a bit more about how to address the divisions. That’s the advantage of bringing it into the open. Contrast with the EU elite sticking their fingers in their ears and hoping the problems go away.

    I see nothing that removes the bogeyman; indeed it's there alive and kicking for Brexiteers to rail against in perpetuity, as I said below. Whatever type of Brexit we finish with, the Brexiteers will have plenty to complain about.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 6,926

    The other problem that Corbyn Labour will have with regulatory alignment is that it will tie any far left Labour government’s hands. The strategy the party’s leadership had been following of waiting for the Tories to implode on the back of a cliff edge Brexit and for the British people to turn left in response has been blown out of the water.

    Mr southam,I may be wrong but weren't you thinking trump wouldn't win and Theresa would have a majority ?

    If I am,I apologize.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,400
    I think that the other key thing that came out of yesterday is that the EU has finally accepted the reality that we are leaving. No matter how hard they sought to make it, no matter what our media screamed, no matter what Labour policy was on any given day the government has been clear and unequivocal: we are leaving. I think it’s taken the EU a long time to come to terms with that. They are used to overturning adverse decisions and keeping the project on the road no matter what. Losing the second largest economy and second largest net contributor is a massive set back for the creation of the super power that was going to rival the USA.

    But now the pragmatists are in charge looking to protect the huge advantages the EU obtains from our current trading arrangements, £60bn net surplus a year. They will want to retain that access and financial advantage. I think phase 2 will prove easier than what we have had to date.
  • DavidL said:

    The regulatory alignment required by art 49 is essentially restricted to the terms of the 1998
    GFA. These can be as wide or as narrow as we agree to make them outside the scope of security, policing and common institutions. I therefore do not agree with David that this ties us in as much as he says.

    I also don’t agree that it is a free standing unilateral guarantee independent of art 5 which says nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.

    But I do agree it is highly indicative of the direction of travel. The government has looked over the cliff edge and not fancied the jump. We are heading towards a soft Brexit where we will tip toe away from the EU over time as it itself evolves away from us. That seems perfectly sensible to me.

    The areas the GFA undoubtedly covers, including agriculture, rule out any significant FTAs with anyone who will not accept EU regulations in those areas. That means the US and many of the African and Latin American ones. It may not rule out the CANZUK countries, once they have all finalised their EU deals, and India and China, though there’ll be big issues with the latter two. Regulatory alignment does make it a whole lot easier for the UK to inherit all the trade related deals the EU has done, though.

  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 1,409
    I don't think May is going to easily yield the helm of the ship of fools to any of the other chancers having waded through shit and blood for Brexit. She'll feel like she's earned it despite the cabinet and party not because of them.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 2,802
    IanB2 said:

    alex. said:

    IanB2 said:

    alex. said:

    Mr. Meeks, the idea there was a dividing line between a cerebral desire to remain and a xenophobic desire to leave is to draw a fictional picture placing the clever on one side and the bigoted on the other.

    Do you genuinely believe there were no sound reasons to want to leave?

    Underneath it all I think it is quite likely that Alistair is actually a leaver. Contrary to the caricature, he hints at it all the time. I reckon in a U.K. of two people (he and RCS) the vote would have been a 2-0 landslide. It’s just he only wanted leave on his terms and was hugely sceptical that that would be delivered. I expect many voted remain for that reason. I think I probably did.

    Where I would slightly disagree is his fundamental belief (I think) that the referendum has created huge division in the country. I think the referendum was the symptom not the cause. It’s just brought the incurrent into the open. Which in the long run could be both positive or negative.
    The troubles being that the division is only peripherally to do with Europe, and that the reality of Brexit will make it worse rather than better. May knew all this on the steps of no. 10, but has utterly failed to do anything about it.
    The counter argument is that by removing the scapegoat/convenient bogeyman Governments in future will actually have to start thinking a bit more about how to address the divisions. That’s the advantage of bringing it into the open. Contrast with the EU elite sticking their fingers in their ears and hoping the problems go away.

    I see nothing that removes the bogeyman; indeed it's there alive and kicking for Brexiteers to rail against in perpetuity, as I said below. Whatever type of Brexit we finish with, the Brexiteers will have plenty to complain about.
    Ok from that perspective it removes the attractively simple solutions to the problem. It is a lot easier for the likes of UKIP to draw support for a single magical policy of “leave the EU” than it is to actually get involved in the more technical detail of how altering various bits of trade agreements will solve everything.

This discussion has been closed.