UKH

Not mincing his words, is he...?

https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2019/02/06/remarks-...

anyone still think that the E.U. is going to back down on the back stop? 

I'm beginning to warm to Donald.

No they're not going to renegotiate. May will fail again. She'll lose her vote in Parliament and after that, eventually, she'll call another referendum.

Not long before she's run out of options.

Go Donald!

One more nail in the coffin for this debacle. Bring on Ref2.

Oh for even 10% of that from someone in our parliament capable of leading a resistance to this nonsense.

jk

I don't think anybody does...

He specifically mentioned the people in the UK who did not want this - at last a politician who can speak for rather than betray the nearly 50% of voters who voted Remain.   Contrast to the Void() here

Bizarre to see him ratcheting up the vitriol, is there any obvious reason why he has? 

Is it meant to be uncompromising to people who assume a last minute EU deal? 

Is it a petulant outburst having run out of patience?

is it a deliberate smokescreen to take attention away from the deal? 

Surely he could have mocked the complete absence of a plan in more diplomatic language. 

And, if he had, do you think it would have had anywhere near the same impact or would it have been just another statement?

I agree with the idea he's done it for a reason, whatever that might be. However my suspicion is that he's just tipped half a million wavering voters in the next referendum back to Leave.

yes, that’s my concern. I know Farage, Johnson, Francois etc have all used very ludicrous insulting language too, but for the most part the EU have played the grown up. Not sure how this helps

Its plain speaking honesty. Admittedly completely devoid of the usual diplomatic niceties, but I think he is now showing the EU have run out of patience completely.

Obviously. A message ahead of mays visit tomorrow that all this bluster and following parliamentary instruction from Bradys amendment to go get a better deal is a waste of time. The UK governments representative (May) negotiated a deal that was acceptable to all. Then parliament said no it isnt. This is the EU saying take it or leave it.

He cannot understand why the UK parliament, (on all sides) seems incapable of controlling small, viciously destructive elements within itself. The EU have always said that article 50 could be revoked anytime. They dont want us to leave. And I think they are getting so exasperated at the UK politicians failing to show any kind of leadership whatsoever. 

No. If anything, the opposite. It is intended to focus the UK on  "THE" deal. The only one available.

He could. He has done in the past. Maybe the lack of reaction to all the previous rhetoric and comment has forced him into the "words of one syllable" type explanations.

Well worth reading the complete statement to put the "Special place in hell" in context", coming as it does at the end of a wholly and admirably principled and statesmanlike summary of the EU's position. 

Would be nice to know what impact it was meant to have. Not clear how this improves negotiations, but maybe he has a cunning plan. Or maybe he just wants it all to end. 

I'm not altogether persuaded that this was a helpful intervention. Trenches are being dug deeper as we speak. 

Isn't that the same statement as the one quoted at the top of the thread?

So, do you think what he has said is helpful to the process?

Up to now, the EU have just been standing behind the existing deal, and trying to avoid doing anything which puts the blame at their door. This is a huge departure from this, so I assume it is deliberate, but I'm struggling to see why.

As an aside, I quite liked the Sun's take on it - Yowsers. Donald Tusk says there will be a special place in hell for those who advocated brexit without defining what it really meant. I suspect he might mean you Boris.

His statement seems very clear to me, and I don't think it is "digging trenches". His last sentence simply expresses his sheer frustration in having to deal with our clueless Brexiteer negotiators. I think any normal, intelligent person in Donald Tusk's position would be nearly tearing their hair out.

It could be read another way...

that they are starting to crack under pressure as it is now becoming more obvious that there will be no second referendum and that they are going to have to budge on the backstop to avoid no deal. Hence his choice of words, slipping mask...

I know nobody will agree with that analysis on here and I am not saying it is right....just an alternative viewpoint  

Which is just further evidence, if any were needed, of what a stupid idea letting the general public be involved in this process is. 

One old crusty guy (albeit in a position of power) says mean things to us in the playground and we resolve to shoot ourselves in the foot even harder in revenge. FFS, he must be knocking on 70. He’ll be dead and cold before the full impact of Brexit has taken effect. 

Edit: had him confused with someone else, he’s not that old. He is however 61 so the point is still fairly valid. 

It's being made very clear in the News that Tusk's "special place in hell" comment is aimed at those who advocated Brexit without having any plan in place, NOT at those who voted for Brexit. Those who led the Brexit campaign should be hanging their heads in shame at the mess they have created. But the likes of Farage, Rees Mogg, Johnson etc won't - they are too arrogant.

The caring polite side of eu, respecting all viewpoints with equal measure. He could have played the adult game and looked more civil than many UK MPs, but he chose to sink to their depths or lower. Imagine if May as a remainer had said that about Corbyn. There'd be a riot by now by the ukc, but tusks comment seems acceptable here. 

Not helpful I think. The Taoiseach will be behind it.

I've dealt with Leo Varadkar when he was transport minister, he behaved like a consummate professional politician I thought at the time.

I think he's over-played his hand in these negotiations though, and the likelihood of a hard brexit is higher now.

Why on earth would he have to respect the viewpoint of our Brexiteers without a plan? They are a menace to this country and a source of huge bemusement to anyone outside of it. 

The role of the BBC is interesting here. It seems they originally tweeted that Tusk had referred to all Brexiteers, then backed down on that after the inevitable backlash from the Brexidiot MPs and journos who couldn't actually be bothered to read what he'd really said.

https://www.thejournal.ie/factcheck-donald-tusk-4479666-Feb2019/

I wonder if there are other factors at play here that have caused this?

There is a lot of bad news out today in the eurozone. The shock plunge in Germany factory orders, down 7% yoy, the eurozone now on the brink of recession, one which it absolutely cannot withstand with the insolvency of the Italian banking sector, the 2.5 trillion euros already spent on QE and the current negative interest rates.

No growth is not a recession, but the eurozone only has inflation as a weapon against it's huge debts so no levers there then. The target 2 system as a sleight of hand accounting trick can keep the plates spinning only until a county defaults (Italy?) at which point the German tax payer will realise in no uncertain terms what a naked emperor looks like.

All these headwinds with a stubborn, awkward UK who will not re vote on Brexit and threatening no deal....must be unbelievably stressful at the top of the EU. Looking at it like that, he was pretty controlled in my view. 

I suspect the last line is putting the game playing tories with their time wasting amendment on notice that the EU will not by meekly taking the blame, that they will be held accountable one way or another.

jk

You really can't keep off your Corbyn hobby horse can you? But Corbyn doesn't need a plan (which is handy because I don't think he's got one anyway), it's May who is leading us (the UK, not Sweden) out of the eu, she is the chief brexiteer now.

Sounds like he’s just qualified from the “Donald Trump international diplomacy school” 

looks to me like the EU didn’t have a plan either of how to handle a leave situation by one of its members. Hey ho that’s politicians for ya.. 

It's the first time I can recall in nearly 3 years I've heard a senior politician acknowledge the existence of the (now majority) remain constituency. Please, don't talk to me about 'respecting all viewpoints', there has been nothing respectful about the 'we won, you lost, get over it!' brexit debacle to date.

jk

No, not really. I just think the various factions are too entrenched for there to be any normal process. I think he is paying hardball to an extent, pointing out that virtually everyone has agreed the terms of a WA that completely satisfies the referendum result, and that the tiny minority who havent agreed to it are going to leave the EU in a worse position than before, and the UK in a VERY much worse position than before, all to try to make their petty political points, and I think its a very strong hint that it is not the EU that will move on this one.

And I'm also sure Boris was one of his intended recipients of that part of the message........

In 2016, that was true. However they havent wasted the last (almost) 3 years grandstanding and arguing amongst themselves, they have very much worked out how they will cope.

The problem for the eu is comments like that might sound great to other eu beurocrats, but they also feed anti sentiment across Europe, not just the UK. You'd think a clever politician, wouldn't feed them sound bites. 

Not exactly, without at least part of the 39billion(which was always due to be paid over several years), they can't balance their books next year. 

Can you imagine dealing with the U.K. over this? They must be heartily sick of us. Surprised they haven’t given us a deal just to make us f*ck off. 

This is the thing quitters never get, the money isn't the ace in our sleeve, it's an irrelevance. Not least because it is in large part payable whether we deal or don't, the only thing that differs is the point in the process at which intolerable pressure can be applied to ensure we pay our bills.

jk

Yes, here’s a bit of what he said, for those that didn’t get past the headline:

“The EU itself is first and foremost a peace project. We will not gamble with peace; or put a sell-by date on reconciliation. And this is why we insist on the backstop. Give us a believable guarantee for peace in Northern Ireland, and the UK will leave the EU as a trusted friend. “

It’s a clear restatement of the E.U. position and the reason for taking it, set out in diplomatic terms- ‘a trusted friend’

And having watched the E.U. programme on the beeb the last two weeks, it’s entirely in keeping with how he operates- after all he told the Greek prime minister, after he dropped a referendum on them without any warning, that he was ‘in the shit’- and he was. Have the ERG not been watching this? 

(Incidentally, probably the most compelling piece of television I’ve watched in years, track it down on iplayer if you missed it)

IMO that would be reading it wrongly. Tusk is an absolute professional, don't for a second believe that this was a rash, uncalculated outburst. This would be as naive as believing that a professional footballer "accidentally" clips his opponent. Of course it is deliberate in both cases!

Instead, this should be read in the context of another EU statement today specifically intended for EU consumption (but obviously also accessible in the UK) specifying the three most urgent aims for the EU in the ongoing negotiations. These were 1) maintaining the GFA at all costs, 2) preparing for the negative economic impact of a possible no deal Brexit (including setting up emergency funds for Irish businesses likely to suffer most from the subsequent economic disruption).

Importantly, point 3) was that, in the light of the upcoming EU elections, it should be made clear that the blame for any potential hardship affecting anyone on the rEU side following a no deal Brexit should be laid at the door of those in the UK promoting Brexit (note that is does not say backing).

This is entirely about heading off any campaign advantage that anti EU parties might gain from playing the blame game. Tusk was therefore deliberately getting his revenge in early.

That he was presumably also getting frustrated by negotiating with a government signing off a deal and then agitating against its ratification in parliament back home is beside the point, even if May's behaviour is the epitome of negotiating in bad faith.

CB

edit: fixed the third para that should now make sense....

They get that anyway, even in a no deal

UK/EU trade negotiations, 30th March 2019, 09:01:

UK delegation- ‘we’d like to talk about a comprehensive trade deal’

EU delegation- ‘yes, that sounds good. But, first- about that 39bn...’

Do you really think the loss of £39bn over a few years is going to cause them to come to a full stop? Contigency planning, scenario planning, call it what you will; the EU has access to adequate funds from within to cover this. I do this type of thing all the time in my day job (at a smaller scale, obviously) and I dont even have access to QE........

See my reply to BiS, I think the calculation was made that the opposite was likely. 

Also, the 39G€ are largely payable anyway, WA or not, and there will be even less leverage for the UK to negotiate that number once they have to secure emergency arrangements after a no deal exit. It will be whatever the EU says it is.

CB

Agreed, which makes it even more bizarre that they've decided to make a stand over the backstop.

Rational for the backstop- to avoid the imposition of a hard border in the event of no deal.

But everyone involved has said they'll be no hard border in Ireland whether there's a deal or not.

So what's the rational for the backstop again? 

The backstop makes sure that the UK government cannot simply illegally ditch the GFA just because it is propped up and can thus be blackmailed by a party that was always against it. 

As for trusting May's promises, some leaver Labor MPs or earlier the Tory remainers may fall for it, but certainly not the rEU negotiators,

BC

Have you watched any of the proceedings in Westminster?

To make sure, in writing, that there can be no hard border. As detailed above and in other places, the UK govt do not exactly have a good recent record of keeping to their word in negotiations........and I cant imagine the current and continued in fighting presents a picture of solidity to those they are negotiating with. As the saying goes, a verbal contract isnt worth the paper its written on.

How on earth does this feed anti Europe sentiments across europe? There was a very specific target audience for those remarks, and they all know who they are.

This is nonsense. The EU has been consistent throughout in its approach. They didn't want this and didn't ask for it. It is not the EU's fault that they are still, at this late stage, waiting to find out what the UK's position is.

Admittedly, it was incredible (and incredibly nauseating) when May got into bed with the swivel eyed religious fanatics in the first place, but do you really think they have even a fraction of the leverage necessary to ditch the GFA?

It's a wonder the Tories haven't already imploded, if they managed to throw away peace in Ireland they'd be finished electorally for the foreseeable future. And they know it.

It's basically rude to anyone who doesn't like the eu. It's also a very teenage playground level comment from the mouth of one of the most senior staff in the eu. 

Ok, so from the UK perspective what's the driver for putting in place a 'hard border'. In itself it isn't a definable legal term, it's infinitely available for fudging and all the government has to do is the minimum necessary to keep the WTO (paper tiger that it is) off its back.

The eu contingency... going to member nations mid way through the year asking for money. It's happened before. 

No, it's rude to people who promoted brexit without a plan of how to carry it out. And probably people who can't read properly. 

The 300 million voters of Europe? To be honest, I think CB's idea that this is a election message for the rest of Europe sounds the most convincing explanation so far.

Tusk's intemperate words were manna from heaven for Farage and Johnson. They now only have to whip up patriotic hysteria regarding his insults, and pretend he insulted the voters, rather than answer the specific questions about why they still don't have the first semblance of a deliverable plan.

You make a good point in regards to trying to deflect blame for the likely May election results....that is another headwind I hadn't thought of that is buffeting them. What a mess eh?

Everything Ian said is right but add to that that the EU don't want an open border into their single market.

Now, I pointed that out on the other thread and you adopted pretty Borisesque language.... basically they could go whistle (but with mention of Honnold and chips).

It was a good discussion to have because the more I think about it the more an open border into another customs regime is a headache for the EU. If that's not going to be sorted with the backstop, they probably think it's not worth doing a deal... and Sabine has said as much.

Remember, in a no deal scenario there are pros for the EU... lots of re-locations of employer from the UK back into the EU. For the UK, there's just cons.

or the ECB. Its happened before. 

So it can happen again.

That other bloke who got into handbags with you on the other thread was right. You do shoot down your own arguments readily enough.

I have no idea. It just seems to be an invented obstacle in order to allow the idiots a bit more potential for arguing.

yes, but a lot of what is said in those debates, often with few MPs present than we would wish, goes unreported and therefore has little effect.  I'm talking about prominent politicians, party leaders and that ilk.  Corbyn is a void and May is running in an unmodifiable loop with too many constants and too few variable and input values.

Cheering though watching BBC Parliament may be it has not proved effectual yet and the likes of Klaura simply pick and choose what they report as suits them.

I don’t think that Brexit voters who support Farage and Johnson care whether there’s a deliverable plan or not at this stage. If they did, you’d expect to have noticed by now.

Indeed, having a deliverable plan is starting to look increasingly like traitorous undermining of the purity of the One True Brexit, ie a no deal one, in the eyes of the Faithful.

If by 'ditch' you mean misunderstand and fatally undermine: yes. Isn't that already evident?

The thing is they won't. They're propped up by a constituency of voters who wouldn't vote for anything but the blue one, even if she's 'you know, one of them' except perhaps that nice man Nigel Farage, he knows what he's talking about...

Sure they'll lose some marginals but they'll gain others where MP's are out of step with their constituents on brexit. It's not going to deliver a thumping win but the idea that their blithering incompetence, infighting, the wilful damage to our economy, national unity and security is a serious barrier to them returning ~300MP's (or donkeys with the right rosette)... I don't buy it.

jk

Very hard to say, most things are last moment with the EU, they love a bit of brinkmanship. Doesn't look great though, neither side want the UK to leave the EU without a deal in place, yet we won't accept what they are offering and they aren't budging on a compromise so it looks ever increasingly like a no deal outcome. 

Personally I still reckon a last min compromise will be reached but I could well be proven wrong. That's when things will get interesting. 

Perhaps they all look to and believe in Army Group Steiner for relief as the end comes

No they don't, but Barnier has already explicitly stated that in the event of no deal, the EU won't force a hard border.

No room on UKC for any sort of nuance anymore is there? Thanks for likening me to Boris, but the point of the analogy wasn't 'that they can go whistle', the point was that you can't take two opposed positions and expect them both to be satisfied. ie, the EU don't want an open border, but they don't want a hard border either.

Of course it's a massive headache.

You don't have to remind me. I'm not pro-Brexit, I'm anti becoming engaged in a mutually destructive quasi-trade war over an issue that doesn't have to be an issue.

Don't know, as I am not privy to the actual negotiations. However, from the regular rEU briefings is was clear that the rEU negotiators decided that they wanted something in writing that would suffice to keep the Irish border open. The rEU suggestion at the time was a special status for NI effectively keeping it in the SM, which I am sure would have been acceptable to anyone but the DUP (especially since NI voted remain).

The extension of the backstop to the entire UK was the suggestion of the UK side. So yes, at the time the DUP tail was able to wag the dog, who says it could not do so again? Nota bene, at the time this was OK with the DUP, but apparently not any longer. Give them a finger, and they will try and rip off your hand.

CB

edit for typo

I like his style... Just pricking the pompous assumption that we have any room for any further negotiation...

Anyone else reminded of the French guard on the ramparts in Monty Python The Quest for the Holy Grail...

"Your mother was un'amster and your father smelled of elderberries!"

youtube.com/watch?v=M9DCAFUerzs&

Fatally undermine? Is it dead already?

People in this country are increasingly and monumentally pissed off at our politicians, of whatever colour. You might be right, but the idea that these monolithic voting blocks are still in place seems unlikely.

Honestly, the only thing I can see keeping the current shower of shit in team blue in power, is the current shower of shit in team red.

There might be a special place in hell but I doubt anyone in government or opposition could find it with a map and a flashlight.

Re last minute compromise- well from the documentary last night, the Greek bale out plan was finally agreed as the markets opened on the Monday morning, so yes I expect that it’ll get pretty frantic on the 28th... 

Which, to them, may be little different to a deal without the backstop........gettit? Either way they still have that headache.

They want an open border with a region in their customs union. They realise their normal policy (and the international norm) is politically unacceptable, so are trying for an alternative that is acceptable for them. If that is the most important part of the deal to them, and it may be, then that explains their intransigence on this.

I have just listened to his quote and he clearly says "Special place in Hull"

Not much difference to be fair

Yeah, and if you remember on the other thread there was much talk of normal policy, immutable rules and how international legal constraints meant that in the event of No Deal, it would be unavoidable that our border controls would increase. Rom even went so far as to insist (with much use of the caps key and the word wrong) that not only would the UK have to tighten its borders but we'd probably have to call in the army to implement it. Lo and behold, a week later HMRC announce that in the event of a no deal, import customs would be considerably relaxed for a transition period likely to stretch to a year.

The more complicated the issue, the more room for fudge and compromise, and if I was going to bet, that's what I'd put my money on in this instance.

He was obviously discussing the self seeking insignificants  who promote this corrupt farce whilst squirrelling their own money out of the country they claim to represent!

Maybe he means that Hull is the only place Boris, Rees Mogg and Farrage will be able to go on Holiday (if they are lucky).  The EU will be telling 300 million Europeans that it was all Bojo's fault and they won't be welcome anywhere on the continent.

This could be the big plus of brexit, that , what ~1/4 of the planet is suddenly off limits to them after they are tarred and feathered by furious brexit voters and tossed into the North Sea and can never come back to the UK or mainland Europe.

Cheers

Toby

Not in all news.  The BBC have been spectacularly poor this afternoon in perpetuating the idea that he said brexiteers (and not the promoters of brexit) even to the extent of cutting clips from the commons to avoid having to broadcast immediate corrections, not to mention rolling out just about every government minister they could find to equally obfuscate

The euro equivalent of just raiding the savings. Although the ecb only has 11billion, which is actually held as capital stock in the individual banks/treasuries of all 28 nations, not Frankfurt. Like all money it's just promissory.  

So if the ecb want 10 billion to keep the wheels on the wagon while it fights the UK over deal/ payment, it will have to approach the 27 member nations for funds either way. It can't just bacs transfer it. Like in 2014 or 15 when it ran out 9mths into the year because it didn't consider some invoices that were due in. 

Taking money from the ecb is just borrowing from itself, countries still have to pay. 

At least it wasn't “Your mother sells whelks in Hull”, or we'd need an exorcist

Donald Tusk doesn't need to wonder whether there is a special place in hell for Brexiters without a plan - as someone on Twitter pointed out, Dante identified just the place -the Eighth Circle of Hell is reserved for fraudsters, hypocrites, corrupt politicians, false prophets, evil counsellors and advisors, and divisive individuals, amongst others. 

https://historylists.org/art/9-circles-of-hell-dantes-inferno.html

When the Greek crisis hit, the EU was prepared to commit 700 billon euros to protect the single  currency. If the future of the EU is at stake, I expect they’ll find the cash if needed

Though, as per my post of 15:32, if we have any expectation of striking a trade deal with the EU this side of the end of time, our liabilities are an issue that is going to need to be resolved 

Just read this on the Newsthump facebook page.

"The genius of the Donald Tusk "special place in Hell" insult is that to be offended by it, you have to admit to having no plan for delivering Brexit, despite being full-throated in your support of it. You can't be offended without proving yourself ignorant at best, fraudulent at worst."

Sums it up fairly well, especially since reading the reactions of the targets......

A very informative link!

but which Bolgia would Boris be consigned to- 4,5,6,7 or 9....?

so many sins, so many options... and Lucifer could probably find space in the second and third circles too, if he wanted, just to spice things up...

Calls for Tusk to apologise for his comments are unfounded. Why should he apologise for telling the truth? 

I have a vision of Boris, with the flames licking round his ankles, singing, “Bee-al-ze-bub...has a devil put aside...for meeeeeeeeee......!!!!!!’

Well 526bn reserves in the eurozone in reality, the EU would get it back from the UK somehow anyway if the UK want to do business.

From my point of view: the target of the message was probably the Irish. The magic word at the end of his sentence is "leaving safely". I expect this resonates quite well with the Irish public. He is saying that for brexiteers to consider leaving the EU without preparing for Northern Ireland is a disgrace. Annoying brexiteers is just collateral.

The behind-the-doors-conspiracy-theory point of view: It is a favour to Teresa May. It nicely distracts the brexiteers for a bit, while making clear to all remain-minded MPs that the EU27 considers the remain case hopeless and that they's better vote for the deal in the next round.

Representative democracy is a generally moderating constitutional mechanism which is why it is an essential part of the fragile British constitutional house of cards. The referendum tends to kick a hole right through all this. 

It's a level of trolling we can only aspire to.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/06/donald-tusk-special-place-...

brexit infernal top trumps... 

A succinct and accurate comment from Donald Tusk.

It highlights all political parties should have been talking among themselves and with the EU what leaving would mean and especially the Leavers should have produce a plan before we ever thought about having a referendum.

Dave

I'm working on it kid. 

My first thought was that although I agree with the sentiment, it's neither diplomatic nor terribly helpful at this time.

The more I think about it, the more I realise how brilliant it is. To be insulted, you have to effectively admit to having deliberately misled the voting public. The strength of the statement means that the media, which has done all it could to avoid engaging with the deliberate misleading of the voting public, cannot ignore it. And it appeals to a wry British sense of humour.

Turns out the Brexiteers are rather a sensitive bunch.

Or, as James O'Brien put it rather brilliantly and succinctly in a tweet today: 'He was only talking about the ones with no plan. Why are they all taking it so personally?'

Bercow's take down of Peter Bone was magnificent:

https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status/1093148562928685056

Yes, I saw that. What was so shocking was how (like so many of them) Bone was just blatantly lying. Tusk was NOT talking about all Brexiters or Brexit voters. Most of his speech was about that. But truth means nothing to these blinkered fanatics.

PS. I think Bercow will go down in history as a great Speaker, despite what many Conservatives think.

I agree. Yes the eu will get the funds, it's money the uk are due to pay anyway.

But this name calling by either elected politician or unelected beurocrats isn't very grown up and certainly no way to conduct business. If the eu is allegedly a peace project, Tusk seems pretty good at building hatred and burning bridges. He's probably in the wrong job. He should get a job on the trump administration. 

Tusk's cellphone now:

Merkel: Nice

Macron: Thumbs up emoji

Rutte: Well said

Conte: thanks for that!

Sanchez: good job

etc etc

What about the phone call to the UK from head eu commissioner tusk eating humble pie in 15 years time, when a senile Putin is stacking his forces on Europe's border and they want some British military support because trump killed nato. Imagine if one of those British mps in hell happened to end up as PM. Impossible to predict the future. Tusk should know better. 

I didn´t see any names mentioned but anyway I thought it was a comment from a Catholic expressing concern about the final destination of a particular group of people, a laudable Christian act of charity

EU strategic autonomy is now indeed required. De Gaulle was right. Germany should increase its army.

Thats why you have savings.........and glad to see you now accept , via JimTitts post that they will be able to acess the funds. Thats what happens when countries cooperate, you know, rather than put up barriers and sulk.

cheers

Toby

Brexit supporting mps. It's pretty likely the eu will at some point have to deal with them in the future. He is entitled to his view, but there is a time and place for it. 

Eu cooperate..  Greece was only bailed out to save the euro.. not for greeces sake. Eastern European cooperation over migrants? Italy.. ?

Plus it's the banks and individual governments that raised a lot of the funds. That's why Germany is balls deep in southern European debt. It's stuck, call in the debt, they collapse etc..  

Plenty time then for some countries to order a job lot of white flags. 

Which is a huge worry for all of us; the possibility that enough of us will be stupid enough to continue voting them back into office........

my problem with them is not that they have had a bad idea, or implemented something badly, or had a swift dose of incompetence; we all cock things up from time to time. My problem with them is they are fundamentally dishonest. They have been willing from the start to say things in public that they know to be false, and despite being caught out again and again, are willing to continue to promise things thy know cannot be delivered, and continue to say things they know to be untrue. 

So we wouldn't want to get involved because? What? Putin wouldn't have us in his sights next? Your scenario seems to me, to argue for better and closer ties with our neighbours. It's us that's doing the pulling away.

Another straw being clutched... 

After the damage these loons (brexit plan-free hell-bound promoters etc) are about to inflict on the UK, to you think for a second that the only thing they will remember is Donald Tusk making a pointed barb at them 15 years ago? That just about sums up the small minded, small nation stance of brexiteers........

Few of us have any choice under FPTP as no new party can break the duoploy in maybe 450 constituencies and realistically a monopoly in 250-300 safe Labour and Tory seats.

What funds can they access? are we assuming that because the ECB has provided QE before, that it can just continue to do so? I'm not sure that will work.

Yes.

Number of Russian attacks resulting in fatalities on U.K. soil in last 15 years: 2

number of Russian attacks resulting in fatalities on other EU nations in last 15 years: 0

who is more likely to be asking for help from whom? 

You seem to have forgotten about an airliner that was shot down over the Ukraine. 

Yes or no. If in 15 years time, the Russians were amassing forces against European borders, would it be in our interest to join them (European forces)? 

FYI, Ukraine is not in the EU.

Maybe thats why it was brought down there?

It cant continue to do so just for fun; there has to be a reason. In this case its probably more likely to take the form of loans or additional contributions from other member states.

As has been pointed out, Ukraine not in EU. So no, I hadn’t forgotten. Fatal attack  count on EU nations remains zero

Ukraine isn't an EU nation.

I love Donald Tusk

Eu citizens? 

Don't forget to mention that the eu didn't solve the Balkan strife, you haven't brought that up for a while.

While FPTP isnt ideal, we dont have to get rid of all of the Lab Con MP's. I'm perfectly happy for the likes of Starmer / Soubry / Umunna etc to be reelected, just not Davis / JRM / BoJo etc etc.

relevance?

https://newsthump.com/2019/02/07/insults-by-eu-unacceptable-say-people-who-...

Must have the patience of a bloody saint. Our politicians are a bunch of clueless imbeciles 

Yes, long since passed. We're owed a healthy dose of realism about this unfurling disaster and those responsible must be held to account.

What good does brexit do? Why do you still support it in light of the clear harm it is doing?

jk

First bit seems likely.

Unfortunately I'm not sure about the likelihood of a second referendum from our spineless politicians.

All but one of the possible outcomes require parliament to make a decision.

And the SNP correction to Peter Bone's lack of honesty about what Tusk said. 

The Dutch people killed when the Russians arranged the shooting down of an airliner?

Not that it changes the case as the EU is not a military alliance yet, though if NATO shrinks or retreats it may have to become so

If there is no deal then there will be a hard border in Ireland. The UK wants to protects its borders and the EU wishes to ensure noncompliant goods or people do no not enter the EU. No deal = hard border. 

And the British, and no doubt others. Still not relevant to the point made; the nationalities of the dead are not relevant to the issue of where the attack took place. 

NB - doesnt make the incident any less horrendous.......

https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.asp

France now outranks the UK in military might. In a few years I suspect a weakened England with a separate Scotland, Wales and Ireland after having suffered years of cutbacks during long recessions would'nt have much to bring to the military power table.

Isn't the UK bound by the Good Friday agreement to avoid a hard border? Presumably, in the event of no deal, the correct thing to do would be to immediately put a border down the Irish Sea and keep the Irish border open. But of course this would involve shafting the DUP ...........

Or put a border down the English channel? If its ok to split the UK common market, surely its just as fine to split the EU one?

(not that I support any of this nonsense)

Which will require an election which might go some way toward explaining stories of conservative election preparation and campaign spending being ramped up. Other explanations exist.

jk

Very good. So who's going to build it? In the event of no deal the UK say they won't, the Irish say they won't, the EU won't, and further, have said they won't insist on it.

Do you think it'll spontaneously manifest itself through Devine intervention?

But it is the UK which chose to leave the EU and caused the problem, so, if we don't want to be in  a customs Union, then it is the UK which should be paying the price of solving the problem, not the EU and the Republic of Ireland who never wanted any of this to happen.

Yup, it is. Both to being bound by the GFA, and to it being the correct / sensible thing to do.

I was going to say that shafting the DUP is just a welcome side benefit, but thats unfair on them. I may despise their politics, and religious leanings, but it isnt their fault they are in the limelight so much; it was the tories who offered them the chance of such power and influence over the UK government. Its almost as if they (the tories) didn't think it through properly........

I think the argument would boil down to:

a) the (dis)UK initiated the action causing the problem, responsibility for resolving it would fall on us

b) relative power and need

People who want to know what the EU ever does for us... watch and learn from the outside what the EU does for Ireland.

jk

It may have escaped your notice that there is going to be a hard border in the english channel anyway as a reasonably direct result of leaving the EU..........

Wouldn't it be for the EU to erect a border in that circumstance, to protect their customs union? The logical position for the UK is not to impose one (except in the sense that it would need to respond to new border infrastructure on the EU side of the line). Therefore a no deal Brexit might, counter-intuitively, produce a EU/UK trade deal rather faster than an exit via the withdrawal agreement, bridged by a "quick and dirty" transitional arrangement that obviates the need for a short-term hard border.

The UK will need a border as well otherwise anyone can ship anything into the UK from any country in the world, duty and tax free. It would merely travel through the EU as transit goods.

But what about the Brexiteers favourite mantra of protecting our borders and reducing immigration. What will stop anyone from coming in through Ireland? 

The legal position under the GFA is for neither the EU or UK to impose one, hence the idea of a (temporary) border in the Irish sea. 

The only ones this is unacceptable to are the hardliners, apparently. Its already been agreed to by the UK govt and ratified by 27 EU states. Its only the UK parliament that is out of step.

Liam Fox, according to  Richard Dannatt and others, was so intent on balancing the books he left (apart from his security disgrace) our the reliability of our Armed Forces as allies being questioned by the Americans.

It's a good point either you have an open border or not, so any policing of it 'as a border' stops it being an open border. Therefore any EU citizen can travel to Ireland and just walk over the border.

Non EU migrants face the problem of getting to Ireland first.

Whether any will actually want to bother coming here is another question.

Maybe they'll have to worry more about UK citizens escaping!

Indeed, escaping is where my thoughts are going!! We desperately need the immigrants already, and will need them even more once the brain drain sets in and those who can leave, will do so! 

No, this is not what was agreed, as the DUP did not like it. Instead, as requested by May and reluctantly agreed to by the EU - as it would offer considerable advantages to UK businesses if activated - the backstop now applies to the entire UK.

Of course, this is in turn considered unacceptable by the Tory brexiters, which was of course not predictable beforehand... Hell its, then, for Juncker.

CB

Maybe he meant  a special place in Hull.......

Although that amounts to much the same thing

ah, I missed that bit; I thought it was Ireland only still.

So we've kept the DUP happy, but pissed off the ERG etc? And therefore two even smaller factions of the "same side" are holding everyone to ransom?

Exactly.

CB

Doubt it. James Devine hasn't been an MP (Labour, Livingstone) since 2010 when he got locked up. Doubt he'll have much say in the matter...

Wahay!

You never know, perhaps he moves in mysterious ways?

One man's unelected beurocrat is another man's civil servant - an employed expert that actually makes things work.

I don't know why you keep bringing this one up... that's the 'shit....hit the panic button response'. At that stage worries about trading arrangements and disputes will have been superseded by 'keep food on the shelves' and maintain civil order concerns.

The EU would have different concerns and will implement their own measures. As I've said before I reckon their main concern would be to get investment back into the EU without any concern for the UK economy.

It really isn't a situation we want to find ourselves in, I'll be saying that to my MP tomorrow night.... who IMO is taking the brinkmanship a bit too far.

The only reason I've brought it up is because many posts on this issue seem to revolve around 'rules is rules', they clearly aren't. Especially so considering the amount of shit about to hit the UK's fan, it's also worth all parties remembering that a sizeable portion of said shit is bound to fly in the EU's direction

I'm sure the EU's position would be much simpler if they could take such a view. The small matter of £341,000,000,000 of annual EU exports into the UK market makes such a black and white stance hard to justify.

Of course. The whole thing is a nightmare.

Edit: for the sake of the pedants.

Oh good.

Yeah and UK exports to the EU at £274,000,000,000, they'll be looking to get a large chunk of that relocated. If we do get to that stage it would be clear we aren't going to get reasonable (or don't have system of government capable doing so).

I agree. If some sort of deal isn't sorted everyone loses and the UK more than most.

...but consider the EU's two big hitters, France and Germany; Merkel has serious problems with a resurgent right, voter unrest at the funding of bail outs and an export market to the UK that accounts for 1 in 7 of the cars they build. Macron is currently weathering the worst civil unrest France has seen in 50 years and just looking at agriculture, his farmers export 14% of their produce to the uk. I think we all know what pissed off French farmers are capable of.

Worth a read, BBC's analysis of a no deal Irish border.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46546295

Basically for a pernament soft border between NI & Eire then NI needs to be in a customs union with the EU. If NI is in a customs union and the rest of the UK is not then there needs to be a hard border between NI & the rest of the UK. What is not feasible long term is for NI not to be in a customs union of some sort with the EU and the existence of a soft border. A no deal Brexit means no customs union therefore a hard border will have to be created to monitor the passage of goods and people between the EU and the UK.

Great, we agree, but just not by how much worse  it will be for the UK. As I've said a few times, they'll be looking to recoup losses in exports to the UK, with likely relocations from the UK. The UK just don't have that option.... time to get real.

I don't quite know what you base your analysis on as to 'how much worse' I think  it'll be for the UK. I've said it'll be worse, I've said the whole situation is a nightmare. 

The only difference between my position on this and that of many posters on here, is that I see it as a disaster for all involved parties. This seems to taint me as anti-EU as far as many are concerned. 

Is it considered normal for very senior civil servants to bad mouth other countries MPs? 

What if the head of the UK civil service publically laughed as they said a place was reserved in hell for barnier? Acceptable behaviour? 

On this continent we have free speech, so yeah.  At least as acceptable as MPs ranting about D-Day and Hitler every time they don't get their way anyhow.

[edit] Oh dear I seem to have upset some delicate little leaver snowlfakes.  How perfectly beastly of me!

If Barnier were a demonstrably appalling and destructive f*ckwit and the civil servant had spent a couple of years on the receiving end of their f*ckwittery, then yes, I think it would be both understandable and acceptable.

You don't seem to be acknowledging the one way relaxations of industry. Do that and we're on the same page. I'm acutely aware of this as I'll be affected. I'll be offered a move but I'm not in a situation to take it up. Getting worried. 

sigh... yes, that border could encompass Ireland as well.

Given all of the trade between the rEU and Ireland and GB is via planes or trucks, its in many ways most sensible to put the hard bit of any border at the points where things load up to leave or arrive on the island of ireland for both intra EU and intra UK trade. Perhaps by making the whole island a special case all sides could be satisfied - and I'd imagine it could have excellent effects for the irish economy.

Tusk is president of the Council, he is a politician.

It is not normal, but these are not normal circumstances.

If Barnier had been trying to trick the UK into not obliging its obligations towards the Irish with respect to the GFA, then yes, I would think such behaviour of the head of the UK civil service acceptable.

Given how badly throughout the whole exit process is, the tight timescale and complete absence of structure in the eus article 50 procedure. I'd say UK staff have cause to be grumpy. The eu believed their own hype and never thought it would happen. So didn't consider it. 

You'd expect a 5 year tiered exit. Different agreements coming into force and others ceasing at say annual intervals. Ratified as it goes along. 

If only tusk spoke out so harshly towards polish mps who are not honouring eu agreements over refugees. A bit selective. 

I'm sorry to hear you'll be impacted so directly, it's bad enough just standing at the peripheries.

It is not necessarily so that economic investments will all flow away from the UK and towards the EU. This is in no way any sort of an upside. The UK is no longer tied to the EU's desire to clamp down on tax havens and UK industry is now unfettered from EU environmental restrictions and labour laws. All in keeping with the desires of the right of the Conservative party.

The ensuing economic chaos the UK is likely to endure can be manipulated into an excuse for a race to the bottom all in the name of attracting foreign investment.

It'll probably work out, after all the UK wont be exporting cars to the EU so the Euros will be buying Beemers instead of Nissans.

Bollocks. May has had two full years to sort something out but has squandered it and her negotiating position by prioritising the appeasement of the extremist scum in her own party rather than serve the interests of the country she represents. She too deserves to rot in hell. 

You'd have thought the imbeciles running this shitshow could have outlined a workable proposal for a 5 year tiered exit and only then thump down article 50 and getting the clock running. Turns out the red-white-and-blue-have-your-cake-and-eat-it-brexit-means-brexit-++ deal plan wasn't quite up to scratch when the clock was started.

Who would have thought it, uh?

Good grief, you are quite ridiculous sometimes. The deadline we are facing is all a result of an inept PM invoking A50 before any kind of plan was developed by the Cabinet, and the difficulties faced in negotiating the WA are a direct result of the red lines laid down by the same inept PM in her Lancaster House speech. If anything has been badly thought out, it has been the entire behaviour of the Government, although that might be over-estimating the amount of thought that has been applied. If one reviews the utterances of the idiots Johnson, Davies and Fox, it is hard to believe they have expended a great deal of mental effort on understanding and dealing with the issues. 

I'm seem to recall lots of remainers complaining they waited too long and prolonged the instability? 

Plus it doesn't matter when you put it in.. the 2 year process is still void of any structure regardless of when you start it. Sone kind of all or nothing 2 year spell of arguing, that means everything is left to the last minute. 

It's the eus article 50 that states it is 2 year process. Nothing to do with the UK. 

And if he self-identified as having not even a sketch of a plan.

That’s very similar to the logic Brexiteers employ when they say we won’t miss Eu trade as we’re now in a better position to sell to the rest of the world.

That it was 2-year process was not a secret. I believe it was reasonably well-known at the time to those who were paying attention. I realise that may exclude some of the dimmer members of the Cabinet. That being the case, it is hard to believe that the UK's blundering into the A50 process with no idea of where they wanted to go was an altogether wise plan of action. 

Not quite. The EU's article, which the UK had strong a hand in drafting and signed it off so A50 itself actually has a lot to do with the UK, says that from the moment you hand in the letter triggering article 50 you have a maximum of 2 years to finish the negotiations.

All these posturing, back stabbing and shit slinging that passes as politics in this country could have been done at leisure, and then when, or rather if, they get their act together and can find a suitable proposal plus a back up proposal, and a back-back up one, and a third and fourth and 20th back up plan, then A50 goes on its way, deal gets agreed, and the UK can go on its merry way down the river towards those waterfalls on a red white and blue ToysUrUs inflatable dinghy named Boaty McBoatFace

Come on, keep up at the back! Summo, have you actually seen the speech? You're as bad as Peter Bone when it comes to your grasp on what was actually said and how. Tusk has a fairly grave expression when delivering the immortal line. The laughter was at Leo Varadkers comment regarding the reaction of the press.......

So, he isnt a civil servant, he didnt restrict his target to MPs, and he didnt laugh when you said he did..........apart from that, your two lines worth were perfectly accurate.

Wasting most of the first year ain't Jeremy Corbyn a fault, nor the EU's either

I agree that a different approach to the exit process would have been wise. I don't think the problem lies with  Article 50 - I think the problem around timescales is being caused by the fact our Government triggered it before we had any clear plan for the exit process. This was entirely within our control and we chose to squander that advantage. We did it to ourselves. Truly the worst Government in my lifetime and I'm old enough to remember a few.

Big follower of the Polish press are you?

Jk

It's a very effective sieve. Honest brexiters can only agree with him.

Except that we triggered it with full knowledge of the two year limit, bastardly EU for making us do it eh!

You really do come across as exceptionally dim witted.

I think what Donald Tusk is saying is not that the general public who voted for Brexit will have a special place in hell... (the hottest bit)... because they didn't really know what they were doing....they were just led along a garden path by a bloke with a fag and a pint of bitter assisted by Lord Snooty and Smiffy. They were all hoodwinked, seduced by the promise of shiny things. 

But, there is still time, even at the eleventh hour, to reserve a special place in heaven....(the comfiest bit) alongside him, Donald, resplendent in shimmering halo, hob nobbing with God on a white cloud, twanging a harp and being fed grapes by an undecided flunky with a beard and dandruff who hovered until the last moment then jumped the right way. 

There's still time to repent folks, see the error of thy ways, otherwise there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Perhaps the dim witted are those that have to resort to insults. You are not called Donald as well? Bit of a global trend with that name and rude comments. 

This post just proves that you have no clue at all, despite living in the rEU.

Assuming that you do not recall which national government most strongly opposed the nomination of Tusk to his current position, precisely because he called out their Euro politics in their national press, would be the friendly interpretation.

The alternative conclusion is that you are simply making up stuff that suits your agenda, and rely on others being so badly informed that they don't realize this.

CB

It still doesn't justify his comments. Regardless of who he is for or against, his appointment etc.. in my view it's just not the right way to speak of other countries politicians. I'm sure he is more than capable, even in a second language, to get his point across with resorting to insults. 

Which poor, delicate little flower do you think has been insulted?

'We' penned Article 50, ratified it then eventually triggered it at your behest. We have no one but ourselves to blame for this and it's not like the consequences were not forewarned, this shitshow was entirely inevitable.

jk

I find fake offense offensive.  Please stop pretending to be upset.

Funny thing memory eh.

See my previous reply. Your answer to everything seems to hinge on wishing the world wasn't as it is, on not on dealing with reality in the here and now.

jk

I'm not offended at all. I just think throwing pointless insults is a little childish as far as ukc goes and for eu diplomats counter productive to their goals. 

Of course, this being ukc everyone is allowed an opinion provided it conforms to the general consensus and must be pro remain. 

Ps. Ukc is full of fake outrage. 

It’s not fake outrage, myself and others posting on here have made it quite clear that we will be adversely and directly affected by brexit, so the deafening silence when asking why why from brexit backing people (or poor arguments that are easily proven wrong)

are you at all surprised that there is a feeling of desperation and outrage from us, the Dutch company I work for really doesn’t know where I stand in 50 days, my guiding friends are uncertain about where they stand.

the annoying thing is you are aware from other brexit posts that some of us are at real risk from brexit so your “fake outrage” statement is typically thoughtless and stupid!

No article 50, the process etc.. is part of the Lisbon treaty. It was penned as much by the UK then as the other 27 nations. Which Gordon Brown dodged signing himself as the then unelected PM and sent Milliband to sign instead during a meeting of foreign secretaries, it was signed in a side room during a lunch break without any media attention. 

No one considered then it would ever be used.

It was considered in peak Greece debt crisis but they realised it wouldn't work. Article 50 was written in a manner for a nation to hard exit in the event of a coup. When no side wanted connection with the other afterwards.That's why it's only 2 years and completely void of any structure, as it wasn't considered any negotiation was required. 

I think his comments were bl**dy great. Heartfelt, sincere, deserved and carefully worded so only the most obtuse could mistake what he was saying or who his targets were.

This  - I was going to say farce, but it's far too serious for that - this sh*storm has been trundling on for best part of 3 years now, with one or two exceptions the EU has behaved with admirable restraint, courtesy and efficiency. They had a right to assume that we would do our best to organise and orderly exit; in fact they have been dealing with the greatest single fiasco and failure of government since God knows when.  We should thank Tusk for reminding us that we were led to this impasse by careless and malicious donkeys. 

I can understand your anger. Tusks comment doesn't help the negotiation or people on either side(UK or eu). 

Like you, I'm likely to personally affected and its possible that I'll have to bring my retirement forward by several months. And either we stay in France & I'll probably have a lot of extra, previously unnecessary, paperwork or we move to Scotland but then my French partner will have the same, assuming we pass whatever income threshold is set by UK immigration (unlikely with our expected pensions & estimates of 30000GBP per year). So the 'easiest' solution is to split

And still the Brexiters can't come up with any concrete benefits, just possible long term advantages which may never happen. And they wonder why we are angry.

I’m angry at you not Tusk, article fifty was for the implementation of withdrawal not the planning of, we had as long as it took to come up with a plan which we could have discussed with the EU then sent our letter, 50 days to go and we don’t even have a plan Tusk is quite right to point this out 

For f£&@s sake we sent David Davies to the EU as our representative, we might as well have pulled our pants down and farted in their general direction it was that insulting

as for our foreign secretary at the time (face palm)

Tusk's "insult" wasn't pointless - it was carefully and cleverly thought out and targeted.

It’s “fake outrage”  ;-/

I’m not sure we could have discussed the plan before A50 was triggered - I’d have to check but my recollection was that the EU would not allow any negotiation before A50 was triggered.

It was literally penned by a British diplomat John Kerr then ratified by the British government. To pretend it's a surprise trap snapped on the plucky little brexit boys is patently absurd!

No one? Surely you must have considered it when you voted for it to be used, after all you knew what you were doing, right?

Yet recognising that just a couple of years later you thought it would be a good idea for us to to have a go. Curious. If you lived here and had to suffer the consequences of your actions I'd think you a fool.

The intention is quite clearly that those two years are used to define the structure and begin a process, to maintain flexibility, anyone with half a brain could see extricating ourselves was the hard work of a decade at least. It was not intended that those two years be pissed up the wall by the most incompetent government in living memory squabbling over what breed of unicorn we were going to demand.

jk

I expect better from the Beeb

Having a plan and consulting with our neighbors before triggering article 50 would have been possible, this would have ensured that the embarrassment that we are facing could have avoided.

Rather like a pair of grown ups separating we could have a talk about separation before you actually call the lawyers in.

It's a cheap tactic when christian fundies do it, it's a cheap tactic when islamic fundies do it and it is a cheap tactic when you do it.  Generally shows a lack of a real argument or integrity.

You can’t do that if one side, the EU, refuses point blank.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/03/eu-...

They could still have agreed their own position, but they didn't even bother to do that much.

The stumbling block here is that our Parliament has to reach a majority position on what Brexit looks like. It would have been useful for those arguments to have been played out before we triggered article 50. Granted that would not have been a speedy process but it might have taken some of the heat out of the debate and we might have been able to reach a rational position. But our idiot politicians went for the symbolism of enshrining the exit date in law instead. It was all within our control. 

But unlike a divorce, the ex has demanded the alimony before they'll even think about discussing visitation rights.

Who are the children in this visitation rights analogy?

Trade.

But the Scots (for starters) in the person of Nicola Sturgeon have already complained about having one rule for NI and another rule for Scotland.

No the ex has asked to honour the various joint HP purchases involved in until they run out.

Hmm... you could look at it like that, but since the ex has already been a net beneficiary to the tune of £400 billion (since 1973, in today's prices), and retains ownership of all fixed assets, their demand as a prerequisite to negotiations could be seen as rather grasping.

https://ukandeu.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Who-pays-for-the-EU-and-ho...

The problem with that is that a lot of Brexiteer MPs were cheerfully insisting that as soon as we walked into the negotiating room looking like we meant business, the EU would cave in and give us everything we wanted. Hell, with less than two months to go until we crash out, some of them are still insisting that we just need to stay firm and something like that will happen. So the chances of parliament agreeing even roughly to what an acceptable realistic outcome would look like before we could demonstrate unequivocally what "realistic" actually meant were approximately zero.

If we are going to have matrimony-based analogy it's more like wanting to discuss your next marriage before having divorced your current partner.  You're not free to discuss the practicalities of how much money you'll be able to put towards the wedding, buying a house together or the arrangements for where all the kids will live until you've figured out what you have left after terminating your current marriage.  

All of which demonstrates the limitations of this analogy. What role does the NI back stop play in this scenario?

I completely agree.

What? You point out the limitations of someone else's analogy and then ask me to stretch it even further?

Good point.

That's like the kids saying that, even after the divorce, they want to be able to spend as much time as they want want with both of you together, while you both act like a couple and as if nothing has happened.

even more basic than the previous replies to this post - nobody, but nobody, ever prevented us having a plan to take to the negotiations, once they started. So the first part of your post - I’m not sure we could have discussed the plan before A50 was triggered - is only relevant because there was no plan to discuss. 

The very idea that you enter any negotiations, never mind something as important as this, without any kind of plan of how you can achieve your aims is ridiculous. One possible take is that, like Farage, the other brexiteer champions were so convinced the vote would be to remain that they didnt think any plans were necessary, and just used the referendum process for a bit of personal grandstanding.

Middle aged man after a few pints down the Local gets chatting to his mate, bit of a posh wide boy with a camel hair coat and fag, he says his wife is always on his case, and he’s sure there are better alternatives out there.

Wide boy convinces him he’ll be fighting of the ladies off, he can get a nice bachelor pad, leather sofas and everything. No one will be able to tell him what to do, and I’m sure all his ex’s will be cueing up to date him. A few more pints and that’s it he’s going to take his new mates advice show the misses who’s boss.

Guy walks in at midnight loudly announces to his family he’s leaving first thing in the morning, spends the night flat on his back snoring noisily and dribbling.

Leave means leave throws his stuff in some plastic bags and leaves in his Volvo 

Down to the local travel lodge, that weekend his new mate isn’t available for a bit of clubbing, unfortunately all the young ladies just aren’t interested in a middle aged man no matter how many bottles of champagne he buys.

He sets his eyes on a more mature relationship with someone middle aged and middle income, unfortunately they all seem to be in stable relationship and they are all friends with his ex wife.

He gets out his little black book and phones round his ex’s they must be gagging to get together, they unanimously agree that their relationship was all a bit one sided and to be honest a bit abusive, they have moved on.

A few months later he’s in a bedsit above the local chippie, his tie’s got egg on it, his halitosis is bad and without his wife to point a few things out he’s been neglecting himself a bit and is getting a bit rough around the edges.

I think they did have a plan. It's just that in keeping with their campaign, it was solely based on bullshit and blather.

I would laugh...

you do expect more, but Laura K the overpromoted "Political Editor" isn't going to deliver it - her large salary is payment for opinionated rubbish.  I prefer Peston, hugely

He then finds out that his posh wide boy mate has been planning this for some time and had a substantial bet with other mates that middle aged man's would split up with his wife. 

He's also now found a tenant for the bedsit he owns above the chippie.

Not just no plan, no coherent agreed objectives.

While my more charitable self is inclined to agree a fair few brexiter MP's inhabit bubbles so weird and small they genuinely thought this would all be easy and glorious my more cynical self suspects more through venal miscalculation have been caught up in a tidal wave of shite they expected never to trigger but cannot now escape. Then there are still more who know this process will be a disaster but also that it is an irreversible disaster, they just need to get it done as step one. Step two is reshaping the world in their image after the shock.

jk

Here's an eloquent lady complaining of "The Emperor's New Clothes"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-47171829/brexit-cambridge-profess...

You credit them with far too much. 

David Davies, the brexit secretary and member of the European Research Group (note the title, especially the second word) , knew so much about the structure and workings of the EU despite our 40+ year membership that he was quite happy to state publicly that he was going to ignore Brussels and go straight to Germany to negotiate "the easiest trade deals in history". 

thats the standard of political "leader" we have.

I caught that on the radio this morning, gloriously weird eccentricity

jk

Holy Christ!... I'd entirely missed that. You'd think he'd be aware Germany has prior membership of a trading bloc. Rather puts Miss Abbott's comparatively minor gaffs into perspective.

Here's some friday afternoon entertainment for you.....

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/minister-for-brexit-davis-da...

And I'd also forgotten that his previous position was Europe Minister.........

But Germany has a car industry that exports stuff to the UK, so they'd go to the EU and insist that they give us whatever we want so long as we keep buying BMWs, and the EU would have no choice but to go along with it, because Germany.

And this sort of thinking is the reason that "get everybody onboard with a plan before triggering article 50" was never really an option. Any suggestion that took a realistic view of what we might get and what sort of compromises we might have to make to get it would have been shouted down as "capitulating before we've even started" by the headbangers.

Discussed with the EU, not discussed internally. Sorry not clear, I was replying to another post in which this was explicit.

The EU not allowing discussion prior to A50 being invoked, and their refusal to allow the future relationship to be discussed at the same time as the withdrawal agreement are two decisions that have played into the current situation.

yeah, fair enough - there's a lot going on in this thread!!

And both were known at the time. They have only contributed to the current situation because the UK govt didnt have a plan (as discussed). The WA should not have taken 2 years as it was based on how to deal with known, exiting) situations and events. The future relationship stuff, which i consider way more important than the WA, has been shuffled off to one side while the WA takes centre stage as a result of the complete lack of either a plan or a realistic end goal.

Or... the EU goes something like - you want the food? Take the cars too... Which is a priority do you think? Which of our home grown car manufacturers will take up the slack if our gambit is called? 

 i think Dave's post contained heavy irony.....

Anyway, I'm expecting the cold winds of recession to sweep across the car factories in germany as the EU hating brexiteers all switch to supporting our home based car manufacturers such as Jaguar / Land Rover.........if the 51.8% actually looked at the overall benefits of buying british, the picture might be different.....

Disclaimer - I'm heavily in favour of EU membership, so I'm obviously excused ownership of my Merc. And the wife's car is a British Astra. Bought before it was sold to Peugeot-Citroen.......

I believe you recall correctly. Maybe we can start a new brexit simile/metaphor thread.

As useful as a one legged man at an arse kicking contest.

As intelligent as David Davis.

etc

Going further into la-la-land bnb ?

Of course not, a no-deal Brexit would be a total breach of trust, it would make it A LOT harder to negotiate anything for the UK. Not only with the EU but also with the rest of the world. The UK would be marginalised in the world markets for years to come.

Rather, what becomes a lot more likely is an united Ireland.

Got that.  

It's interesting and possibly(?) very fortunate for the UK that the timing of Germanys slow down is now, and people are really starting to notice.

 https://www.economist.com/leaders/2019/02/07/it-is-time-to-worry-about-germ...

Tusk and Junker like to use the phrase "we, the 27...." but in reality out of that 27 there is only one 800lb gorilla, and that is Germany. There is already a large drop in sales of certain German marques in the UK (Audi and Porsche), could that also spread to BMW and VW?  In better times, Germany would probably tow the EU line and stand firm,...but, could this could be a good time for the UK to hold it's nerve re the backstop and let the pressure build over the channel as headwinds gain momentum?

Dream on, Germany has a Parliament as well and in December they voted overwhelmingly against re-opening negotiations so Frau Merkel can't and won't. She has told you so.

The opinion polls are equally bleak, the vast majority say no new deal and in a sensitive election year the German politicians are unlikely to change their position. While the Germans understand the importance of their car industry the majority also think they are conniving shitheads and deserve to join Farage and co in Tusks version of paradise.

Thanks for the considered reply....lol. I get your gist though. German parliament sticks to it's guns...all good. UK parliament sticks to it's guns...bunch of wankers

Anyway, apologies that my contribution irked you so and I hope the fact it's friday cheers you up a bit

How does any of that make it better for us to be out of the eu?

It doesn't. The suggestion is that the negotiating position we are currently in *could be* enhanced with a "just smile and wave boys, smile and wave" as other factors outside of our control happen to distract and apply pressure to the other side of the table.

I was hypothesizing that if this were the case, the timing is very fortuitous.

But "we" haven't stuck to our guns. 

May came up with a workable solution, agreed to by EU27, ratified by all 27 parliaments. Only a disagreement within the tory party, and the noose held over the tories by the DUP prevented us ratifying it also. So despite being continually told that renegotiation of the WA is not possible, May goes back to brussels with some slightly different proposals on parts of the WA, and its somehow the EU's fault? The UK parliament need to realise that its their problem to sort out. Now is no longer the time for clever rhetoric and points scoring.

On a slightly differerent point; would it not have been better to agree / ratify the WA proposal in the HoC in advance of agreeing it with the EU27? If it couldnt have been , for all the reasons we are now dealing with, then we could have at least extended A50 to allow some breathing space. As it is, wiggle room is now severely limited. Maybe we should concentrate more on the political declaration, and accept the WA as it is......

Don't worry, I just look at the situation with bewilderment. Apart from a few financial inconveniences and regret my children won't have the opportunities they could have had there's nothing much to do but accept what's happening. It's going to cost you a lot of money and as a German company with over 90% exports a drop in the value of the € would be useful

"So despite being continually told that renegotiation of the WA is not possible.."

Until it is.... (that was the point of my post...will other forces make the EU reconsider it's stance on no renegotiation? Personally I think unlikely, but I felt it was worthy of adding to the debate)

We have 64days assuming we extend A50, more like 6 if we don't. Good luck with waiting for Germany to come begging.

Jk

Enough of your speculation based on years studying economic forces working at the heart of the City. How dare you try to offer some balance

its always possible...........but given the necessary logistics, including UK delaying A50 to sllow the EU27 to agree and then take the new deal to be reratified by thier parliaments, its vanishingly unlikely.

So you're saying we do something about Poles sending £3 BILLION a year out of our economy back to Poland, on top of the £9 BILLION a year they get from us through the EU, and now we're not friends?

Whatever gives you any reason to believe that it could be, to any substantive extent? Seems to me like a miniature unicorn (a.k.a. a lie) promoted without justification by Brexit proponents to keep the more gullible of the wishful thinkers on board while the clock continues to be run down.

Rom, if you want a discussion, don't open with an insult. I don't think you're any better placed than the thousands of professional media commentators and economists (or UKC posters) who claim no certainty as to the outcome of the Brexit negotiations. So show some humility in the first place, politeness second and finally don't assume that any of my posts on Brexit reflect my personal affiliation.

I am analysing not cheerleading. And I sense that the majority of thoughtful contributors here have recognised that. I'm disappointed that you want to make this personal instead of addressing a range of possibilities that different voices have raised. Your arguments carry no weight with those whom you seek to dismiss.

For what it's worth, I think there is too much confusion over the Withdrawal vs Trade Agreement and the latter is not contingent on the agreement of the former. In the event of no Withdrawal deal, not just the UK but the member states (not just the EU), will be under considerably more pressure, from business and from voters, to accelerate a new trading relationship. Alternatively, the sudden need to erect a hard border in Ireland might very rapidly bring about a revised WA with a time-limited backstop. That is, after all, the game of blink being played today.

I’m just not sure that the reaction of voters will necessarily be in the direction you suggest. 

If there is a disorderly exit, will we blame the consequences here on ourselves, our politicians, or the EU?

well, it’ll depend on who you ask, but my guess is the EU will bear the brunt of it. If so, will the pressure be to strike a reasonable trade deal, with all the compromises that will require; or will it be to make some sort of gesture to let the EU know ‘they can’t treat us like that’? Again, it’s a guess, but I’m not sure there’ll be much popular appetite for compromise to push politicians in that direction.

and I expect it’ll be much the same in Germany. If Brexit is seen to be disruptive, Tusk’s comments are likely to be mild compared to wider sentiment. 

If everyone behaved rationally, in their best economic interests, then a deal would rapidly emerge. But history suggests they usually don’t, and poison in the well of U.K. /eu relations seems more likely to me. 

FWIW, I don't see how the EU could possibly have a trade agreement without the withdrawal agreement being signed. This goes against two years of Council decision to sort the important issues out first. In a no-deal scenario, these will still be the important issues. Moreover, if the UK refuses to work together in a no-deal scenario to set up a customs/regulation border in the Irish sea (which the EU thinks the UK is obliged to do because of the GFA), I actually expect the EU to impose economic sanctions on the UK (after a couple of months of fudging the border).

Tusk's press statement was pretty brutal in this regard. He said:

"The top priority for us, remains the issue of the border on the island of Ireland, and the guarantee to maintain the peace process in accordance with the Good Friday Agreement. There is no room for speculation here. The EU itself is first and foremost a peace project. We will not gamble with peace; or put a sell-by date on reconciliation. And this is why we insist on the backstop. Give us a believable guarantee for peace in Northern Ireland, and the UK will leave the EU as a trusted friend."

If you are not a trusted friend, will you get a trade agreement?

I'm finding Rees-Mogg on LBC right now, absolutely terrifying. In fact I can't watch it any more.

https://www.facebook.com/LBC/videos/1450011455132999/?notif_id=154964908937...

It's genuinely baffling to me how anyone could be that mendacious over such a long period. Do you think he actually believes many of the things he says?

It's not a mini unicorn lie, it's just me putting something into the debate, no politician has mentioned it as far as I am aware.

This is the thing, all of these Brexit threads on UKC follow the same trajectory. A circle jerk echo chamber of everyone high giving each other on ridiculing the UK, the Tories, Theresa May the ERG, Corbyn...basically anything that is not EU. That's fine, and it a lot of cases deserved, but I have no real interest in joining in as it's not very interesting and entirely predictable. 

So I try and add something , admittedly not on hymn sheet and certainly not UKC party line to inject some alternative view points that might be interesting to someone reading the thread. I don't pretend to know I am right so you will notice that my posts are not preaching.

Anyway ... Germanys economic problems are a reality. There is a lot going on in the EU that is problematic (France Italy spat resulting in removal of ambassadors! Yellow vests...) that are nothing to do with Brexit but must be adding pressure at the top of the EU. I think this is interesting

Edited to add...Strictplates contributions to this thread have been far more interesting than almost anyone elses IMO mainly because he doesn't just swallow the narrative of "Brexit will be the end of everything". He has the ability to look at the issues  objectively, play devils advocate... even though he has to repeatedly admit he voted remain just to keep a lid on the abuse and to be taken half seriously. 

Hide behind your settee. We used to do that when Dr. Who was on. Just peep over the top every so often.

Sadly, yes. And he has a great phalanx of hard-Brexit sycophants ringing in to support him. Really scary.

I never thought of you as that feeble. Did Dr Who really scare you? It was, to me, the epitome of gentle, harmless British TV.

When you put it like that Hans, it all seems so straight forward. Shame it isn't. You'll note that unlike you, Tusk doesn't specify a hard border in the Irish Sea (and the EU has said it won't insist on a hard border at all...you keep ignoring that bit). This is because the EU 'will not gamble with peace'.

Hard border in Ireland risks a resurgence of Republican terrorism. Meanwhile, hard border in the Irish Sea risks a resurgence in Unionist terrorism.

This is why the EU keeps batting the ball back to the UK. Brexit has provoked an intractable problem in Ireland. Any definitive, fudge free solution risks peace. 

Aww...I'm blushing. Full disclosure though; even people who know me refuse to take me half seriously.