Brexit

[david63]

If I understand this correctly then the backstop in itself is not the problem. The problem is that IF the backstop comes into play then it is "open ended" with the balance being with the EU and it is that part of it that is unacceptable.

I believe that all suggestions of a technological border solution have been dismissed by the EU and I feel that Leo Varadkar is backing himself into a corner over the border issue

[barney]

If I understand this correctly then the backstop in itself is not the problem. The problem is that IF the backstop comes into play then it is "open ended" with the balance being with the EU and it is that part of it that is unacceptable.

I believe that all suggestions of a technological border solution have been dismissed by the EU and I feel that Leo Varadkar is backing himself into a corner over the border issue

I think that you are almost correct there David, but unfortunately Johnson has gone hardcore with insisting it be removed.
I would have suggested a compromise on a time limit but Ireland would not agree to that.
That may have soothed both parties, but it was not to be.
Let's face it, with a time limit in which to do a trade deal, the minds would have been very focussed.

The absolute irony being that the sticking point will guarantee what Ireland want to avoid.
That being, an EU imposed border.

I'm curious as to who will build the infrastructure and who will man the check point ????
I'm joking of course.
We all know that it's a red herring and will never happen.

The problem as I see it, with the proposed backstop, is that it would be in effect up to and until an agreement was concluded between the parties.

So, for example, France say that they want X amount of UK fishing territory.
The UK says no to this.
Fine say the French, then you stay in the backstop until you agree.

This of course could apply to any part of future trade talks or agreements.
Those who have no desire to leave the EU would love this because it would keep us tied in Ad Infinitum.
That is why I'm amazed that so many Labour MPs rejected it in a stance of solidarity.

[Manoverboard]

There is, or can be, a technical solution to goods crossing Irish / UK / Irish borders … the same solution that exists between the EU Countries and Switzerland for example. Where there's a will there's a way … my ol Mum used to say.

ps … I recall that the EU wanted the backstop as much if not more than TM.

….. If a technological solution exists, or is being worked on, now is the time to reveal the details.

PS. The backstop was a British proposal … I thought so too

The technical solution is simple enough and is based on the movement of goods which are ' bonded ', these are shipped between approved end points within and external to the EU. The problem thus far, as I understand it, has been getting the EU to agree to this method without the need for the UK to accept the entire Swiss package.

I am however totally opposed to the notion of disclosure of tactics and / or proposals, such details are for closed room negotiations rather than being on Social Media platforms. Once agreed in principle they can be put forward to Parliament. Any other way will result in further blocking and / or watering down which, as a Brexiteer, I would obviously be opposed to.

[david63]

That is why I'm amazed that so many Labour MPs rejected it in a stance of solidarity.

They had to have something to cling on to as they had already made the decision to reject the deal before they even knew what the deal was.

[barney]

That is why I'm amazed that so many Labour MPs rejected it in a stance of solidarity.

They had to have something to cling on to as they had already made the decision to reject the deal before they even knew what the deal was.

Very true David !

But... in hindsight, it was clearly the wrong decision for them

it would have been done and dusted now and technically, the UK would have 'remained' in the EU even though we had formally 'left'

[Ray Scully]

That is why I'm amazed that so many Labour MPs rejected it in a stance of solidarity.

They had to have something to cling on to as they had already made the decision to reject the deal before they even knew what the deal was.

Very true David !

But... in hindsight, it was clearly the wrong decision for them

it would have been done and dusted now and technically, the UK would have 'remained' in the EU even though we had formally 'left'

But what would have really been gained? Negotiating the trading arrangement would remain a festering sore for, well, generations.

[barney]

They had to have something to cling on to as they had already made the decision to reject the deal before they even knew what the deal was.

Very true David !

But... in hindsight, it was clearly the wrong decision for them

it would have been done and dusted now and technically, the UK would have 'remained' in the EU even though we had formally 'left'

But what would have really been gained? Negotiating the trading arrangement would remain a festering sore for, well, generations.

I don't really see why it would Ray.

The very simple question to ask the EU before proceeding is, do you want to do a free trade deal ?

If the answer is yea, then proceed.
If the answer is no, or with millions of strings attached, the we accept that and continue on our merry way.

The EU is not the world, and if they don't want tariff and quota free access into the UK market, then on their heads be it.
90 billion trade deficit, don't forget.
see below.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... eal-brexit

from an independent player with no axe to grind either way.

[Gill W]

If I understand this correctly then the backstop in itself is not the problem. The problem is that IF the backstop comes into play then it is "open ended" with the balance being with the EU and it is that part of it that is unacceptable.

I believe that all suggestions of a technological border solution have been dismissed by the EU and I feel that Leo Varadkar is backing himself into a corner over the border issue

If they have dismissed suggestions of a technological border solution, its because the solution doesn't yet exist.

They'd hardly likely to agree to something that is not yet in existence AND agree to the insurance policy ending at a defined date, when the solution still may not be in existence.

[Gill W]

I am however totally opposed to the notion of disclosure of tactics and / or proposals, such details are for closed room negotiations rather than being on Social Media platforms. Once agreed in principle they can be put forward to Parliament. Any other way will result in further blocking and / or watering down which, as a Brexiteer, I would obviously be opposed to.

Details don't need to be on Social media.

I'd be happier if I knew that they had formulated a proper, detailed plan and it was being discussed with the EU.

But they have no detailed plan and are not likely to rustle one up in the next few weeks

[Manoverboard]

…… I'd be happier if I knew that they had formulated a proper, detailed plan and it was being discussed with the EU.

But they have no detailed plan and are not likely to rustle one up in the next few weeks

You mean they haven't added you to the distribution list … whatever next

I do not personally need to know nor do I expect to be told anything until it is about to be voted on in the House.

It is the role of ' others ' to sort out the problems of governance and only to advise the rest of us when it is either done 'n' dusted or thwarted.

[barney]

Varadkar said just today, that the backstop CANNOT be reopened.

For that, read that the backstop WILL NOT be reopened.

So, at last we have a bit of clarity.
The EU will not reopen the failed agreement and the UK will not even entertain speaking with them until it is removed.

But …. hang on …. the EU are looking at options on what to do, should the UK CRASH OUT without ratifying any agreement.

Technical options, I believe.

It's anyone's guess as to what will actually happen but one thing is for sure.
Something will be sorted out.

Has anyone on here, genuinely taken out an insurance policy without an end date ?
That is, an insurance that you cannot unilaterally leave and can only get out of it by agreement of the other party.
I doubt if they have, but that is what the EU want us to subscribe to.


Ireland will absolutely crash and burn economically without a solution.
The EU have promised billions of euros to assist but that will not be enough.
I was reading about an Irish mushroom farmer who employs 27 (all Latvians) and his entire crop comes to the UK at the moment.
Maybe he can find a local market but will still need to massively downsize.

This is of course, a huge opportunity for UK mushroom producers to increase capacity.

[Manoverboard]

Clearly the magnitude of the problem can only mushroom … just saying

[Ray Scully]

Varadkar said just today, that the backstop CANNOT be reopened.

For that, read that the backstop WILL NOT be reopened.

So, at last we have a bit of clarity.
The EU will not reopen the failed agreement and the UK will not even entertain speaking with them until it is removed.

But …. hang on …. the EU are looking at options on what to do, should the UK CRASH OUT without ratifying any agreement.

Technical options, I believe.

It's anyone's guess as to what will actually happen but one thing is for sure.
Something will be sorted out.

Has anyone on here, genuinely taken out an insurance policy without an end date ?
That is, an insurance that you cannot unilaterally leave and can only get out of it by agreement of the other party.
I doubt if they have, but that is what the EU want us to subscribe to.


Ireland will absolutely crash and burn economically without a solution.
The EU have promised billions of euros to assist but that will not be enough.
I was reading about an Irish mushroom farmer who employs 27 (all Latvians) and his entire crop comes to the UK at the moment.
Maybe he can find a local market but will still need to massively downsize.

This is of course, a huge opportunity for UK mushroom producers to increase capacity.

Perhaps a unified Ireland could result

[Gill W]

…… I'd be happier if I knew that they had formulated a proper, detailed plan and it was being discussed with the EU.

But they have no detailed plan and are not likely to rustle one up in the next few weeks

You mean they haven't added you to the distribution list … whatever next

I do not personally need to know nor do I expect to be told anything until it is about to be voted on in the House.

It is the role of ' others ' to sort out the problems of governance and only to advise the rest of us when it is either done 'n' dusted or thwarted.

Ah well, lets all sit passively and await our fate.

I

[Mervyn and Trish]

There's not a lot of point arguing about how we got here. As my old boss used to say, we are where we are.

And where we are is with an exit plan our parliament will never agree and which the EU says is the only deal possible.

Therefore our present PM, love him or hate him, has only two choices. Cancel Brexit or exit with no deal. Neither requires any further discussion with the EU.

We know he will never cancel Brexit. That can only happen if he is unseated. Which is what some people wish to achieve. But naturally he is not in that camp.

His only option therefore is to prepare vigorously for a no deal exit, to minimise its negative effects and capitalise on the positive.

I have no doubt at all that the EU are clever enough to understand the old proposal is dead. They are gambling that people here will indeed unseat Boris and cancel Brexit. But as time passes, if that hasn't happened, they also know no deal will be damaging for all. It may be worse for some than others but one thing is sure. It will be devastating for Ireland. The very people they claim to be protecting.

If and when that becomes the clear course, maybe they'll decide there is, after all, reason to talk. If not they, and no one else, will be responsible. They've blocked the sensible course.

[Manoverboard]

…… I'd be happier if I knew that they had formulated a proper, detailed plan and it was being discussed with the EU.

But they have no detailed plan and are not likely to rustle one up in the next few weeks

You mean they haven't added you to the distribution list … whatever next

I do not personally need to know nor do I expect to be told anything until it is about to be voted on in the House.

It is the role of ' others ' to sort out the problems of governance and only to advise the rest of us when it is either done 'n' dusted or thwarted.

Ah well, lets all sit passively and await our fate.

I

Absolutely given that I have no intention of getting involved with the usual band of suspects … well, not unless we Brexiteers are marching shoulder to shoulder to unseat the rabble who failed the 17,000,000 very nice people who voted etc.

[barney]

There's not a lot of point arguing about how we got here. As my old boss used to say, we are where we are.

And where we are is with an exit plan our parliament will never agree and which the EU says is the only deal possible.

Therefore our present PM, love him or hate him, has only two choices. Cancel Brexit or exit with no deal. Neither requires any further discussion with the EU.

We know he will never cancel Brexit. That can only happen if he is unseated. Which is what some people wish to achieve. But naturally he is not in that camp.

His only option therefore is to prepare vigorously for a no deal exit, to minimise its negative effects and capitalise on the positive.

I have no doubt at all that the EU are clever enough to understand the old proposal is dead. They are gambling that people here will indeed unseat Boris and cancel Brexit. But as time passes, if that hasn't happened, they also know no deal will be damaging for all. It may be worse for some than others but one thing is sure. It will be devastating for Ireland. The very people they claim to be protecting.

If and when that becomes the clear course, maybe they'll decide there is, after all, reason to talk. If not they, and no one else, will be responsible. They've blocked the sensible course.

Well, the blame game is in full flow already Merv.

We have Ireland now saying that there will have to be a hard border (rubbish imo) and it will be the UK's fault.
Then we have BoJo saying that we will leave without a transition agreement and that will be the EU's fault.

Then we have the US Democrats saying that they will block any future trade deal if our leaving the EU jepordises the peace process, even though they have no idea what it's all about and in fact, the backstop breaks the Good Friday Areement, by splitting NI from the UK.

So, maybe it's time for them all to wind their neck's in a bit and get on with the serious business of the UK separating itself from the politcal institutions of the EU.
This should all be done behind the scenes.

The EU must now just accept that the UK is leaving on 31st October because it is the deadline that was set by them, not us.

How we leave is the question.
Transition period and payment , or not, is in their hands

That's the way I see it.

Johnson has asked if the WA can be reopned to amend the backstop.
The EU have collectively said no.
That's pretty much the end of that discussion.

Now the onus is on both sides to make adequate preparations.

[Ray Scully]

Interesting piece on Dominic Cummings in today'sTimes which further helps to cloudy the water.

[Mervyn and Trish]

Then we have the US Democrats saying that they will block any future trade deal if our leaving the EU jepordises the peace process.

Ironic that the US was a major funder of the IRA!

[barney]

Interesting piece on Dominic Cummings in today'sTimes which further helps to cloudy the water.

Nothing that I didn't know already if it's the same as in the Guardian.

The Tories have had an unnecessary policy of austerity for far too long.

I fully understand the need following the financial crash but there was really no need to continue with it.

The UK is extremely wealthy as a nation
So rich that we can literally give away billions every year, to both the EU, in subsidies and the Aid budget.

All this while there is a crisis in so many things in our own country, from in work poverty to food banks to adult social care to disability benefits.

It's about time that we gave priority to our own needy.

A new, compassionate government is what is needed.

Is johnson the guy to bring it ?

I doubt it, unfortunately.

[Stephen]

Interesting piece on Dominic Cummings in today'sTimes which further helps to cloudy the water.

Nothing that I didn't know already if it's the same as in the Guardian.

The Tories have had an unnecessary policy of austerity for far too long.

I fully understand the need following the financial crash but there was really no need to continue with it.

The UK is extremely wealthy as a nation
So rich that we can literally give away billions every year, to both the EU, in subsidies and the Aid budget.

All this while there is a crisis in so many things in our own country, from in work poverty to food banks to adult social care to disability benefits.

It's about time that we gave priority to our own needy.

A new, compassionate government is what is needed.

Is johnson the guy to bring it ?

I doubt it, unfortunately.

[Mervyn and Trish]

It's fine to call for an end to austerity if we're also prepared to accept a rise in taxes.

We may be a wealthy country but we also have huge debts and to increase them further pushes us down the route of economic basket cases like Greece. That will endanger our grandchildren's futures far more than Brexit ever will.

I hear so many people say the government should spend more money on this or that. In many cases I don't disagree with the need.

But they have to understand the government has no money. What it spends it raises in taxes.

So what they mean is other people should pay for this or that. They rarely mean I'm happy to pay more for it.

And experience shows taxing the rich more usually results in lower revenue because they simply take their wealth where taxes are lower. It's usually the middle earners who foot the bill. Since we can all afford cruises that probably means most of us. Are we ready to pay more for the good of those who are less well off?

I'd be quite happy, by the way, to cut the foreign aid budget. Charity begins at home. But say that too loud and you'll be accused of racism and xenophobia.

[Ray Scully]

Chatting to an economist friend he said that outwith Brexit, and despite being classed as the 5th largest economy, a real threat to UK ltd is the cost of funding pensions, in particular, those state-funded final salary schemes enjoyed so much by their recipients.

[barney]

It may surprise you Merv, to find out that the UK has the second lowest debt to GDP ratio in the EU
The only country with less debt is …. wait for it … Germany !!

I'm no 'economist' but I have run businesses most of my working life and understand budgets.

If the UK fails to invest in our system, it can only get worse and much worse.

I don't necessarily advocate raises taxes on middle earners but I do advocate taxing major international companies who currently pay next to nothing.
That alone would raise tens of millions.
It's a scandal that HMRC will happily come after Merv because of an error while allowing Amazon et al to get away with murder.

it's not only the cost of funding pensions but more importantly, funding adequate social care for those who need it.

Square this circle.


My dear old Mum got a horrible disease called Cancer
Her treatment form the NHS was first class and free at the point of delievery. After a few years of excellent care, she passed away.
My dear old Mother in Law got an awful disease called Dementia.
Her treatment from the NHS was non existent.
She eventually had to go into a care home but as she had assets , the family home, a debt was raised against the property until it was sold.
She is now , as they call it , fully funded (by herself) and will be until the money has gone down to the limit allowed.

My wifes Uncle had a massive stroke a year ago next month.
So severe that he has never gone home because of his needs.
Do you think that the NHS picks the bill up for this.
Nope !
Once again, we've had to sell his home to finance his care.


NHS - cradle to grave ???
well, it all depends on what disease you get.

This is a scandal and could be sorted with proper funding.
The money is there, it's just being mis-directed

[Mervyn and Trish]

I agree Barney those iniquities need sorting. My M-I-L too had dementia and had to pay for her own care, while still paying tax on her pension to support others who got it free.

But I don't agree that increasing our debt is the way to solve it.

Just because the bloke next door has a bigger credit card bill than me doesn't mean I want to increase mine!