Loading Notifications...

The easiest no deal in history.

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.

Deliberately a click bait title.

So many questions regarding how a no deal will lead to further trade deals with other countries.

It's hard to believe Johnson seriously thinks it's a good idea, is it a case of implementing "Brexit purity" before departing the stage to a lucrative speaking gig?

The reaction of his own MPs last week when he accused Starmer of being an IRA sympathiser combined with the blistering response was telling. It didn't look like a man keen to stick it out for 4 more years, details just aren't his forte. 

9
In reply to Kalna_kaza:

It's oven ready mate.

 MonkeyPuzzle 07 Sep 2020
In reply to Alkis:

Oven ready, from the reduced section, been left on the worktop in the heat for too long and it's going to make us all sick.

1
In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

It was Tesco Value to start with, has had several yellow labels stuck on top of each other, purchased just before midnight and *then* left on the worktop for a couple of days.

 Blunderbuss 07 Sep 2020
In reply to Alkis:

> It's oven ready mate.

Looks like he never bothered to buy an oven....

 jkarran 07 Sep 2020
In reply to Kalna_kaza:

> Deliberately a click bait title.

> So many questions regarding how a no deal will lead to further trade deals with other countries.

> It's hard to believe Johnson seriously thinks it's a good idea, is it a case of implementing "Brexit purity" before departing the stage to a lucrative speaking gig?

No point wondering what Johnson thinks about brexit, it's irrelevant. Johnson cares about Johnson, that's all. Which faction will hold power in the aftermath, which donors think what, which way is the wind blowing, what will the history books say? Fu*k absolutely everyone and everything else, this was never rational behaviour for a nation, this is the consequence of and continues on a path driven by unchecked amoral personal ambition being allowed its head.

jk

Post edited at 10:23
3
In reply to jkarran:

> Which faction will hold power in the aftermath, which donors think what, which way is the wind blowing, what will the history books say? 

In the short to medium term the blame game / responsibility pass the parcel will be doing an ever tightening helter-skelter trajectory.

Fast forward to a new Tory leadership contest and more months of confusion whilst a new, less charismatic leader tries to solve internal Conservative party issues rather than decide what is best for the country's international trading relationships. Covid may well take a back seat in the news headlines in the coming months.

1
 Trevers 07 Sep 2020
In reply to Kalna_kaza:

Time to start stockpiling again...

1
 Trevers 07 Sep 2020
In reply to jkarran:

> No point wondering what Johnson thinks about brexit, it's irrelevant. Johnson cares about Johnson, that's all. Which faction will hold power in the aftermath, which donors think what, which way is the wind blowing, what will the history books say? Fu*k absolutely everyone and everything else, this was never rational behaviour for a nation, this is the consequence of and continues on a path driven by unchecked amoral personal ambition being allowed its head.

Something tells me it'll be Gove and Cummings in Number 10 this time next year. Although Cummings will probably have been shifted to a less publicly visible position.

1
In reply to Trevers:

> Although Cummings will probably have been shifted to a less publicly visible position.

Should have gone to Barnard Castle.

1
 jkarran 07 Sep 2020
In reply to Trevers:

A year on from the brexit-covid crash is a long way to look but I suspect they'll leave Johnson to stew in it a couple more years before maybe replacing him. However bad he is for the country (will those red-wall MP's organise, will they act for career or constituents? Open question but history suggests most opt for party loyalty and career in the long run) he did figurehead their most spectacular electoral success in decades, that buys him some leeway especially where nobody really wants to be interim leader, indelibly tainted by Johnson's mess.

jk

1
 mondite 07 Sep 2020
In reply to jkarran:

There is a suggestion some of the red-wall MPs might be suspect in the tory central office view.  Remember reading a comment saying "if we thought we were going to win them we would have been more careful about candidates".

However I would go with them keeping him for a couple of years. That way all the blame can be handed to him for covid/brexit and his replacement has a 1-2 years to set themselves up as a brand new broom nothing to do with the previous one honest guv.

On the flip side after "delivering brexit" he might decide to walk himself. He doesnt seem overly interested in the job he has spent his life trying to get and now he has got an obvious place in the history books might walk away.

Post edited at 11:37
1
 Lankyman 07 Sep 2020
In reply to Kalna_kaza:

> Should have gone to Barnard Castle.


I can't see that happening.

 Trevers 07 Sep 2020
In reply to mondite:

> On the flip side after "delivering brexit" he might decide to walk himself. He doesnt seem overly interested in the job he has spent his life trying to get and now he has got an obvious place in the history books might walk away.

Wish he would walk himself off Beachy Head.

In his defense though, he wasn't lying about the withdrawal agreement being "over ready". Only he neglected to mention that the oven was an incinerator.

Post edited at 11:56
2
 chris_r 07 Sep 2020
In reply to Kalna_kaza:

I think that they'll blame any economic downturn on Covid, not Brexit. It's an excellent get out of jail free card.

In reply to chris_r:

> I think that they'll blame any economic downturn on Covid, not Brexit. It's an excellent get out of jail free card.


You are not wrong. Here's hoping that the media and the opposition will hold them to account on that by stating the facts.

Lol, who am I kidding, that would never happen.

 Cobra_Head 07 Sep 2020
In reply to Kalna_kaza:

"Oven ready" We should have a "Oven Ready" clapping day, like we did for the NHS

Post edited at 12:41
In reply to Kalna_kaza:

Given Boris' new self-imposed deadline for, next month, it's going to be fascinating to see how he explains to the people and Parliament that 4 years of negotiating was for nothing, and having no trade deals with anyone is actually a good thing, and all the rotting food and Irish confusion is all worth it because........

 mondite 07 Sep 2020
In reply to purplemonkeyelephant:

Be a mix of blaming the EU, covid and just claiming that it was always the plan anyway and those comments about great deals were just jokes. The latter option has been fairly successful so far.

 Trevers 07 Sep 2020
In reply to purplemonkeyelephant:

> Given Boris' new self-imposed deadline for, next month, it's going to be fascinating to see how he explains to the people and Parliament that 4 years of negotiating was for nothing, and having no trade deals with anyone is actually a good thing, and all the rotting food and Irish confusion is all worth it because........

... it wound up the lefties/snowflakes?

2
In reply to mondite:

The thing that worries me the most is that a lot of people voted for Brexit for change, because they felt their lives would be improved by it. They then gave BoJo a large majority to deliver on those promises. While it is entirely possible that if he fails he could convince these people that it was not his fault, if he fails to deliver, causes a Thatcher-like jobs apocalypse in those communities *and* fails to convince them that he's not at fault we could end up with actual violent unrest.

3
 jkarran 07 Sep 2020
In reply to purplemonkeyelephant:

> Given Boris' new self-imposed deadline for, next month, it's going to be fascinating to see how he explains to the people and Parliament that 4 years of negotiating was for nothing, and having no trade deals with anyone is actually a good thing, and all the rotting food and Irish confusion is all worth it because........

He won't. He tried his hardest, pulled out all the stops, compromised where we should, stood firm where we must, worked himself and the best brains in Britain half to death all to no avail! All this chaos, your shortages, the inflation, the invading hoards of bedraggled half drowned refugees, the queues and the business failures: all of it warlike punishment of brave Britannia by the old enemy showing her true colours in collaboration with remainer saboteurs within. The border in Ireland not the inevitable result of the UK reneging on our treaty obligations but a brazen attempt to force a border poll and annex Ulster by IRA ultra nationalists hiding in plain sight.

jk

1
 mondite 07 Sep 2020
In reply to Alkis:

>  While it is entirely possible that if he fails he could convince these people that it was not his fault, if he fails to deliver, causes a Thatcher-like jobs apocalypse in those communities *and* fails to convince them that he's not at fault we could end up with actual violent unrest.

I would be far more concerned if he does manage to keep blaming others. Since that could equally bring violent unrest but directed at innocents rather than the guilty.

In reply to jkarran:

I don't know your politics so I'm really hoping you're playing devils advocate.

In reply to Kalna_kaza:

I think there's rather less sh*gging and rather more work than he was hoping for.

He's a pathetic, weak creature who nonetheless has the ability to inflict damage on the UK that could - will - take decades to fix.

1
In reply to jkarran:

There may be a vacancy for you at No 10.

1
 baron 07 Sep 2020
In reply to purplemonkeyelephant:

> I don't know your politics so I'm really hoping you're playing devils advocate.

No, he’s definitely being serious!  

 Timmd 07 Sep 2020
In reply to purplemonkeyelephant: He's being tongue in cheek. 

1
In reply to Timmd:

I wonder how many Brexit voters are worried this latest episode is damaging their idea of a string of trade deals with many different countries, yet feel outnumbered by the likes of Brexit voters who are of the "crush the traitors, the EU are evil" school of thought? 

Some of the comments on the Daily Mail website constantly defy logic: "playing hard ball with the EU will show other countries we mean business" and "they can keep their trade deal, we'll keep the fish"(both paraphrased). Sigh.

 Andy Hardy 07 Sep 2020
In reply to Blunderbuss:

> Looks like he never bothered to buy an oven....


He doesn't really do details, he got confused and checked out fridges instead. I doubt he's bothered to acquaint himself since then with how his food gets hot before it's delivered to his capacious maw.

 Eric9Points 07 Sep 2020
In reply to Kalna_kaza:

I am hoping this is a negotiating tactic.

In order to be taken seriously you really need to behave like you will do what you say you'll do. That means putting legislation in place to facilitate Leaving the EU without a trade agreement.

Post edited at 16:07
 Trevers 07 Sep 2020
In reply to Alkis:

> The thing that worries me the most is that a lot of people voted for Brexit for change, because they felt their lives would be improved by it. They then gave BoJo a large majority to deliver on those promises. While it is entirely possible that if he fails he could convince these people that it was not his fault, if he fails to deliver, causes a Thatcher-like jobs apocalypse in those communities *and* fails to convince them that he's not at fault we could end up with actual violent unrest.

I am morbidly curious to see how far people will be pushed before they bite back. I suspect that the English are especially susceptible to falling under an authoritarian regime because we're such a meek people and don't like to make a fuss. Furthermore, I think a lot of people find it very difficult to admit they voted mistakenly. But just to be on the safe side, it's useful for the government to whip up a culture war so that people are aware that their real enemies are experts, Remainers, liberals, lefties and foreigners.

A personal anecdote here: My father is a long-time Tory voter and Telegraph leader, although he voted remain at the referendum. As late as last summer, he seemed to agree that Johnson was a tosser and joined me on anti-Brexit marches. I've regularly tried to engage him in political discussion, which has often been frustrating for me. However his attitude has changed starkly over the last year. For starters, I couldn't convince him to vote for anyone other than the Tory candidate at the last election, despite the fact that he lived in David Gauke's constituency and therefore had a perfect alternative who was not likely to prop up a Corbyn government.

More recently in discussions about COVID-19, he's appeared worringly incapable of accepting any criticism against Johnson or his government, immediately casting blame elsewhere however nonsensical it might be. Recently I pushed the issue further and tried to actually engage him about my worries and concerns, and I really wish I hadn't. Pushed on ministerial incompetence and the lack of accountability, he replied that he thinks it's good that civil servants take the fall because they're the ones responsible. Asked about government corruption (Jenrick being the obvious example), he said that there is always corruption and it's in both parties. Pressed on the government's response to COVID, he said that it's a difficult problem to deal with. On Johnson's character as an individual and evidence of his utter untrustworthiness, well all politicians are liars, and the rest he knew nothing about and wasn't going to trouble himself to find out. On the crass irresponsibility of a no-deal Brexit, he wasn't interested.

I have no problem with political disagreement, but this was something I hadn't seen before: implicit trust in the integrity and decency of government, almost devotion to Boris Johnson. The arguments and justifications were laughably weak and did not stand up to basic scrutiny, and were clearly not the product of rational thought, but there was no space for objectivity or reason. What I saw was some sort of cognitive dissonance, a complete unwillingness or inability to even consider any criticism of Johnson. It was deeply disturbing to say the least.

Post edited at 16:45
5
 wercat 07 Sep 2020
In reply to Trevers:

We can look forward to buying in to feed ourselves next year on WTO terms to replace the lost wheat production of a bad harvest this year.

Boris:  "Have they no Bread.  Then let them eat cake .."

it will definitely only be the less well off who will suffer.

https://watchers.news/2020/08/27/uk-bread-price-worst-wheat-harvest-40-years/

Floods, Famine, Plague - what better to add to these in this best of all possible worlds is Brexit performed by this best possible of governments

ps, let me know when the guns and ammunition are to be handed out, mine's an SLR

Post edited at 17:20
2
 Trevers 07 Sep 2020
In reply to purplemonkeyelephant:

Interestingly we share many other opinions on things - notably, he agrees that Trump is an evil stain on humanity and a threat to American democracy. He's also not a culture war victim, he's not foaming at the mouth over desperate refugees or immigrants, and he couldn't give a hoot about the lyrics of Rule Britannia. He's absolutely not a bad person.

In reply to Trevers:

Your post reminded me of this video. It shows the dark powers of the right wing media and how there can be hope once someone is unplugged.

In reply to mondite:

> There is a suggestion some of the red-wall MPs might be suspect in the tory central office view.  Remember reading a comment saying "if we thought we were going to win them we would have been more careful about candidates".

My thoughts exactly. It would seem that most of 'em are no-hopers who were put up for a showing. There is a real paucity of actual talent. The worry about calibre of candidates should apply to the rest of the Tory shower of course.

Post edited at 17:42
1
 baron 07 Sep 2020
In reply to Trevers:

> I am morbidly curious to see how far people will be pushed before they bite back. I suspect that the English are especially susceptible to falling under an authoritarian regime because we're such a meek people and don't like to make a fuss. Furthermore, I think a lot of people find it very difficult to admit they voted mistakenly. But just to be on the safe side, it's useful for the government to whip up a culture war so that people are aware that their real enemies are experts, Remainers, liberals, lefties and foreigners.

> A personal anecdote here: My father is a long-time Tory voter and Telegraph leader, although he voted remain at the referendum. As late as last summer, he seemed to agree that Johnson was a tosser and joined me on anti-Brexit marches. I've regularly tried to engage him in political discussion, which has often been frustrating for me. However his attitude has changed starkly over the last year. For starters, I couldn't convince him to vote for anyone other than the Tory candidate at the last election, despite the fact that he lived in David Gauke's constituency and therefore had a perfect alternative who was not likely to prop up a Corbyn government.

> More recently in discussions about COVID-19, he's appeared worringly incapable of accepting any criticism against Johnson or his government, immediately casting blame elsewhere however nonsensical it might be. Recently I pushed the issue further and tried to actually engage him about my worries and concerns, and I really wish I hadn't. Pushed on ministerial incompetence and the lack of accountability, he replied that he thinks it's good that civil servants take the fall because they're the ones responsible. Asked about government corruption (Jenrick being the obvious example), he said that there is always corruption and it's in both parties. Pressed on the government's response to COVID, he said that it's a difficult problem to deal with. On Johnson's character as an individual and evidence of his utter untrustworthiness, well all politicians are liars, and the rest he knew nothing about and wasn't going to trouble himself to find out. On the crass irresponsibility of a no-deal Brexit, he wasn't interested.

> I have no problem with political disagreement, but this was something I hadn't seen before: implicit trust in the integrity and decency of government, almost devotion to Boris Johnson. The arguments and justifications were laughably weak and did not stand up to basic scrutiny, and were clearly not the product of rational thought, but there was no space for objectivity or reason. What I saw was some sort of cognitive dissonance, a complete unwillingness or inability to even consider any criticism of Johnson. It was deeply disturbing to say the least.

It’s a good job that you know better than your dad.

15
In reply to baron:

I'm amazed that someone's given you a like for that exceptionally nebulous comment. I'd love to know what you're getting at.

1
 Trevers 07 Sep 2020
In reply to baron:

> It’s a good job that you know better than your dad.

Did you actually read what I wrote, about precisely why I found the conversation disturbing?

1
 baron 07 Sep 2020
In reply to Trevers:

> Did you actually read what I wrote, about precisely why I found the conversation disturbing?

Yes, I did.

Should I not have agreed with you?

8
 baron 07 Sep 2020
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

> I'm amazed that someone's given you a like for that exceptionally nebulous comment. I'd love to know what you're getting at.

What’s nebulous about what I wrote.

I thought it was very obvious what I meant.

1
 MonkeyPuzzle 07 Sep 2020
In reply to Kalna_kaza:

The quick YouGov poll just done on this might give the Tories pause for thought. The unpopularity of No Deal effectively reunites divided Labour and former Labour voters but divides the Tories much more starkly. It might give them pause if Johnson cares about anything other than delivering Brexit in the easiest way possible that is.

 Trevers 07 Sep 2020
In reply to baron:

> Yes, I did.

> Should I not have agreed with you?

I wrote:

> "I have no problem with political disagreement... What I saw was some sort of cognitive dissonance, a complete unwillingness or inability to even consider any criticism of Johnson. It was deeply disturbing to say the least."

You absolutely should agree that criticism of our political leader should be countenanced.

Post edited at 18:31
1
 baron 07 Sep 2020
In reply to Trevers:

> I wrote:

> You absolutely should agree that criticism of our political leader should be countenanced.

Johnson is a buffoon.

As I’ve stated on this forum numerous times.

I wrote that it’s a good job that you know better than your dad.

If that’s not supporting what you wrote then I don’t know what is.

9
 Trevers 07 Sep 2020
In reply to baron:

> Johnson is a buffoon.

> As I’ve stated on this forum numerous times.

> I wrote that it’s a good job that you know better than your dad.

> If that’s not supporting what you wrote then I don’t know what is.

Then you have my apologies, although I would say that it's not about "knowing" but about questioning, including oneself. I thought it was intended sarcastically to imply that I might be the brainwashed one. It's not always easy to know on the internet and sometimes things should just be read at face value

Post edited at 18:43
1
 baron 07 Sep 2020
In reply to Trevers:

> If that's what you intended then you have my apologies, although I would say that it's not about "knowing" but about questioning, including oneself. I thought it was intended sarcastically to imply that I might be the brainwashed one. It's not always easy to know on the internet and sometimes things should just be read at face value

I can see how my post could have been taken as being sarcastic.

1
In reply to baron:

A sinner repents!

1
 baron 07 Sep 2020
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

> A sinner repents!

😀

1
In reply to baron:

That was exactly the problem with it. Because it read immediately as 'It's a good job that you think you know better than your dad.' Taken straight it's very odd indeed, because who's to say he knew better than his dad? I still don't entirely trust your apology, frankly. 

4
 baron 07 Sep 2020
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

> That was exactly the problem with it. Because it read immediately as 'It's a good job that you think you know better than your dad.' Taken straight it's very odd indeed, because who's to say he knew better than his dad? I still don't entirely trust your apology, frankly. 

That’s your choice. 

2
In reply to baron:

Sure, but you expressed yourself either oddly or ambiguously, depending on which way you look at it.

1
 baron 07 Sep 2020
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

> Sure, but you expressed yourself either oddly or ambiguously, depending on which way you look at it.

My post wasn’t odd or ambiguous.

It could have been sarcastic but it wasn’t.

7
 munkins 07 Sep 2020
In reply to Kalna_kaza:

> Deliberately a click bait title.

> So many questions regarding how a no deal will lead to further trade deals with other countries.

It's a very tricky balancing act, if the UK is successful it could lead to a much diminished EU if other countries follow suit. The UK has left with the intent to gain a competitive advantage over the EU, the EU needs the UK to fail. Maybe a deal was never possible. I doubt it'll be until late November, possibly early December until we know what's really going on atm.

5
In reply to Blunderbuss:

But he has left lots of buns in the oven

 john arran 07 Sep 2020
In reply to munkins:

> It's a very tricky balancing act, if the UK is successful it could lead to a much diminished EU if other countries follow suit.

Is there any justification whatsoever for believing that this could be a likely or even a vaguely credible outcome? Certainly I've never heard any.

1
 wbo2 07 Sep 2020
In reply to munkins: despite what you read in the telegraph every 3rd day there is no evidence of the EU falling to pieces. Sorry. 

To Eric9points - there's a rumour its a negotiation tactic, but with the extreme end of the Tory party,  before capitulation.   Maybe , hmm.

But remember no deal is better than a bad deal is also the EU position, especially as this proves England cannot be trusted.   So they are prepared to walk away.  Brevity is 3rd place on the priority list now. Tough man positions don't often work in negotiations 

 munkins 07 Sep 2020
In reply to john arran:

> Is there any justification whatsoever for believing that this could be a likely or even a vaguely credible outcome? Certainly I've never heard any.

I believe quite a lot of people have expressed reasons why the UK might be better out of the EU. Our exit seems unavoidable now, I hope they are right. 

1
 munkins 07 Sep 2020
In reply to wbo2:

> despite what you read in the telegraph every 3rd day there is no evidence of the EU falling to pieces. Sorry. 

Actually I read the Guardian. I'll soon stop though if they expect me to pay them anything. Interesting poll

https://www.euronews.com/2020/08/10/nearly-half-of-italians-would-support-leaving-the-eu-if-brexit-is-successful-according-to

 HansStuttgart 07 Sep 2020
In reply to munkins:

> Actually I read the Guardian. I'll soon stop though if they expect me to pay them anything. Interesting poll

the relevant poll would be whether the Italians think brexit is succesfull... I doubt that one.

1
In reply to john arran:

I think the EU will withstand whatever damage Brexit does or does not inflict on it however it's long term survival depends on how integrated it tries to become.

There are already known public disagreements between Northern and Southern States and the possibility of entrenched collective debt. Kept as a relatively loose relationship it'll thrive but trying to straightjacket all states into the "ever stronger union" will probably end in fragmentation or even dissolution.

 Tyler 07 Sep 2020
In reply to Eric9Points:

> In order to be taken seriously you really need to behave like you will do what you say you'll do. That means putting legislation in place to facilitate Leaving the EU without a trade agreement.

If you want to be taken seriously you need the other side to believe you are negotiating in good faith. What's being reported is that the new legislation will unilaterally countermand the WA, if the EU believe it then negotiations are off, I guess it gives Johnson the chance to blame the EU if he can force them to walk away first.

If a deal is salvaged from all the this* then it will simply be the EU giving up their claims on fishing as in, monetary terms, it's worth f*ck all but is emblematic for 'patriots'. In return the UK will cave on everything else.

*I've not mentioned the lunacy that's being mooted about the govt forcing the city not to allow EU firms access to London capital markets, even I  don't think this govt is that dumb

 Blunderbuss 07 Sep 2020
In reply to munkins:

> I believe quite a lot of people have expressed reasons why the UK might be better out of the EU. Our exit seems unavoidable now, I hope they are right. 

😂

 Tyler 07 Sep 2020
In reply to munkins:

> I believe quite a lot of people have expressed reasons why the UK might be better out of the EU.

Not from an economic standpoint, they've all been emotional arguments about sovereignty (again mostly based on a false premise). There were some economic arguments made early doors but none of them survived first impact with the negotiations.

> Our exit seems unavoidable now, I hope they are right. 

You do know we've already exited don't you? We've now moved on to the next phase, the easy deal with the EU and new deals with the rest of the world

Post edited at 21:15
In reply to mondite:

> and now he has got an obvious place in the history books might walk away.

I don't think that place will be the one he hoped for...

 john arran 07 Sep 2020
In reply to munkins:

> I believe quite a lot of people have expressed reasons why the UK might be better out of the EU. Our exit seems unavoidable now, I hope they are right. 

I presume you must have missed the word "credible" in my statement.

 munkins 07 Sep 2020
In reply to john arran:

> I presume you must have missed the word "credible" in my statement.

What do you mean by credible?

 Ian W 07 Sep 2020
In reply to Tyler:

> Not from an economic standpoint, they've all been emotional arguments about sovereignty (again mostly based on a false premise). There were some economic arguments made early doors but none of them survived first impact with reality.

FTFY

In reply to Kalna_kaza:

November 2019: Boris Johnson reveals that every Conservative parliamentary candidate has personally pledged to vote his Brexit deal through the House of Commons.

September 2020: Deal never made sense.

Worse situation this country has been in for decades and we have a PM who basically pulls the playground stunt 'I had my fingers crossed behind my back'.

Post edited at 11:08
In reply to Mike Stretford:

'Worse situation this country has been in for decades.' Since WW II I'd say - and at least that one wasn't self generated, unlike this one.

1
 wbo2 08 Sep 2020
In reply to munkins: That's a pretty big jump in support compared to other polls, but as Hans infers, it all depends on the wording of the questions.  Italian desire to exit is normally about 20% as I recall.  Note that the poll coincides with the birth of an Italexit party.....

 Graeme G 08 Sep 2020
In reply to HansStuttgart:

> the relevant poll would be whether the Italians think brexit is succesfull... I doubt that one.

Should also probably include the question as to whether the UK even exists as a state let alone be in a good one.

 jkarran 08 Sep 2020
In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

> The quick YouGov poll just done on this might give the Tories pause for thought. The unpopularity of No Deal effectively reunites divided Labour and former Labour voters but divides the Tories much more starkly. It might give them pause if Johnson cares about anything other than delivering Brexit in the easiest way possible that is.

So long as he can keep the tory press on side (and let's face it the press is in this upto their necks) he's got 4 years and a pandemic with which he can re-write history before he could be held accountable. Whatever the polls say it's the donors and press barons not the voters or even the Johnson who'll decide which way brexit goes.

jk

 HardenClimber 08 Sep 2020
In reply to Alkis:

> ...... a lot of people voted for Brexit for change, because they felt their lives would be improved by it. They then gave BoJo a large majority to deliver on those promises. ......

Strictly, our electoral system gave BoJo a large majority....

(the thing that still depresses me is how electoral reform was thrown out by such a decisive majority in the referendum....in part due to an unholy alliance of right wing cynics and left wing idealists. I think with a single transferable vote system (yes I know it is flawed, but still better than our present lottery) would have led to a very different decade...)

 jkarran 08 Sep 2020
In reply to munkins:

> It's a very tricky balancing act, if the UK is successful it could lead to a much diminished EU if other countries follow suit.

This is fantasy, nobody is following us off the gangplank, they're recoiling in horror at our self destruction.

> The UK has left with the intent to gain a competitive advantage over the EU, the EU needs the UK to fail.

This is the lie we're told. The UK left the EU by accident in a move designed to quell a rebellios underbelly of nostalgic, nationalistic and imbecilic MPs. We've left and it's practically irreversible but have nowhere to go, we never did, it was never a fully formed idea.

The very last thing the EU wants is a big, belligerent and aggrieved failed state on its border in thrall to its own new 'Versailles' narrative. Britain is not to gain any advantage by leaving, that is certain but it isn't to fail either unless that cannot be prevented without conceding advantage to the UK which simply won't happen. The peace and prosperity the EU has brought Europe is ultimately worth the trouble.

> Maybe a deal was never possible. I doubt it'll be until late November, possibly early December until we know what's really going on atm.

Compromise has deliberately been made very very difficult by those seeking to increase their power in a diminished UK.

jk

Post edited at 12:20
 munkins 08 Sep 2020
In reply to HansStuttgart:

> the relevant poll would be whether the Italians think brexit is succesfull... I doubt that one.

Look at it from the EU's perspective. If UK leaves the EU with a Canadian style free trade agreement it has mostly zero tariffs on goods. However the UK would be out of the customs union, no ECJ, no EU authority over our regulations. 

So if a big company, say automotive, wanted to set up shop in the EU the UK could woo them with lower taxes and regulation, yet the company could still sell cars in Europe tariff free. The UK would only have the UK automotive industry to balance the deal with and not the EU wide industry.

If the UK doesn't leave the EU with the ability to set its own regulation and make trade deals then (from a leavers perspective) the whole thing is pointless. If the price of the UK getting a deal  that prevents us from doing that with the level playing field and ECJ rule is it even worth doing?

Boris and the Brexiteers are saying it is not worth it so we will leave on WTO. The same situation as above could arise however without the allure of tariff free trade we would need to offer lower taxes and less regulation, the slide to the bottom as many see it. 

The brexiteers see the slide to the bottom as a way to achieve low unemployment, growth and a high GDP. It what they set out to do from day one, so to them a free trade deal with the EU is a bonus but not necessary.

So what does the EU do? Offer the Canada deal and you're shooting yourself in the foot, no deal and your shooting yourself in the foot. Just a case of choosing the gun. Meanwhile the brexiteers smirk and leer at the EU with a double barrel shotgun pointed at both feet and a bionic leg design drawn on a fag packet.

 Graeme G 08 Sep 2020
In reply to munkins:

You’re still talking as if the UK will still exist. The situation is far more complex than just UK vs EU.

2
In reply to jkarran:

> So long as he can keep the tory press on side (and let's face it the press is in this upto their necks) he's got 4 years and a pandemic with which he can re-write history before he could be held accountable. 

He's certainly rewriting something when his NI Minister is admitting that they are deliberately breaking the law.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54073836

 mondite 08 Sep 2020
In reply to Dave Garnett:

> He's certainly rewriting something when his NI Minister is admitting that they are deliberately breaking the law.


Ah but only in a limited and specific way. I wonder if any defence lawyers in charge of a hopeless case might say sod it and try the same line "well yes he did kill that person but it was only one person".

 Doug 08 Sep 2020
In reply to Dave Garnett:

seems as if the head of the gouvernment's legal unit has resigned as he considers this a step too far - https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/sep/08/uks-top-legal-civil-servant-quits-over-brexit-deal-changes-jonathan-jones

meanwhile other Tory MPs are arguing that the withdrawal agreement should be torn up.

 Trevers 08 Sep 2020
In reply to Doug:

> meanwhile other Tory MPs are arguing that the withdrawal agreement should be torn up.

You mean the ones who voted for it?

 Doug 08 Sep 2020
 Ian W 08 Sep 2020
In reply to mondite:

> Ah but only in a limited and specific way. I wonder if any defence lawyers in charge of a hopeless case might say sod it and try the same line "well yes he did kill that person but it was only one person".

They do try that type of thing; a case up here where a young driver was accused (and found guilty) of causing death by dangerous driving had the defence saying she shouldnt get a severe sentence as the only person killed was a single man with no kids. As in "its not as if he had a family or anything".

 jkarran 08 Sep 2020
In reply to Graeme G:

> You’re still talking as if the UK will still exist. The situation is far more complex than just UK vs EU.

It's hard to see the UK disintegrating (formally) under this government without significant new 'troubles'. I think likely it's still legally intact come GE2024, then who knows, depends what's on offer against what backdrop.

jk

 Graeme G 08 Sep 2020
In reply to jkarran:

> It's hard to see the UK disintegrating (formally) under this government without significant new 'troubles'. I think likely it's still legally intact come GE2024, then who knows, depends what's on offer against what backdrop.

> jk

You obviously don’t live in Scotland. I could very much see the UK finished well before then. Yes, it may still exist ‘formally’ but if Scotland gets its vote on independence that will significantly weaken the UKs negotiating position across the globe. IMO.

 Eric9Points 08 Sep 2020
In reply to Graeme G:

There isn't going to be another referendum regardless of the hype. The government behave already ruled it out and it doesn't matter what Holyrood says.

That's the reality whether you like it or not.

5
 jkarran 08 Sep 2020
In reply to Graeme G:

> You obviously don’t live in Scotland. I could very much see the UK finished well before then. Yes, it may still exist ‘formally’ but if Scotland gets its vote on independence that will significantly weaken the UKs negotiating position across the globe. IMO.

I don't doubt the Union is in real jeopardy, I just don't think it will be formally dissolved under this government and we're lumbered with this government four more long years. I fear that situation could lead us back toward civil unrest in NI or even in Scotland.

To be honest I can't see Scotland voting again before 2024, I don't think the SNP will risk blowing their opportunity by winning a non binding Out vote and I don't see them having sufficient leverage in Westminster this term to force one. I could well be wrong.

jk

 Graeme G 08 Sep 2020
In reply to Eric9Points:

> There isn't going to be another referendum regardless of the hype. The government behave already ruled it out and it doesn't matter what Holyrood says.

> That's the reality whether you like it or not.

Did you mean to come across so aggressively?

1
 Graeme G 08 Sep 2020
In reply to jkarran:

> I could well be wrong.

As could I. Time will tell.

 wercat 08 Sep 2020
In reply to Mike Stretford:

as we have a lawless government I don't know how far back you'd have to go in history?

back to Droit de Seigneur perhaps?  Or Dissolution of the Monasteries?

But arguably the Tudors knew more about government

Post edited at 17:01
 wercat 08 Sep 2020
In reply to Doug:

Good Riddance to someone who does not fit in with our unelected hidden dictator's plans?  Another enemy of the people gone?

1
 HansStuttgart 08 Sep 2020
In reply to munkins:

> Look at it from the EU's perspective. If UK leaves the EU with a Canadian style free trade agreement it has mostly zero tariffs on goods. However the UK would be out of the customs union, no ECJ, no EU authority over our regulations. 

Which is why the EU offers an FTA with strings attached.

> So if a big company, say automotive, wanted to set up shop in the EU the UK could woo them with lower taxes and regulation, yet the company could still sell cars in Europe tariff free. The UK would only have the UK automotive industry to balance the deal with and not the EU wide industry.

Yes, there are possibilities, but at a cost of all the small businesses whose economic position gets worse. (And as I am not on the left, I don't support this level of state control over the economy).

> If the UK doesn't leave the EU with the ability to set its own regulation and make trade deals then (from a leavers perspective) the whole thing is pointless. If the price of the UK getting a deal  that prevents us from doing that with the level playing field and ECJ rule is it even worth doing?

agreed, but this is only the perspective of a small fraction of the leavers. there are plenty who want to stop freedom of movement and don't care about the trade stuff.

> Boris and the Brexiteers are saying it is not worth it so we will leave on WTO. The same situation as above could arise however without the allure of tariff free trade we would need to offer lower taxes and less regulation, the slide to the bottom as many see it. 

> The brexiteers see the slide to the bottom as a way to achieve low unemployment, growth and a high GDP. It what they set out to do from day one, so to them a free trade deal with the EU is a bonus but not necessary.

> So what does the EU do? Offer the Canada deal and you're shooting yourself in the foot, no deal and your shooting yourself in the foot. Just a case of choosing the gun.

EU offers Canada but with strings attached. Force the UK to either acknowledge the hegemony of the EU when it comes to trade regulation and control in Europe or go for no deal.

> Meanwhile the brexiteers smirk and leer at the EU with a double barrel shotgun pointed at both feet and a bionic leg design drawn on a fag packet.

This is the point that a madman strategy always look good from the point of view of the madman, because he does not have to take consequences into account.

This FTA or no deal scenario is not such a big deal anyway, especially from an EU point of view. The big one was the decision to leave the single market. That will change a lot of the trade pattern between EU and UK. I think the EU will try to use single market rules to get/enlarge its slice from UK's financial services/biomedical technology and entertainment industries. I don't think cars are that high up the list.

The value of the tariffs is overestimated. Most high-value goods are sold in combination with services. And control over regulations (single market) is more effective at preventing competition from the outside than raising tariffs. (This is why all the FTA talk is about fish and agriculture tariffs, a very small section of the economy.)

 munkins 09 Sep 2020
In reply to HansStuttgart:

only the perspective of a small fraction of the leavers. there are plenty who want to stop freedom of movement and don't care about the trade stuff.

If you're talking about leave voters then I agree entirely, sovereignty and immigration won the vote. However if you focus in on what Rees-Mogg and Baker say (the spokesmen for the ERG as I see it) then I can honestly say I don't think these guys care about immigration. They say we need controlled immigration but I think their actually goal has little to do with it. The ERG are pretty much running the show as all the moderates got booted out and the Tories filled their ranks with brexiteers. My point being that the average leaver no longer has a horse in the race and the ERG are going all out for the low regulation, low tax economy they crave.

> EU offers Canada but with strings attached. Force the UK to either acknowledge the hegemony of the EU when it comes to trade regulation and control in Europe or go for no deal.

Not Canada then! That's their point, give us what you gave Canada and we're good to go.

> This FTA or no deal scenario is not such a big deal anyway, especially from. The big one was the decision to leave the single market. That will change a lot of the trade pattern between EU and UK. I think the EU will try to use single market rules to get/enlarge its slice from UK's financial services/biomedical technology and entertainment industries. I don't think cars are that high up the list.

> The value of the tariffs is overestimated. Most high-value goods are sold in combination with services. And control over regulations (single market) is more effective at preventing competition from the outside than raising tariffs. (This is why all the FTA talk is about fish and agriculture tariffs, a very small section of the economy.)

Yes I think you're right and a no deal may well be inevitable, I'm going to wait until late December until I give up hope for a better solution.  

 HansStuttgart 09 Sep 2020
In reply to munkins:

> If you're talking about leave voters then I agree entirely, sovereignty and immigration won the vote. However if you focus in on what Rees-Mogg and Baker say (the spokesmen for the ERG as I see it) then I can honestly say I don't think these guys care about immigration. They say we need controlled immigration but I think their actually goal has little to do with it. The ERG are pretty much running the show as all the moderates got booted out and the Tories filled their ranks with brexiteers. My point being that the average leaver no longer has a horse in the race and the ERG are going all out for the low regulation, low tax economy they crave

Good point. I am not 100% convinced the ERG wants a low regulation, low tax economy as their prime goal. And they can also still just be stupid as opposed to devious. But I do respect their political tactics. It is quite genius. On a pure how to maximize your power/influence they are doing everything right.

> Not Canada then! That's their point, give us what you gave Canada and we're good to go.

This is the UK gov spin, in reality they are asking for a lot more than Canada in the negotiations. (Still there is also a point that the EU would never give the UK what it gave to Canada...)

> Yes I think you're right and a no deal may well be inevitable, I'm going to wait until late December until I give up hope for a better solution.  

Sorry to be pessimistic but I gave up hope for a good solution when most of Britain voted for parties promising to take the UK out of the single market in order to get rid of freedom of movement in the 2017 GE.

 Alyson30 09 Sep 2020
In reply to HansStuttgart:

> Good point. I am not 100% convinced the ERG wants a low regulation, low tax economy as their prime goal.

Certainly not. So far all they have been pushing for is far more state interventionism in the economy, far less free market, and far more power to the state.
It is quite interesting to see a party that venerates Thatcher continue to do so whilst at the same time reneging her entire legacy and espousing stalinist policies. The conservatives aren't' conservatives anymore they are radical anti-liberal. Surely everybody should have noticed by now.

Post edited at 21:58
In reply to munkins:

> Not Canada then! That's their point, give us what you gave Canada and we're good to go.

I think there’s a ‘most favoured nation’ provision in the trade agreement with Canada.  The EU may not be able to give UK the same deal, and certainly can’t give us a better one (Canada+) without offering the same to Canada.

At least, not without breaking an international treaty in at least a very specific and limited way.  So, perhaps there isn’t a problem after all!

 munkins 09 Sep 2020
In reply to HansStuttgart:

> Sorry to be pessimistic but I gave up hope for a good solution when most of Britain voted for parties promising to take the UK out of the single market in order to get rid of freedom of movement in the 2017 GE.

I too thought that a sensible trade off, ruled out from day one.

 munkins 09 Sep 2020
In reply to Dave Garnett:

> I think there’s a ‘most favoured nation’ provision in the trade agreement with Canada.  The EU may not be able to give UK the same deal, and certainly can’t give us a better one (Canada+) without offering the same to Canada.

> At least, not without breaking an international treaty in at least a very specific and limited way.  So, perhaps there isn’t a problem after all!

When the UK was negotiating under May did they not offer the UK a so called Canada deal? I thought that was one of they options they proposed, although my memory isn't great...

In reply to Kalna_kaza:

Did you see Bojo's press conference last night..... 'moonshot'?!?

He really is Trump tribute act. Question is, if the real thing is finished, what happens to the tribute act?

Post edited at 11:12
In reply to Mike Stretford:

It sounds ambitious with a large number of unknowns with "the technology does not exist yet" being the biggest hurdle.

I'm certainly not qualified to accurately judge if it's a goer or not but £100bn is an absolutely enormous sum of money to invest on a gamble, a similar cost to HS2 or running the UK nuclear deterrent for 30 years.

If that money was invested in medical care then it would definitely have a positive measurable impact.

Post edited at 11:23
In reply to Kalna_kaza:

> It sounds ambitious with a large number of unknowns with "the technology does not exist yet" being the biggest hurdle.

> I'm certainly not qualified to accurately judge if it's a goer or not but £100bn is an absolutely enormous sum of money to invest on a gamble, a similar cost to HS2 or running the UK nuclear deterrent for 30 years.

Sure, but even if they're going to do it, last nights press conference should have been all about 'rule of 6', nothing else, no false hopes that may encourage some to let their guard down.... not putting the scientists either side of him in a position where they have to correct him before making their points.

In reply to Mike Stretford:

Very true, his lack of attention to detail is criminally negligence as far as I'm concerned. If I were as clumsy as that in my job I would be sacked and most likely end up in court. 

In reply to Kalna_kaza:

> If I were as clumsy as that in my job I would be sacked and most likely end up in court. 

That's the thing when you are BoJo, when you are clumsy other people get sacked and end up in court.

Post edited at 11:34
 DerwentDiluted 10 Sep 2020
In reply to Mike Stretford:

> Sure, but even if they're going to do it, last nights press conference should have been all about 'rule of 6', 

Or if you are Cummings, 'rule of A66'.

In reply to Kalna_kaza:

Nice linearity to todays Pound Euro slide. Wonder where it will settle?

https://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=GBP&to=EUR&view=1D


In reply to Mike Stretford:

Back into the sea so we can all have a rousing rendition of RULE BRITANNIA after exchanging many £££s for an espresso whilst visiting Johnny foreigner. (I obviously have no idea, but I'm sure the Daily Express will claim it's a good thing, some how...)

1
 john arran 10 Sep 2020
In reply to Mike Stretford:

A foretaste of the likely change in currency value of a country that cannot be trusted to honour its international legal obligations?

1
 Mike505 10 Sep 2020
In reply to Kalna_kaza:

Yea, I use to (still do) think Dail Mail headlines were ridiculous and a little scary, but the Express seems to have had a 'hold my beer moment'

In reply to john arran:

> A foretaste of the likely change in currency value of a country that cannot be trusted to honour its international legal obligations?

Yup. I think currency traders thought they had priced in the worst case scenario for the UK already. But no............the incompetence of this government defies conventional wisdom!

 john arran 10 Sep 2020
In reply to Mike Stretford:

The cynic in me wouldn't be at all surprised if some of this posturing about reneging on international commitments hasn't been orchestrated precisely to achieve such a currency drop. Would be good to know which of the main players in government have close ties to whoever has been betting on currency movement. It's by far the most plausible explanation for it I can think of.

1

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.