Brexit Schmexit

[zahidf]

24 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Brexit deal done, part 1.

Which is more progress than just about anyone expected.

It'll be interesting to see what's in the text.

some analysis

 

https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/939030772693872641

 

 

Edited December 8, 2017 by zahidf

[eFestivals]

9 minutes ago, zahidf said:

some analysis

look at what Tusk has just said.

He's basically said that the UK *IS* leaving the SM/CU and that a new deal is available that is SM/CU-lite.

There's of course the details to be worked out on that, but it's a very long way from the hard (hardest) of brexits people like you said May wanted.

And May appears to have sidelined the brexit headbangers.

Despite everything of May's shitness, I'm impressed. She's managed the impossible according to so many.

[eFestivals]

27 minutes ago, Wooderson said:

What a mess, Neil.

Perhaps tell your boss Leo that?

He's been saying Ireland has got everything it wanted (tho he's telling porkies, because he's embarrassed by what he said previously).

[Wooderson]

6 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Perhaps tell your boss Leo that?

He's been saying Ireland has got everything it wanted (tho he's telling porkies, because he's embarrassed by what he said previously).

Good talk, Neil

/fin.

[zahidf]

12 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

look at what Tusk has just said.

He's basically said that the UK *IS* leaving the SM/CU and that a new deal is available that is SM/CU-lite.

There's of course the details to be worked out on that, but it's a very long way from the hard (hardest) of brexits people like you said May wanted.

And May appears to have sidelined the brexit headbangers.

Despite everything of May's shitness, I'm impressed. She's managed the impossible according to so many.

Oh, im glad its out of phase 1. We did capitulate on pretty much everything to the EU though. 

Tusk is being a little bit patronising here as well i thought

 

[eFestivals]

2 minutes ago, Wooderson said:

Good talk, Neil

/fin.

Leo hasn't say it's a good deal?

Despite it being much less than he said was the minimum he'd accept? 

Meanwhile i'd love you to tell me what deal wouldn't have been embarrassing? Would that be a deal where one country does what another tells it too?

How's your tax sovereignty by the way, and your sovereignty over banks, and the tab the EU made YOU pick up for the bankers (while you were saying "our balance of payments is positive") by much more than "evil" tories had people in the UK pick up?

Now those WERE embarrassing.

[eFestivals]

3 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Oh, im glad its out of phase 1. We did capitulate on pretty much everything to the EU though. 

Tusk is being a little bit patronising here as well i thought

1. you're quoting people ho can't read the simplest of words, to get the understanding they say they haven't got. Why not quote someone with a brain?

2. The only "caving" to the EU is promising what the UK had *always* said it wanted.

It's a lesser deal than I'd like, but that doesn't cause me to turn into a lying moron.

[eFestivals]

Starmer says words that again indicate that Labour want out of the SM/CU.

Starmer begrudgingly admits that May has done what he said was impossible.

 

[LJS]

32 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

look at what Tusk has just said.

He's basically said that the UK *IS* leaving the SM/CU and that a new deal is available that is SM/CU-lite.

There's of course the details to be worked out on that, but it's a very long way from the hard (hardest) of brexits people like you said May wanted.

And May appears to have sidelined the brexit headbangers.

Despite everything of May's shitness, I'm impressed. She's managed the impossible according to so many.

Maybe, but there's a lot of detail that's been kicked down the road and it remains to be seen if all sides remain on board once they get down to the nitty gritty.

 

[eFestivals]

2 minutes ago, LJS said:

Maybe, but there's a lot of detail that's been kicked down the road and it remains to be seen if all sides remain on board once they get down to the nitty gritty.

yep, I don't disagree that plenty has been kicked down the road, but it's also the case that some things that weren't clear before have now been made explicit.

One of those is that the EU will accept an "alignment" deal, which previously it had said it wouldn't do.

I'm loving Sturgeon's tweets btw. ... where she's being a bit shy about welcoming May's deal as much better than her own suggestions for a deal for Scotland. Fancy that, eh, that the tories have done better for Scotland than the "for Scotland"-ers.

[LJS]

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

yep, I don't disagree that plenty has been kicked down the road, but it's also the case that some things that weren't clear before have now been made explicit.

One of those is that the EU will accept an "alignment" deal, which previously it had said it wouldn't do.

I'm loving Sturgeon's tweets btw. ... where she's being a bit shy about welcoming May's deal as much better than her own suggestions for a deal for Scotland. Fancy that, eh, that the tories have done better for Scotland than the "for Scotland"-ers.

Ironically it's the bigoted DUP that have secured a better deal for all the UK than would otherwise have been agreed.

Whether it's better for Scotland than the Scottish government proposals is debatable.

[eFestivals]

Just now, LJS said:

Ironically it's the bigoted DUP that have secured a better deal for all the UK than would otherwise have been agreed.

Nope. Today's deal is as-good-as identical to the deal agreed on Monday without the DUPs input, with just a few word changes to keep them happy.

 

Just now, LJS said:

Whether it's better for Scotland than the Scottish government proposals is debatable.

It depends what proposals, of course. I'll happily admit that Sturgeon's first proposal of continued SM/CU was better - *IF* the UK has the same.

Not if it doesn't. That Scotland/England border would be a right shit and you know it, and bumming off 65% of exports to favour 13% is one for the morons.

But her doc from last December? Blown out of the water by May's deal. 

Of course, it's not yet a done deal - but Sturgeon's was no more done, or even known if it were agreeable to the EU; I have suspicions it wouldn't have been, as it was too-much pick & choose.

[eFestivals]

PS: just heard Leo on the radio, talking up the 'backstop' deal of staying in the SM/CU.

Yet of course it's no more of a done deal than anything. It's a deal tied to other deals, where if other deals aren't deals, that's not either.

And all sovereign bodies retain the option of changing its mind at any point, anyway - something which is implicit in all deals.

[russycarps]

so everything stays the same apart from we have no say whatsoever in any decisions. 

Yay!

 

[eFestivals]

19 minutes ago, russycarps said:

so everything stays the same apart from we have no say whatsoever in any decisions. 

Yay!

not actually true. In many ways it's better than a SM/CU deal (if it pans out as suggested in today's agreement, anyway).

BTW, does anyone know where 'passporting' of financial services sits in EU law/regulation/agreements? Is it a part of the SM, or not?

[zahidf]

Basically, no brexit and super hard brexit is off the table. 

 

If brexit has to happen, a soft brexit is the least worse option, which is what that agreement seems to point to.

[KingPin]

26 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

not actually true. In many ways it's better than a SM/CU deal (if it pans out as suggested in today's agreement, anyway).

BTW, does anyone know where 'passporting' of financial services sits in EU law/regulation/agreements? Is it a part of the SM, or not?

Can you explain this please? I've not personally had chance to keep up with what's coming out today due to work.

[eFestivals]

6 minutes ago, zahidf said:

If brexit has to happen, a soft brexit is the least worse option, which is what that agreement seems to point to.

except - perhaps (depends on the deal detail) - a better soft brexit than an SM/CU soft brexit, as the UK gets to write its own 'alignment' laws rather than have them dictated verbatim by the EU. If nothing else, that should make them clearer in their limits than happens currently.

But it's good to see you recognise - finally - that what May had been saying all along was about something far softer than a hard (hardest) brexit, even if it might not be quite as soft as "a soft brexit" with full SM/CU rules.

[zahidf]

2 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

except - perhaps (depends on the deal detail) - a better soft brexit than an SM/CU soft brexit, as the UK gets to write its own 'alignment' laws rather than have them dictated verbatim by the EU. If nothing else, that should make them clearer in their limits than happens currently.

But it's good to see you recognise - finally - that what May had been saying all along was about something far softer than a hard (hardest) brexit, even if it might not be quite as soft as "a soft brexit" with full SM/CU rules.

Well, her rhetoric throughout was more hard brexit than soft...

 

But (depending on the final deal of course) this is closer to a soft brexit.

[russycarps]

34 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

not actually true. In many ways it's better than a SM/CU deal (if it pans out as suggested in today's agreement, anyway).

BTW, does anyone know where 'passporting' of financial services sits in EU law/regulation/agreements? Is it a part of the SM, or not?

Maybe it is better than that, but it's still massively shit compared to not leaving.

Passporting is part of the SM. I am pretty sure the City has accepted there is no chance of retaining it (unless brexit is reversed). There has to be some kind of equivalence agreement negotiated. But that will also be at the mercy of the EU rules, and presumably we'll have no say on them.

We are about to become a passive rule taker, with no say over anything.

 

 

Edited December 8, 2017 by russycarps

[eFestivals]

2 minutes ago, KingPin said:

Can you explain this please? I've not personally had chance to keep up with what's coming out today due to work.

it's of course all subject to a final agreement; I'm working from what the wording of today's agreement and speeches suggest.

The UK will have something different - lesser - to the rules of full SM/CU membership (Tusk or Juncker said as much today), just the rules which only involve keeping the borders as open as now.

An easy example* is the (as they work now) 'free movement' rules. The UK might not have to allow free settlement and working rights, because they're not something with a consequence at the UK's borders.
(the UK is likely to have to 'pay' for this privilege somehow, tho).

So the UK ends up with greater commercial freedoms, and gets to choose its own rules for those (so what new settlement rules are, to try it back to the example above*) - and no matter what you might think of the EU and its rules, I'm sure anyone would prefer (if possible) to have EU rules fit to what the UK (or you) wants rather than sometimes being contrary to what the UK (or you) would like. 

(* I'm not advocating the tightening of immigration rules, btw. It's just a clear example of where 'aligning' with rules for open borders doesn't have to follow every jot of SM/CU rules)

[eFestivals]

10 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Well, her rhetoric throughout was more hard brexit than soft...

Nope, it never was. All of her tough rhetoric was about "we're leaving" and not what leaving would look like. For the looking like, she always talked about a comprehensive trade deal, and not no-deal.

There's some stuff come out recently, of May having been terrified that her as a remainer wouldn't be accepted as someone who'd take the UK out - so I guess that was her addressing that, by talking up the certainty of it happening.

 

10 minutes ago, zahidf said:

But (depending on the final deal of course) this is closer to a soft brexit.

Yep. I've been pointing to May's words and saying it's close to a soft brexit for months.

[KingPin]

6 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

it's of course all subject to a final agreement; I'm working from what the wording of today's agreement and speeches suggest.

The UK will have something different - lesser - to the rules of full SM/CU membership (Tusk or Juncker said as much today), just the rules which only involve keeping the borders as open as now.

An easy example* is the (as they work now) 'free movement' rules. The UK might not have to allow free settlement and working rights, because they're not something with a consequence at the UK's borders.
(the UK is likely to have to 'pay' for this privilege somehow, tho).

So the UK ends up with greater commercial freedoms, and gets to choose its own rules for those (so what new settlement rules are, to try it back to the example above*) - and no matter what you might think of the EU and its rules, I'm sure anyone would prefer (if possible) to have EU rules fit to what the UK (or you) wants rather than sometimes being contrary to what the UK (or you) would like. 

(* I'm not advocating the tightening of immigration rules, btw. It's just a clear example of where 'aligning' with rules for open borders doesn't have to follow every jot of SM/CU rules)

Ah right ok, so it's basically a more fluid flexible version of the SM/CU rules and certain bits can be modified to better suit the UK's needs (as perceived by whatever the government of the time is)?

[eFestivals]

13 minutes ago, russycarps said:

Maybe it is better than that, but it's still massively shit compared to not leaving.

I don't disagree.

But if we're leaving and the tories are the ones in control of making us leave, this sounds like it's heading for about the best result. 

Within that context - and of how opinions are split in so many different directions - I'm pretty happy with it. May seems to have managed the almost-impossible.

 

13 minutes ago, russycarps said:

Passporting is part of the SM. I am pretty sure the City has accepted there is no chance of retaining it (unless brexit is reversed). There has to be some kind of equivalence agreement negotiated. But that will also be at the mercy of the EU rules, and presumably we'll have no say on them.

Personally, I'm quite happy to lose some bankers, if other parts of the economy still have about the same EU ties.

Things aren't going to change while bankers remain such a big part of the economy.

13 minutes ago, russycarps said:

We are about to become a passive rule taker, with no say over anything.

But only for some rules by the look of things. Not as many as the EU would hand down to the UK as things are now.

[eFestivals]

3 minutes ago, KingPin said:

Ah right ok, so it's basically a more fluid flexible version of the SM/CU rules and certain bits can be modified to better suit the UK's needs (as perceived by whatever the government of the time is)?

yep. It's some of the SM/CU rules applying - but not all of them - and the UK gets to write the wording of the rules that do apply (rather than have the EU give us the wording).

Switzerland has an integrated ad-hoc deal. This would be something similar, but with the joined up bits in different places.