** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

[pete75]

Why the Backstop is unfair and the hard supporters of brexit are right in resisting it

Unlike the GFA where every one stood to gain, the end of violence, the backstop is different.

The UK derives few benefits, other than the GFA, from remaining in the backstop and in fact it damages the UKs long term interests and life outside the EU.

On the other hand it meets the requirements of the EU perfectly - meeting the demands of the GFA and also protecting the single market dogma

Thus any alternative to the backstop has to be ATLEAST as good ie perfect in the EU's view It has no incentive to accept any soln worse than it

The EU may thus be inclined to set an impossibly high bar to agree to end it - that is the growing realisation in the supporters of brexit camps? A valid worry.

What we need is a soln that is in the interests of all partys to remove asap? The "Backstop" is not that. ( Goodness knows why Mrs May agreed to it)

Brexit itself is far more damaging than anything else to the UK's long term interests. Complaining about the backstop when Brexit is ongoing is like complaining about a splinter in your left hand while your right hand is being chopped off.

[bovlomov]

Brexit itself is far more damaging than anything else to the UK's long term interests. Complaining about the backstop when Brexit is ongoing is like complaining about a splinter in your left hand while your right hand is being chopped off.

Yes, and why are unionists complaining about the backstop when their preferred style of Brexit is going to hasten the demise of the union they claim to love?

[pete75]

Wonderful post Brexit trade deals?
From the FT.
https://www.ft.com/content/5ce60af2-2b9 ... 8ef2b976c7

"Tokyo is confident that it can secure better terms from the UK than it did in negotiations with the much larger EU, and is not willing to duplicate the existing treaty precisely in either a bilateral deal or in talks for the UK to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership group. "

"This week, Britain’s Department for International Trade briefed 30 business groups on its failure to replicate “most” of the EU’s trade deals with other countries around the world. Participants complained that they would be seriously affected by the failure to conclude agreements with partners as significant as Canada, Turkey and Japan."

[Cunobelin]

Wonderful post Brexit trade deals?
From the FT.
https://www.ft.com/content/5ce60af2-2b9 ... 8ef2b976c7

"Tokyo is confident that it can secure better terms from the UK than it did in negotiations with the much larger EU, and is not willing to duplicate the existing treaty precisely in either a bilateral deal or in talks for the UK to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership group. "

"This week, Britain’s Department for International Trade briefed 30 business groups on its failure to replicate “most” of the EU’s trade deals with other countries around the world. Participants complained that they would be seriously affected by the failure to conclude agreements with partners as significant as Canada, Turkey and Japan."

According to some sources ALL the present trade deals signed under WTO are invalid as they were E.U. agreements

We are starting at basics with all trading on the base Tariffs

All these wonderful trade deals are simply part for the 100,000 other regulations, rules, legislation,laws, guidelines and policies that need to be written, negotiated passed through Parliament, voted on, approved by the House of Lords

.... and all in less than two months

[PDQ Mobile]

Switzerland, the much vaunted example of an economy doing well outside of the EU, has around 40 years of negotiations behind it covering a huge number of specific areas.
To imagine we could achieve a similar position in less than half or even a whole decade is simply impossible.
I posted this many many moons ago, before the vote, and it was discounted by many "leavers" on here.

[mercalia]

Why the Backstop is unfair and the hard supporters of brexit are right in resisting it

Unlike the GFA where every one stood to gain, the end of violence, the backstop is different.

The UK derives few benefits, other than the GFA, from remaining in the backstop and in fact it damages the UKs long term interests and life outside the EU.

On the other hand it meets the requirements of the EU perfectly - meeting the demands of the GFA and also protecting the single market dogma

Thus any alternative to the backstop has to be ATLEAST as good ie perfect in the EU's view It has no incentive to accept any soln worse than it

The EU may thus be inclined to set an impossibly high bar to agree to end it - that is the growing realisation in the supporters of brexit camps? A valid worry.

What we need is a soln that is in the interests of all partys to remove asap? The "Backstop" is not that. ( Goodness knows why Mrs May agreed to it)

Brexit itself is far more damaging than anything else to the UK's long term interests. Complaining about the backstop when Brexit is ongoing is like complaining about a splinter in your left hand while your right hand is being chopped off.

beside the point. Just trying to get clear about the rights and wrongs of the situation and to make sense of the apparant intransigence of the EU since they claim to be reasonable whereas we are just causing trouble?

[pete75]

Why the Backstop is unfair and the hard supporters of brexit are right in resisting it

Unlike the GFA where every one stood to gain, the end of violence, the backstop is different.

The UK derives few benefits, other than the GFA, from remaining in the backstop and in fact it damages the UKs long term interests and life outside the EU.

On the other hand it meets the requirements of the EU perfectly - meeting the demands of the GFA and also protecting the single market dogma

Thus any alternative to the backstop has to be ATLEAST as good ie perfect in the EU's view It has no incentive to accept any soln worse than it

The EU may thus be inclined to set an impossibly high bar to agree to end it - that is the growing realisation in the supporters of brexit camps? A valid worry.

What we need is a soln that is in the interests of all partys to remove asap? The "Backstop" is not that. ( Goodness knows why Mrs May agreed to it)

Brexit itself is far more damaging than anything else to the UK's long term interests. Complaining about the backstop when Brexit is ongoing is like complaining about a splinter in your left hand while your right hand is being chopped off.

beside the point. Just trying to get clear about the rights and wrongs of the situation and to make sense of the apparant intransigence of the EU since they claim to be reasonable whereas we are just causing trouble?

Of course it isn't beside the point- it's exactly the point. You claim the backstop is damaging to Britain's long term interest when Brexit is far more damaging.
Any problems, troubles etc that come from Brexit are entirely down to the UK leaving. No leaving, no problems.

[pete75]

Switzerland, the much vaunted example of an economy doing well outside of the EU, has around 40 years of negotiations behind it covering a huge number of specific areas.
To imagine we could achieve a similar position in less than half or even a whole decade is simply impossible.
I posted this many many moons ago, before the vote, and it was discounted by many "leavers" on here.

The Switzerland that has a free trade agreement with the EU, has free movement of people , is part of the Schengen area and contributes to the EU budget?

[PH]

beside the point. Just trying to get clear about the rights and wrongs of the situation and to make sense of the apparant intransigence of the EU since they claim to be reasonable whereas we are just causing trouble?

In real practical terms what is it you think the EU can offer? An open border between two customs regimes isn't possible, is it? Does it exist anywhere else?

[roubaixtuesday]

Why the Backstop is unfair and the hard supporters of brexit are right in resisting it

Unlike the GFA where every one stood to gain, the end of violence, the backstop is different.

The UK derives few benefits, other than the GFA, from remaining in the backstop and in fact it damages the UKs long term interests and life outside the EU.

On the other hand it meets the requirements of the EU perfectly - meeting the demands of the GFA and also protecting the single market dogma

Thus any alternative to the backstop has to be ATLEAST as good ie perfect in the EU's view It has no incentive to accept any soln worse than it

The EU may thus be inclined to set an impossibly high bar to agree to end it - that is the growing realisation in the supporters of brexit camps? A valid worry.

What we need is a soln that is in the interests of all partys to remove asap? The "Backstop" is not that. ( Goodness knows why Mrs May agreed to it)

Complete nonsense.

The backstop was a huge concession from the EU.

It gives far *better* terms than any long term agreement will.

[mercalia]

Brexit itself is far more damaging than anything else to the UK's long term interests. Complaining about the backstop when Brexit is ongoing is like complaining about a splinter in your left hand while your right hand is being chopped off.

beside the point. Just trying to get clear about the rights and wrongs of the situation and to make sense of the apparant intransigence of the EU since they claim to be reasonable whereas we are just causing trouble?

Of course it isn't beside the point- it's exactly the point. You claim the backstop is damaging to Britain's long term interest when Brexit is far more damaging.
Any problems, troubles etc that come from Brexit are entirely down to the UK leaving. No leaving, no problems.

I wasnt saying any thing about the pros and cons of Brexit but about the issues assuming Brexit. An important distinction

[Cunobelin]

Switzerland, the much vaunted example of an economy doing well outside of the EU, has around 40 years of negotiations behind it covering a huge number of specific areas.
To imagine we could achieve a similar position in less than half or even a whole decade is simply impossible.
I posted this many many moons ago, before the vote, and it was discounted by many "leavers" on here.

You have 47 days, 5 hours, 45 minutes and 40 seconds....

[mercalia]

beside the point. Just trying to get clear about the rights and wrongs of the situation and to make sense of the apparant intransigence of the EU since they claim to be reasonable whereas we are just causing trouble?

In real practical terms what is it you think the EU can offer? An open border between two customs regimes isn't possible, is it? Does it exist anywhere else?

not dealing with that issue just the unbalanced nature of the backstop and total puzzlement why Mrs may agreed to it. She built her deal on sand: In terms of the GFA it would have been like demanding that the IRA disarm first.

[mercalia]

Why the Backstop is unfair and the hard supporters of brexit are right in resisting it

Unlike the GFA where every one stood to gain, the end of violence, the backstop is different.

The UK derives few benefits, other than the GFA, from remaining in the backstop and in fact it damages the UKs long term interests and life outside the EU.

On the other hand it meets the requirements of the EU perfectly - meeting the demands of the GFA and also protecting the single market dogma

Thus any alternative to the backstop has to be ATLEAST as good ie perfect in the EU's view It has no incentive to accept any soln worse than it

The EU may thus be inclined to set an impossibly high bar to agree to end it - that is the growing realisation in the supporters of brexit camps? A valid worry.

What we need is a soln that is in the interests of all partys to remove asap? The "Backstop" is not that. ( Goodness knows why Mrs May agreed to it)

Complete nonsense.

The backstop was a huge concession from the EU.

It gives far *better* terms than any long term agreement will.

[pete75]

beside the point. Just trying to get clear about the rights and wrongs of the situation and to make sense of the apparant intransigence of the EU since they claim to be reasonable whereas we are just causing trouble?

Of course it isn't beside the point- it's exactly the point. You claim the backstop is damaging to Britain's long term interest when Brexit is far more damaging.
Any problems, troubles etc that come from Brexit are entirely down to the UK leaving. No leaving, no problems.

I wasnt saying any thing about the pros and cons of Brexit but about the issues assuming Brexit. An important distinction

You may think you were but you weren't.