Brexit the economy and house prices part 7: Brexit Harder

cogito

Sailtheworld wrote: »

The backstop would've only come into play if the UK had failed to meet promises to come up with solutions to the Irish border. I don't believe the EU want us lot handcuffed to them indefinitely and the backstop doesn't seem to be a perfect solution for the EU either so it's not the asymmetric solution portrayed.

The EU would be delighted to have us in a Customs Union and subject to ECJ rulings for ever and a day. Whatever solution we proposed to the backstop would be rejected by them as magical thinking. You don’t have to look into a crystal ball when you can read the book.

The naivety of those who trust the EU is simply breathtaking.

Sailtheworld

cogito wrote: »

Yes, it is. She was the only candidate and 48% of MEPs voted for her. Perhaps there should be a confirmatory vote.

Is % of the electorate who voted for something an important metric to you?

Of those that voted she got 54% of the vote. A colossal majority.

Sailtheworld

westernpromise wrote: »

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/07/17/fanatical-von-der-leyen-final-nail-coffin-shambolic-eu-democracy/

Is this actually true?

If you look at the bile in that URL and then consider it's the Telegraph you should consider what they're not saying.

I'm not sure if you follow European politics but the Council is where national governments are represented. They always prefer a consensus so there's plenty of horse trading. MEPs then have to 'sign off' which they've done by small majority.

Sailtheworld

cogito wrote: »

The EU would be delighted to have us in a Customs Union and subject to ECJ rulings for ever and a day. Whatever solution we proposed to the backstop would be rejected by them as magical thinking. You don’t have to look into a crystal ball when you can read the book.

The naivety of those who trust the EU is simply breathtaking.

You have neither read the book nor have access to a crystal ball so you're trying to pass off an opinion as fact.

I know we might like to think that the World revolves around the UK but it just doesn't. Brexit has been breakfast, lunch and dinner in the UK for getting on five years now. I suspect for the EU brexit is just one of the things on the to-do list and we've become a nuisance who they'd like to see get a grip so we can do one.

Nothing like a referendum to fill people with hate for our friends and allies. Obviously for some people that was quite a short journey.

SouthLondonUser

Can't read the article as that's behind a paywall. However, if the way she was chosen upsets the Torygraph, Brexiters and even supposedly-non-Brexiters (who seem to have however drank copious amounts of Brexit kool-aid) like @westernpromise so much, how are they reacting to the fact that a totally unrepresentative zero-point-nothing % of the population is choosing the next British PM, who will not even face an obligatory confidence vote? For consistency, they should be organising a revolution...

There are also the usual points, repeated trillions of times, on how the EU works. Von der Leyen was chosen by the EU Council. The EU Council isn't a group of obscure unelected unaccountable bureaucrats: they are the heads of government of the EU member states. She was then voted by the European Parliament. A system with more power to MEPs and less power to the Council, i.e. to national governments, is theoretically possible, but would be a step in the direction of the EU super-state that so many foaming-at-the-mouth Brexiters loathe so much. Not to mention it would make things even more dysfunctional, IMHO.

However, saying that the candidate on which national leaders had reached an agreement was voted and confirmed by MEPs is not as sensational, right?

cogito

Sailtheworld wrote: »

Is % of the electorate who voted for something an important metric to you?

Of those that voted she got 54% of the vote. A colossal majority.

You missed the sarcasm then?

cogito

Sailtheworld wrote: »

You have neither read the book nor have access to a crystal ball so you're trying to pass off an opinion as fact.

I know we might like to think that the World revolves around the UK but it just doesn't. Brexit has been breakfast, lunch and dinner in the UK for getting on five years now. I suspect for the EU brexit is just one of the things on the to-do list and we've become a nuisance who they'd like to see get a grip so we can do one.

Nothing like a referendum to fill people with hate for our friends and allies. Obviously for some people that was quite a short journey.

Ok, then tell us. The UK remaining within a Customs Union and subject to ECJ rulings is entirely to the advantage of the EU. Why on earth would they ever release us from the backstop? They won’t even consider it being time limited which is pretty clear evidence that they won’t.

cogito

Sailtheworld wrote: »

If you look at the bile in that URL and then consider it's the Telegraph you should consider what they're not saying.

I'm not sure if you follow European politics but the Council is where national governments are represented. They always prefer a consensus so there's plenty of horse trading. MEPs then have to 'sign off' which they've done by small majority.

Did you even read the article? It’s paywalled so my guess is that you didn’t in which case you probably don’t know that it was an opinion piece written by an MEP who was present throughout the process.

Here’s the complete text:

Brussels technocrats have called EU parliament's bluff

Ursula Von der Leyen, the controversial Defence Minister of the Bundeswehr, got the approval of the EU Parliament to become President of the EU Commission by just nine votes. She was the only candidate, selected by the EU Council, and will have a central role in Brexit negotiations with the the British government.

Here in the EU Parliament, where most deals are stitched up way before any vote, that’s as close as it gets and certainly not the ringing endorsement that Donald Tusk asked Parliament for two weeks ago.

It comes after a days of intense wheeler-dealing, with Mrs Von der Leyen walking the corridors of Strasbourg and Brussels to lobby for the Presidency. MEPs from all political parties had expressed serious concerns about the abandonment of their precious Spitzenkandidaten process, which in theory ties the choice of President to the results of the European election.

In selecting her, the European Council turned their backs on Parliament’s candidates. There were also serious questions about her competency. Dubbed ‘the Chris Grayling of German politics’, concerns were raised about allegations of mismanagement and overspending at the German Defence Ministry under her leadership.

Yesterday saw the climax of the process here in the Strasbourg session of the European Parliament. Mrs Von der Leyen started the day with a speech to MEPs in the Hemicycle, the Parliament’s space-age debating chamber, setting out her vision for Europe.

Listening from the Brexit Party’s seats at the back to Chamber, it was clear that it was going to a naked bid to the pro-federalists, underlining her previous support for a United States of Europe.

Starting with ‘we have to do it the European way’ and ‘the world needs more Europe’ her proposals included an EU minimum wage, a capital markets union, a European unemployment insurance scheme, and most controversially, the abandonment of the national veto on foreign policy, another step towards a European army and handing over the decision to go to war to the EU.

She also promised the deepening of Europe’s economic and monetary union, a common consolidated corporate tax base, to be sympathetic towards an approach from Britain for further delay of Brexit.

Von der Leyen concluded saying ‘we need to move towards full co-decision power for the European Parliament and away from unanimity for climate, energy, social and taxation policies. She finished with a rallying cry ‘Long Live Europe, Vive la Europe!’ underlining her support for a United States of Europe.

The pro-Federalists in the room lapped it up, rising to their feet to applaud Mrs Von der Leyen’s speech. But elsewhere, the response wasn’t so happy. German MEP, Mr Meuthen from the Eurosceptic ID Group, commented that ‘nobody will rue your departure in Germany to become European President.’
Our own Nigel Farage raised the temperature stating that her candidacy ‘is an attempt from the EU to control every single aspect of our lives,’ adding ‘she wants to build a centralised, undemocratic, updated form of communism where nation state parliaments will cease to have any relevance at all.’

As ever at the EU, the session closed for lunch. The vote was scheduled for later in the evening and Ursula Von der Leyen took the opportunity to tour the committee rooms meeting with key groups. The buzz in the Parliament’s busy bars was that the deal had been done, but few were happy and it might be a close run thing.

So to the vote itself. A secret ballot done in the old-fashioned way ticking a box on a scrap of paper. There was real tension in the room when it came to announcing the result, with the candidate a solitary figure in the pit of the Chamber facing a phalanx of photographers waiting to catch her reaction. She needed 374 votes for a majority. She scraped in with 383, a majority of just 9, much closer than anyone expected.

Cue rapturous applause from the Federalists on dodging a bullet. And a delighted and much relieved Von der Leyen embraced her supporters on the news. The Chair of the Parliament halted the proceedings to ‘call President Tusk and let him know the good news.’

But back in the bars, the mood was sombre. Parliament’s bluff had been called, MEPs had rolled over, the democratic can had been kicked another five years down the road. Many contradictory promises had been given to secure the vote, how could they be delivered? The closeness of the vote meant that the bitter battle between Federalists and Eurosceptics remained unresolved.

Britain now knows the name of the new Commission President, the most powerful position in the EU. Ursula Von der Leyen, the only candidate, scraped in on the back of a federalist dream and manifesto. The European Parliament is not a happy place. It’s definitely time to leave.

Sailtheworld

cogito wrote: »

Ok, then tell us. The UK remaining within a Customs Union and subject to ECJ rulings is entirely to the advantage of the EU. Why on earth would they ever release us from the backstop? They won’t even consider it being time limited which is pretty clear evidence that they won’t.

Your starting assumption is that the EU will act in bad faith and you'll never be persuaded otherwise.

If they did and the intention was to dismiss all of the brilliant ideas the UK promised to think up with the sole intention of keeping us in the CU you'd find that people with more moderate views would get on board. No agreement would survive such an act of bad faith.

People need to be careful about being instructed to assume bad faith from the off because it's exactly what the right want people to assume. Good, bad or indifferent they want us to leave without a deal and will say anything to achieve it.

cogito

Sailtheworld wrote: »

No agreement would survive such an act of bad faith.

It's more than just an agreement. It’s an international treaty which would survive until both parties agreed otherwise.