Brexit the economy and house prices part 7: Brexit Harder

lvader

Sailtheworld wrote: »

Well they're going to suspend parliament again next week so Boris can avoid another PMQs.

Yes and totally legal. This week has proved the original prologue didn't really affect parliament by the fact nothing happened, most MPs didn't even turn up for work.

shaggydoo

Brexit: Europe's media scorn Johnson's 'unrealistic' plans

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-49917409


Sounds like there is little chance of the EU agreeing to BJ's deal.


So will BJ/ The Tories be going into the GE advocating no deal? It'll be interesting to see how many would actually vote for that.


I think the Tories honestly believed they had a solution to the backstop problem - given the smirk on Steve Baker's face last night on Newsnight.

setmefree2

Stephen Bush (New Statesman - Morning Call)

Good morning. Where to begin with Boris Johnson's new proposal for an alternative to the backstop? Under his proposal, Northern Ireland would remain in the same regulatory environment for Ireland for not only food and agriculture, but for goods as well. That's the big upside as far as reaching a deal - Johnson has made a small move towards an Ireland-only backstop and got the DUP to breach what Arlene Foster once described as her "blood red" line: that the party will never back an accord that puts further regulatory barriers between Northern Ireland the rest of the UK.

While it is far from an achievable, real-world proposal, you can still, just about, see the space for an accord where Downing Street tries to finesse that what it wants to sell as a triumphant win for checks away from the border is, in practice, a regulatory border in the Irish Sea. That's certainly the hope of some in the Cabinet - but many on the EU side and in Parliament think that Johnson's real game is blaming the EU for the no deal Brexit he really wants.

Now here are the downsides: it includes the creation of border infrastructure by any other name, which breaks the terms of the December 2017 agreement reached between the European Union and the United Kingdom, a commitment which has already been passed into law here in the United Kingdom.

The veto it hands to Stormont - one requiring not only a majority of Assembly members but a cross-community majority to vote in favour of continuing the all-Ireland zone every four years - on continued regulatory alignment means that, in practice, every Assembly election will become a referendum on Northern Ireland's constitutional status.

As it stands, this is far from a negotiable Brexit, so any talk about whether it can command a majority in the House of Commons is a second-order issue. The Conservative government's new talking point is that the problem with the backstop is that it doesn't command sufficient cross-community support. It's true to say that no unionist member of the Stormont assembly backs it, but the independent Unionist MP, Sylvia Hermon, does. However, Johnson's new proposal doesn't have the support of any cross-community members of the Assembly, any nationalist members of the Assembly or 11 of the 39 unionist members of the Assembly. It doesn't have the support of most of Northern Ireland's business organisations. If cross-community consent is the question then only a tissue-soft Brexit for the whole of the United Kingdom is the answer.

Doesn't sound promising.

Sailtheworld

lvader wrote: »

Yes and totally legal. This week has proved the original prologue didn't really affect parliament by the fact nothing happened, most MPs didn't even turn up for work.

May as well argue you didn't have a crash after 5 pints so the drink-driving laws can be safely ignored.

Moby

setmefree2 wrote: »

Stephen Bush (New Statesman - Morning Call)



Doesn't sound promising.

The European Parliament Brexit group sums it up really:-


First, the UK proposals on customs and on regulatory aspects explicitly provide for infrastructure, controls and checks but are unclear as to exactly where and how these would be carried out. Any form of controls and checks in and around the border would signify the end of frictionless trade and as such would harm the all-island economy as well as represent a serious risk to the peace process, and could imply a serious risk for consumers and businesses. The proposals tabled by the UK government thus breach a range of fundamental principles and red lines passed in the resolutions of this house. At the same time, such controls would not be sufficient to guarantee the protection of EU consumers and businesses in all circumstances, thereby potentially leaving the EU with a significant hole in its Single Market.
Second, the UK proposals would operationally only be worked out in detail by the EU and the UK, or in the UK unilaterally, during the fourteen-month transition period. This does not provide the necessary certainty or fulfil the agreed principles in the Withdrawal Agreement. This would mean the European Parliament would have to give consent to the Protocol without knowing its full implications, nor having any guarantee as to its legal operation. This is unacceptable.
Third, the right of consent being offered to the Northern Irish Assembly effectively makes an agreement contingent, uncertain, provisional and unilateral decision, instead of the safety net provided for by the backstop. Furthermore, the Northern Irish Assembly has not sat for nearly three years and it is questionable whether it would be able to reconvene and take on the responsibility for an international treaty of this nature.

Moby

I see the tories are being fed their lines in the event of a negative response to Johnson's so called 'deal offer'.:-
https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham/eu-crazy-leaked-tory-memo

Arklight

Moby wrote: »

I see the tories are being fed their lines in the event of a negative response to Johnson's so called 'deal offer'.:-
https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham/eu-crazy-leaked-tory-memo

According to Verhofstadt the EU have already rejected it on the grounds its half baked and unfaur to Ireland.

So Bozo is going to try and plough ahead with an illegal no deal Brexit. Things really are coming to a head aren't they?

lvader

Yes we are getting Brexit done :beer:

mayonnaise

lvader wrote: »

Yes we are getting Brexit done :beer:

Ditching it all together would also get Brexit done. :beer:

lvader

mayonnaise wrote: »

Ditching it all together would also get Brexit done. :beer:

My 2nd favourite option, everything is better than delay, delay, delay