What will the UK do wrt Brexit?

Great Debates
1582

100% blameless is a completely stupid standard. You can always find some blame to pin on someone, even if it’s something like ‘you pushed him away when he stabbed you with the knife, so there was violence on both sides!’. There are plenty of divorces and breakups where there is one side that is clearly in the wrong long past any reasonable standard of blame.

You can’t have both. The UK is making ridiculous demands, and the only way the EU could go out of their way to get things sorted is to give in to them. “It seems unlikely” is a wimpy copout - if the EU is actually being unreasonable, then you should be able to point out at least one significant area of unreasonableness. But all that I’ve seen the EU do is follow the treaty that both parties agreed to and refuse to give in to ridiculous demands.

I’m just coming into this thread, and am not familiar with your history, but your claims of being a reasonable Brexiter are undermined by the unsustainable claims about how the EU is handling a situation that the UK is solely responsible for creating in the first place.

1583

Yeah, OK - all of that is fair. And indeed, foreseeable. I concede both points, and thank you for sticking with it.

It’s still true that the UK didn’t have to take the path it has taken between 2016 and now, with so many stupid decisions and missed opportunities along the way. I don’t think anyone really expected that in 2016. The problem was, as (again) has been pointed out ad nauseam, that no-one knew exactly what they were voting for.

I dunno - I sort of agree, but on the other hand, May messed up the major decisions so badly it probably would have been better if she hadn’t tried. Whereas although I would never call his resignation honourable or right, at least Cameron could say that he didn’t feel he could credibly lead exit negotiations having spent years campaigning against that position.

Sure, but that wasn’t really my point - I’ve already accepted the UK is largely to blame for the failure to find an agreement thus far. I’m just saying it sometimes seems to be painted in very black and white terms and I don’t think that’s helpful.

It’s a copout because I don’t know, not only am I not involved in the negotiations but I rarely bother to read about them any more. I don’t trust any reporting to be accurate or unbiased - inevitably, on the rare occasions I see something in the media on which I do have special knowledge, it is inaccurate (to a greater or lesser degree), biased, or both. It follows that this is probably true for a great number of other things reported in the media, I just don’t know which bits are accurate and which are not. I have better things to do than trying to keep on top of it all (such as posting here, obviously :slight_smile:).

To reiterate - I don’t think the EU is being unreasonable. I still think Brexit is a reasonable idea, it’s just that it has been dealt with appallingly by the UK government from start to finish. At least, so far - obviously we’re nowhere near the finish.

I don’t think I’m making unsustainable claims, just providing a slightly different viewpoint while largely agreeing with people. I have often admitted I lack the knowledge and passion of others in this debate.

1584

NETA: I suppose I should say - if I have made unsustainable claims, I have been willing to withdraw or modify them in the presence of reasoned argument, for which I am grateful. As usual the SDMB is helping me on the path to self-improvement.

Also, meant to add that as above, I would take issue with the UK being “solely” responsible for the present mess - “largely”, yes, but had the EU been a better-run organisation we wouldn’t have needed a referendum in the first place.

1585

What will the UK do wrt Brexit?

That depends on whether there will be a post Brexit deal with the EU or ‘no Deal’. These are two completely different paths and it is the latter ‘no Deal’ that means a huge dislocation in the terms of trade with the UK’s biggest trading partner. The preparations for this can be seen in Kent, the county containing the main ship and train links to our nearest neighbour, France. That route is a huge bottleneck.

Land for huge truck and lorry parks has been obtained in the anticipation that in a ‘no Deal’, all cargo will need to be inspected to ensure the correct traffis are standards have been applied. There has been some concern amongst logistics companies that the software neccessary to implement customs documentation systems will not be ready by the end of the year. So chaos is anticipated as a huge backlog of goods waiting to be checked develops. Moreover, it is neccessary for much the same sort arrangement on the other side of the channel in France for goods heading towards the UK. It is a fact often overlooked in the UK press that customs checks have to exist on both sides of a border.

Macron in France will be under a lot of pressure to deal with the Fishing issue. If there is a no-Deal I don’t doubt that French fishermen, will make their feelings felt about losing their livelihood in the form of political direct action. Of course, it is always possible to put out such political fires by simply paying adequate compensation. But handling that would be very much in Macron’s hands and he would be looking to the UK to help foot the bill. The UK has paid for infrastructure in France to deal with cross channel issues before. The channel ports on the French side have lots of beefed up security measures to ensure the refugees don’t flood across the channel in the backs of containers. With this route made difficult, the focus has moved to the use of small boats ferry refugees from France to England and this is turning into a flood as people traffickers persuade their clients that beating the end of year Brexit deadline is their last chance.

While the Fisheries issue politically important in France, in the UK the big issue with Brexit is the soverignty argument and in particular the freedom for the UK government to support UK industries on its own terms rather than those of the EU.

If Boris does not deliver a convincing agreement that says the UK is completely independent of the EU rules on government support for industry, the knives will be out for him in the Consevative party. He will become victim of the same nationalistic bluster with which he won control of the party.

The EU see this as the UK having it cake and eating it. A frictionless trade agreement with the EU, but with no collective responsibility to maintain the EU market. If the UK gets a good deal, with few consequences, then it make encourage other countries there the national sovereignty issue is important to consider their own future and lead to the break up of the EU.

Right now it a game of brinkmanship. Going to the wire: Brexit with a Deal or No Deal

And it is happening in the middle of second wave of the Covid pandemic and the dramatic economic consequences of the lockdowns.

This is a double whammy for the UK economy and I suspect Boris and EU will come up with some face saving fudge that puts off the important details until this Covid crisis subsides in a year or two. There was supposed to be an agreement last week.

This guy imagines himself as pivotal figure and the moment of national crisis. He wants a ‘Churchill moment’ that will seal his legacy as a statesman.

We wait anxiously for a Boris big ‘reveal’.

1586

If your claims are not unsustainable, then provide evidence for them. You have not provided any evidence to support the rather absurd claim that the EU has not gone out of their way to get things sorted. You’re not exactly changing my opinion of the reasonableness of the “Leave” crowd by repeating that unsubstantiated claim and arguing over it.

1587

Well, the evidence for that is that there is no agreement in place yet - had the EU side been willing to go out of their way to get one, it could have been in place by now. But as Malden Capell has pointed out, if that was because the UK side was making unreasonable demands, that’s not the EU’s fault. I accept that assessment, so at this point we are probably just arguing over a small distinction without a practical difference.

1588

I always thought that the EU should be seen as similar to Bucky Fuller’s Global Energy Grid, meaning that the return to jingoistic nation states would be disastrously expensive.

I am both saddened and glad that I will be proven right. My partner and I will be moving back to civilisation next year (COVID scuppered our plans to do it this year) and I hope I will only have to deal with people in the foreseeable future who won’t be fooled into thinking that a sovereignty that they never lost is more important than peace and prosperity.

1589

Sadly one of the consequences of Brexit is that the UK will be excluded from the development of a EU energy grid and a trading network. This is a shame because the UK has a huge investment in the development of offshore windfarms in the North Sea and it would greatly benefit from an international electricity grid to make it easier to trade electrical energy with other countries, especially those bordering the huge North Sea windfarms that are rapidly being built.

Buckminsters farsighted idea may yet be realised in the next couple of decades as countries re-engineer their grids to take account of renewable power generation, grid batteries, HVDC transmission, EV charging, etc and see the benefit of electrical energy trading between countries.

This is one of a many EU projects that make a lot of economic sense, in which the UK will no longer play a part. A different kind of Conservative would have supported the development of such trading networks as the path to prosperity.

But this one does not really think that far ahead.

No-one is quite sure what will happen in January, but we will surely find out just how much planning the government has been doing during these endless Brexit debates.

I expect they will blame any problems on Covid.

1590

Not @Dead_Cat and not a Brexit voter, but I got the impression the EU has been somewhat unreasonable in areas like Europol and the Galileo network - cooperation not intrinsically tied to single market membership and which it would benefit both sides to continue. Anyone know more about it?

1591

The EU is not just a single market. It provides all sorts of services to its members, such as Europol and Galileo.

The UK has removed itself from the EU. Why should it get access to services which the EU provides to EU members?

1592

I get the impression that the divide is not only about the substantive policy/activity areas but also about timing and process. AIUI, Johnson’s tactical ambition was to tie down agreement on each specific area as they go along, but the EU has been taking the line that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, because the fundamental thing they want to deter is a pick-and-mix approach.

1593

‘Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed’

That sounds familiar. Was that not Theresa May’s negotiating position?

1594

Non-EU-Members can get involved in aspects of the Galileo project, but they have to sign up to obligations. Annoyingly I can’t find out what those obligations are, but likely to do with funding and adhering to EU-set rules.

Anathema to ‘muh sovereignty’ UK, but fine it seems for the likes of China and Israel.

1595

The EU also cooperates with non-members in those same services, and they’re not an inseparable part of single market membership.

I think this is true, but not necessarily reasonable on the EU’s part. It’s chock full of exceptions and special agreements already (see Norway, Switzerland, the various colonies of member states, etc). What I see as reasonable and fundamental to the EU’s position is no single market membership without free movement, but unrelated co-operative agreements should be up for negotiation as long as both sides benefit.

I wouldn’t be surprised to find out this was the true reason. It would be nice to know what the obligations are, though.

1596

It appears to be to do with EU rules about eligibility for procurement contracts and access to parts of the system with security implications, as I read this (maybe now superseded?) article

1597

That does imply there are faults on both sides, but also shows how tangled up the different issues are. I suppose something similar is going on in other areas like sharing information on crime. The claims of the various Brexit campaigns look even more ridiculously over-optimistic now.

1598

Sure, but if you’re busy trying to negotiate the end of single market membership and freedom of movement of British and EU citizens, which are at the core of EU membership, then it makes sense to put the non-membership issues off until after those core issues are sorted.

1599

Just bumping this to despondently note that we are 29 days from leaving the transition period and we have no deal.

1600

On the other hand, in “Who could possibly have seen this coming?” territory, the Daily Mail is complaining about the EU treating Brits as though they’re no longer part of the EU once they’re no longer part of the EU.

This is literally what Leavers voted for, and what they were told would happen. (To be fair, it’s not what the expats voted for, because they weren’t allowed to vote.)

But hey - the EU may take our right to freedom of movement, work and residence, but they’ll never take our xenophobia-driven sense of grievance and entitlement!

1601

There’s been a bit of that. I’ve seen one interview with a fish wholesaler saying that No Deal could be a disaster - some sleuth dug up an older interview with the same guy from 2016, in which he’s saying, of course, that Brexit will be great and anyone concerned about loss of access to markets doesn’t know what they’re talking about.

I feel for the guy - and everyone in the same boat - but have to work quite hard to suppress the ungenerous impulse that says the alternative point of view was put to him quite clearly.