Craig needs to read what is being proposed, it literally is the government proposing "let's have this Brexit cake and eat it" with a bit of flourish.
Plus signing the UK away. They're agreeing to a sea border in principle which is huge.
Where does it say that?
It doesn't that I can see. They commit to a backstop, the 'operational legal text' of which hasn't been agreed yet afaik, and William seems to be assuming said backstop we'll agree to will include a sea border.
If something like this is agreed, there will be no need for the backstop.
Well yes, but it is clear we still need to agree on a backstop just in case something like this is not agreed, and whether we have accepted a principle of splitting our own country is pretty significant.
The deal being proposed is basically lifted from the existing Switzerland-EU treaty. I mean it's almost identical.
I was always told the EU regretted the Swiss Treaties as they thought the Swiss had outmanoeuvred them in the negotiation.
It's a good comprise deal for everyone involved though and it has a basis in reality. What will be very difficult to sell for the government is putting all of this forwards without the EU saying "yes, but we insist on free movement". I think no deal comes back on to the table if the EU insist on free movement.
There’ll be a fudge. If EU citizens can come here, look for work and get the right to stay with an employment contract that’s FoM in all but name, especially with healthcare reciprocity slapped on in addition.
You're reading stuff that isn't being proposed. Right now the government is proposing that the UK stays in the single market for goods (fine, who gives a fuck about widget standards anyway), has some kind of customs arrangement that looks a lot like pre-clearance, and no free movement of people. The big concession is that we'll leave the single market for services, but that brings as many upsides as downsides, we stop being rule takers and it allows Westminster to be much more proactive in helping grow the services industries, but locks UK based business out of a big market without a capitalised EU based subsidiary.
Overall it's a fair compromise for a 52/48 referendum win. I just don't see how the EU accepts it without insisting on full free movement as they have for Switzerland.
It’s the start of a negotiation. This is not where we’ll end up. FoM will end; but it will remain. And that’s because we are going to need a lot of services access. It’s far too important to throw away. As Nick Palmer says, this will be the mother of all fudges. A symbolic Brexit with not much changing in practice. A waste of time and effort, mildly damaging, not catastrophic, slightly lower growth, the odd, very limited, trade deal and blue passports. Most folk will be happy with thst.
Craig needs to read what is being proposed, it literally is the government proposing "let's have this Brexit cake and eat it" with a bit of flourish.
Plus signing the UK away. They're agreeing to a sea border in principle which is huge.
Where does it say that?
It doesn't that I can see. They commit to a backstop, the 'operational legal text' of which hasn't been agreed yet afaik, and William seems to be assuming said backstop we'll agree to will include a sea border.
If something like this is agreed, there will be no need for the backstop.
As a Remainer, I'm reasonably happy with this. My only regret is that I think it makes a no deal scenario with a second referendum and a reversal of the referendum result much less likely. Staying in is obviously much more desirable.
Agree on both points, except the part about staying in being more desirable, it definitely isn't. Especially if this deal is accepted. It puts the UK on a path away from Brussels and away from the super state.
Craig needs to read what is being proposed, it literally is the government proposing "let's have this Brexit cake and eat it" with a bit of flourish.
Plus signing the UK away. They're agreeing to a sea border in principle which is huge.
Where does it say that?
It doesn't that I can see. They commit to a backstop, the 'operational legal text' of which hasn't been agreed yet afaik, and William seems to be assuming said backstop we'll agree to will include a sea border.
The backstop is Northern Ireland only, and the proposed future relationship leaves open the possibility of regulatory divergence which is specifically says would have consequences for the border, which can only be in the Irish sea.
That's why the possibility will never be instantiated.
Craig needs to read what is being proposed, it literally is the government proposing "let's have this Brexit cake and eat it" with a bit of flourish.
Plus signing the UK away. They're agreeing to a sea border in principle which is huge.
Where does it say that?
It doesn't that I can see. They commit to a backstop, the 'operational legal text' of which hasn't been agreed yet afaik, and William seems to be assuming said backstop we'll agree to will include a sea border.
The backstop is a fallback for NI only if nothing that would prevent a hard Irish border can be agreed for the UK as a whole. As these proposals effectively maintain UK membership of the customs union and the single market for goods, the backstop won't be needed.
Won't be needed, but it does say that the UK will be agreeing a backstop solution of some kind, just in case presumably. It may not be as significant as William believes, but it does seem relevant, therefore, what the backstop is going to be.
Craig needs to read what is being proposed, it literally is the government proposing "let's have this Brexit cake and eat it" with a bit of flourish.
Plus signing the UK away. They're agreeing to a sea border in principle which is huge.
Citation required.
Search for 'backstop' and 'frictionless border'.
They will sign the backstop which is legally binding on the assumption that it won't be needed, but their proposal for the future relationship does not guarantee a frictionless border, so come next April, the chance of the backstop being activated at the end of transition will be very real.
The deal being proposed is basically lifted from the existing Switzerland-EU treaty. I mean it's almost identical.
I was always told the EU regretted the Swiss Treaties as they thought the Swiss had outmanoeuvred them in the negotiation.
It's a good comprise deal for everyone involved though and it has a basis in reality. What will be very difficult to sell for the government is putting all of this forwards without the EU saying "yes, but we insist on free movement". I think no deal comes back on to the table if the EU insist on free movement.
There’ll be a fudge. If EU citizens can come here, look for work and get the right to stay with an employment contract that’s FoM in all but name, especially with healthcare reciprocity slapped on in addition.
You're reading stuff that isn't being proposed. Right now the government is proposing that the UK stays in the single market for goods (fine, who gives a fuck about widget standards anyway), has some kind of customs arrangement that looks a lot like pre-clearance, and no free movement of people. The big concession is that we'll leave the single market for services, but that brings as many upsides as downsides, we stop being rule takers and it allows Westminster to be much more proactive in helping grow the services industries, but locks UK based business out of a big market without a capitalised EU based subsidiary.
Overall it's a fair compromise for a 52/48 referendum win. I just don't see how the EU accepts it without insisting on full free movement as they have for Switzerland.
It’s the start of a negotiation. This is not where we’ll end up.
You'd think so, although to hear some tell it doing anything other than agreeing to what the EU says is cherry picking! (as though the very nature of a negotiation, even between unequal parties, is not a discussion to see which cherries will and won't be picked)
Craig needs to read what is being proposed, it literally is the government proposing "let's have this Brexit cake and eat it" with a bit of flourish.
Plus signing the UK away. They're agreeing to a sea border in principle which is huge.
Where does it say that?
It doesn't that I can see. They commit to a backstop, the 'operational legal text' of which hasn't been agreed yet afaik, and William seems to be assuming said backstop we'll agree to will include a sea border.
The backstop is Northern Ireland only, and the proposed future relationship leaves open the possibility of regulatory divergence which is specifically says would have consequences for the border, which can only be in the Irish sea.
That's why the possibility will never be instantiated.
We're not there yet though. They are agreeing the principle of an Irish sea border, which will have a huge impact on the psychology of Northern Irish politics.
Well a few things to take away from this disgraceful but totally predictable betrayal:
- Javid returned to form, backing a Remainer plan again as soon as he saw the way the wind was blowing. He is now finished as a candidate for next leader. Tory members only backed him because he pretended to be a Leaver. - None of the Cabinet leavers will ever become Tory leader. They will now be ridiculed for the rest of their careers. - The deal will not be rejected by the EU. However, they will just chip away at every piece until all the provisions match whatever they want. There will be no resistance from May. Free movement, payments into the budget and ECJ jurisdiction will all be conceded. The backstop will be agreed per the EU text. The money will be handed over with no links to the trade agreement. The idea that this will go away because the EU will reject it misses the point - May and Robbins are involved in a conspiracy with the EU. This meeting was all about provIng that the Leavers will never resign, nothing else. - If the Government plan to put this White Paper before Parliament, how are they going pass it? Labour support? - Or shall we just watch the Tory Leavers mumble but sit on their hands. It truly is a party of invertebrates. - The Tories have condemned themselves to a massive defeat at the next GE. Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch. The Tory Party has been betraying the country to the EU for 50 years.
The deal being proposed is basically lifted from the existing Switzerland-EU treaty. I mean it's almost identical.
I was always told the EU regretted the Swiss Treaties as they thought the Swiss had outmanoeuvred them in the negotiation.
It's a good comprise deal for everyone involved though and it has a basis in reality. What will be very difficult to sell for the government is putting all of this forwards without the EU saying "yes, but we insist on free movement". I think no deal comes back on to the table if the EU insist on free movement.
There’ll be a fudge. If EU citizens can come here, look for work and get the right to stay with an employment contract that’s FoM in all but name, especially with healthcare reciprocity slapped on in addition.
You're reading stuff that isn't being proposed. Right now the government is proposing that the UK stays in the single market for goods (fine, who gives a fuck about widget standards anyway), has some kind of customs arrangement that looks a lot like pre-clearance, and no free movement of people. The big concession is that we'll leave the single market for services, but that brings as many upsides as downsides, we stop being rule takers and it allows Westminster to be much more proactive in helping grow the services industries, but locks UK based business out of a big market without a capitalised EU based subsidiary.
Overall it's a fair compromise for a 52/48 referendum win. I just don't see how the EU accepts it without insisting on full free movement as they have for Switzerland.
It’s the start of a negotiation. This is not where we’ll end up. FoM will end; but it will remain.
But that's my point, negotiation sure, but the EU would need to insist on full fat free movement which the government would not be ready to accept. As I said, this looks like cakeism dressed up in EU compatible language. They have shown time and again that free movement is a non-negotiable point for them, they have never fudged it.
Craig needs to read what is being proposed, it literally is the government proposing "let's have this Brexit cake and eat it" with a bit of flourish.
Plus signing the UK away. They're agreeing to a sea border in principle which is huge.
Citation required.
Search for 'backstop' and 'frictionless border'.
They will sign the backstop which is legally binding on the assumption that it won't be needed, but their proposal for the future relationship does not guarantee a frictionless border, so come next April, the chance of the backstop being activated at the end of transition will be very real.
Did you read Grieve’s comments? There are literally NO Votes in the HoC for splitting the Union- much as you might wish it otherwise....
Craig needs to read what is being proposed, it literally is the government proposing "let's have this Brexit cake and eat it" with a bit of flourish.
Plus signing the UK away. They're agreeing to a sea border in principle which is huge.
Citation required.
Search for 'backstop' and 'frictionless border'.
They will sign the backstop which is legally binding on the assumption that it won't be needed, but their proposal for the future relationship does not guarantee a frictionless border, so come next April, the chance of the backstop being activated at the end of transition will be very real.
Did you read Grieve’s comments? There are literally NO Votes in the HoC for splitting the Union- much as you might wish it otherwise....
Cabinet collective responsibility. They will sign it or there will be no withdrawal agreement.
Craig needs to read what is being proposed, it literally is the government proposing "let's have this Brexit cake and eat it" with a bit of flourish.
Plus signing the UK away. They're agreeing to a sea border in principle which is huge.
Where does it say that?
It doesn't that I can see. They commit to a backstop, the 'operational legal text' of which hasn't been agreed yet afaik, and William seems to be assuming said backstop we'll agree to will include a sea border.
The backstop is Northern Ireland only, and the proposed future relationship leaves open the possibility of regulatory divergence which is specifically says would have consequences for the border, which can only be in the Irish sea.
Today remain lost just as a hard Brexit lost.
So William the game is up for you.
You need to start a campaign to rejoin as we are leaving
Craig needs to read what is being proposed, it literally is the government proposing "let's have this Brexit cake and eat it" with a bit of flourish.
Plus signing the UK away. They're agreeing to a sea border in principle which is huge.
Where does it say that?
It doesn't that I can see. They commit to a backstop, the 'operational legal text' of which hasn't been agreed yet afaik, and William seems to be assuming said backstop we'll agree to will include a sea border.
The backstop is Northern Ireland only, and the proposed future relationship leaves open the possibility of regulatory divergence which is specifically says would have consequences for the border, which can only be in the Irish sea.
That's why the possibility will never be instantiated.
We're not there yet though. They are agreeing the principle of an Irish sea border, which will have a huge impact on the psychology of Northern Irish politics.
So far only you seem to be seeing this particular point - I guess we will have to wait to see what the DUP think. They're never happy about anything, so if it is not enough for them to pull the plug on the agreement with the Tories, it surely hasn't crossed a red line for them, which that was.
The deal being proposed is basically lifted from the existing Switzerland-EU treaty. I mean it's almost identical.
I was always told the EU regretted the Swiss Treaties as they thought the Swiss had outmanoeuvred them in the negotiation.
It's a good comprise deal for everyone involved though and it has a basis in reality. What will be very difficult to sell for the government is putting all of this forwards without the EU saying "yes, but we insist on free movement". I think no deal comes back on to the table if the EU insist on free movement.
There’ll be a fudge. If EU citizens can come here, look for work and get the right to stay with an employment contract that’s FoM in all but name, especially with healthcare reciprocity slapped on in addition.
You're reading stuff that isn't being proposed. Right now the government is proposing that the UK stays in the single market for goods (fine, who gives a fuck about widget standards anyway), has some kind of customs arrangement that looks a lot like pre-clearance, and no free movement of people. The big concession is that we'll leave the single market for services, but that brings as many upsides as downsides, we stop being rule takers and it allows Westminster to be much more proactive in helping grow the services industries, but locks UK based business out of a big market without a capitalised EU based subsidiary.
Overall it's a fair compromise for a 52/48 referendum win. I just don't see how the EU accepts it without insisting on full free movement as they have for Switzerland.
It’s the start of a negotiation. This is not where we’ll end up.
You'd think so, although to hear some tell it doing anything other than agreeing to what the EU says is cherry picking! (as though the very nature of a negotiation, even between unequal parties, is not a discussion to see which cherries will and won't be picked)
The UK has given a lot of ground, the red lines are turning pink, crucially the Cabinet Brexiteers have been humiliated and emasculated. My guess is that the EU will begin to soften. Any deal that is now done will be unequivocally on their terms and that’s the win they’ve been looking for.
Craig needs to read what is being proposed, it literally is the government proposing "let's have this Brexit cake and eat it" with a bit of flourish.
Plus signing the UK away. They're agreeing to a sea border in principle which is huge.
Where does it say that?
It doesn't that I can see. They commit to a backstop, the 'operational legal text' of which hasn't been agreed yet afaik, and William seems to be assuming said backstop we'll agree to will include a sea border.
The backstop is Northern Ireland only, and the proposed future relationship leaves open the possibility of regulatory divergence which is specifically says would have consequences for the border, which can only be in the Irish sea.
That's why the possibility will never be instantiated.
We're not there yet though. They are agreeing the principle of an Irish sea border, which will have a huge impact on the psychology of Northern Irish politics.
Yes. Theresa May may have to look for cross party support if the DUP defect. That will be interesting.
The deal being proposed is basically lifted from the existing Switzerland-EU treaty. I mean it's almost identical.
I was always told the EU regretted the Swiss Treaties as they thought the Swiss had outmanoeuvred them in the negotiation.
It's a good comprise deal for everyone involved though and it has a basis in reality. What will be very difficult to sell for the government is putting all of this forwards without the EU saying "yes, but we insist on free movement". I think no deal comes back on to the table if the EU insist on free movement.
There’ll be a fudge. If EU citizens can come here, look for work and get the right to stay with an employment contract that’s FoM in all but name, especially with healthcare reciprocity slapped on in addition.
In theory current freedom of movement arrangements allow the UK to deny residency to economically inactive EU citizens who are not working and aren't not economically self sufficient (eg they have pensions) and don't have private healthcare arrangements. We ignore that and dole out welfare, tax credits and housing benefit and even social housing when we have such a shortage.
Our non contributory benefits system and free at the point of use healthcare system is the problem. Bar pensioners with S1s Brits moving to Pretty much every eastern and Central European country who dont work - including students - do not have full access to the national healthcare system or welfare if they are resident (and therefore not EHIC eligible). They would need private healthcare. If we can't get it there why should their nationals qualify here?
If welfare and NHS access is retained under this deal how is it different to FOM - a job offer for an unskilled low wage job which means you won't be self sufficient financially without tax credits, HB and more surely can't be sufficient?
The deal being proposed is basically lifted from the existing Switzerland-EU treaty. I mean it's almost identical.
I was always told the EU regretted the Swiss Treaties as they thought the Swiss had outmanoeuvred them in the negotiation.
It's a good comprise deal for everyone involved though and it has a basis in reality. What will be very difficult to sell for the government is putting all of this forwards without the EU saying "yes, but we insist on free movement". I think no deal comes back on to the table if the EU insist on free movement.
There’ll be a fudge. If EU citizens can come here, look for work and get the right to stay with an employment contract that’s FoM in all but name, especially with healthcare reciprocity slapped on in addition.
You're reading stuff that isn't being proposed. Right now the government is proposing that the UK stays in the single market for goods (fine, who gives a fuck about widget standards anyway), has some kind of customs arrangement that looks a lot like pre-clearance, and no free movement of people. The big concession is that we'll leave the single market for services, but that brings as many upsides as downsides, we stop being rule takers and it allows Westminster to be much more proactive in helping grow the services industries, but locks UK based business out of a big market without a capitalised EU based subsidiary.
Overall it's a fair compromise for a 52/48 referendum win. I just don't see how the EU accepts it without insisting on full free movement as they have for Switzerland.
It’s the start of a negotiation. This is not where we’ll end up. FoM will end; but it will remain.
But that's my point, negotiation sure, but the EU would need to insist on full fat free movement which the government would not be ready to accept. As I said, this looks like cakeism dressed up in EU compatible language. They have shown time and again that free movement is a non-negotiable point for them, they have never fudged it.
Clearly the "mobility framework" is going to end up as something so close to free movement that you won't be able to tell the difference, except that the UK will honestly, this time we mean it voters, enforce the 90-day deadline for finding work.
Just look at the document. Every red line laid out in detail, with the only thing missing being actual red text. And then the following paragraph is a huge qualification and watering down of the preceding red line.
Well a few things to take away from this disgraceful but totally predictable betrayal:
- Javid returned to form, backing a Remainer plan again as soon as he saw the way the wind was blowing. He is now finished as a candidate for next leader. Tory members only backed him because he pretended to be a Leaver. - None of the Cabinet leavers will ever become Tory leader. They will now be ridiculed for the rest of their careers. - The deal will not be rejected by the EU. However, they will just chip away at every piece until all the provisions match whatever they want. There will be no resistance from May. Free movement, payments into the budget and ECJ jurisdiction will all be conceded. The backstop will be agreed per the EU text. The money will be handed over with no links to the trade agreement. The idea that this will go away because the EU will reject it misses the point - May and Robbins are involved in a conspiracy with the EU. This meeting was all about provIng that the Leavers will never resign, nothing else. - If the Government plan to put this White Paper before Parliament, how are they going pass it? Labour support? - Or shall we just watch the Tory Leavers mumble but sit on their hands. It truly is a party of invertebrates. - The Tories have condemned themselves to a massive defeat at the next GE. Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch. The Tory Party has been betraying the country to the EU for 50 years.
The deal being proposed is basically lifted from the existing Switzerland-EU treaty. I mean it's almost identical.
I was always told the EU regretted the Swiss Treaties as they thought the Swiss had outmanoeuvred them in the negotiation.
It's a good comprise deal for everyone involved though and it has a basis in reality. What will be very difficult to sell for the government is putting all of this forwards without the EU saying "yes, but we insist on free movement". I think no deal comes back on to the table if the EU insist on free movement.
There’ll be a fudge. If EU citizens can come here, look for work and get the right to stay with an employment contract that’s FoM in all but name, especially with healthcare reciprocity slapped on in addition.
You're reading stuff that isn't being proposed. Right now the government is proposing that the UK stays in the single market for goods (fine, who gives a fuck about widget standards anyway), has some kind of customs arrangement that looks a lot like pre-clearance, and no free movement of people. The big concession is that we'll leave the single market for services, but that brings as many upsides as downsides, we stop being rule takers and it allows Westminster to be much more proactive in helping grow the services industries, but locks UK based business out of a big market without a capitalised EU based subsidiary.
Overall it's a fair compromise for a 52/48 referendum win. I just don't see how the EU accepts it without insisting on full free movement as they have for Switzerland.
It’s the start of a negotiation. This is not where we’ll end up.
You'd think so, although to hear some tell it doing anything other than agreeing to what the EU says is cherry picking! (as though the very nature of a negotiation, even between unequal parties, is not a discussion to see which cherries will and won't be picked)
The UK has given a lot of ground, the red lines are turning pink, crucially the Cabinet Brexiteers have been humiliated and emasculated. My guess is that the EU will begin to soften. Any deal that is now done will be unequivocally on their terms and that’s the win they’ve been looking for.
What do you think they will soften on? May and co will need something they can display as a win, but FOM is so hard for the EU to even appear to concede on.
Craig needs to read what is being proposed, it literally is the government proposing "let's have this Brexit cake and eat it" with a bit of flourish.
Plus signing the UK away. They're agreeing to a sea border in principle which is huge.
Citation required.
Search for 'backstop' and 'frictionless border'.
They will sign the backstop which is legally binding on the assumption that it won't be needed, but their proposal for the future relationship does not guarantee a frictionless border, so come next April, the chance of the backstop being activated at the end of transition will be very real.
Did you read Grieve’s comments? There are literally NO Votes in the HoC for splitting the Union- much as you might wish it otherwise....
The only person I’ve ever heard to be in favour of the Irish Sea customs checks, which would affect Irish businessses and NI businesses anyway, is williamglenn
Craig needs to read what is being proposed, it literally is the government proposing "let's have this Brexit cake and eat it" with a bit of flourish.
Plus signing the UK away. They're agreeing to a sea border in principle which is huge.
Where does it say that?
It doesn't that I can see. They commit to a backstop, the 'operational legal text' of which hasn't been agreed yet afaik, and William seems to be assuming said backstop we'll agree to will include a sea border.
The backstop is Northern Ireland only, and the proposed future relationship leaves open the possibility of regulatory divergence which is specifically says would have consequences for the border, which can only be in the Irish sea.
That's why the possibility will never be instantiated.
We're not there yet though. They are agreeing the principle of an Irish sea border, which will have a huge impact on the psychology of Northern Irish politics.
I don't think that's so at all. If the EU accepts this proposal, the backstop becomes irrelevant. If they reject it, then there is no deal.
Well a few things to take away from this disgraceful but totally predictable betrayal:
- Javid returned to form, backing a Remainer plan again as soon as he saw the way the wind was blowing. He is now finished as a candidate for next leader. Tory members only backed him because he pretended to be a Leaver. - None of the Cabinet leavers will ever become Tory leader. They will now be ridiculed for the rest of their careers. - The deal will not be rejected by the EU. However, they will just chip away at every piece until all the provisions match whatever they want. There will be no resistance from May. Free movement, payments into the budget and ECJ jurisdiction will all be conceded. The backstop will be agreed per the EU text. The money will be handed over with no links to the trade agreement. The idea that this will go away because the EU will reject it misses the point - May and Robbins are involved in a conspiracy with the EU. This meeting was all about provIng that the Leavers will never resign, nothing else. - If the Government plan to put this White Paper before Parliament, how are they going pass it? Labour support? - Or shall we just watch the Tory Leavers mumble but sit on their hands. It truly is a party of invertebrates. - The Tories have condemned themselves to a massive defeat at the next GE. Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch. The Tory Party has been betraying the country to the EU for 50 years.
Javid or Gove will succeed TM - hard Brexit is over and we move on
Craig needs to read what is being proposed, it literally is the government proposing "let's have this Brexit cake and eat it" with a bit of flourish.
Plus signing the UK away. They're agreeing to a sea border in principle which is huge.
Where does it say that?
It doesn't that I can see. They commit to a backstop, the 'operational legal text' of which hasn't been agreed yet afaik, and William seems to be assuming said backstop we'll agree to will include a sea border.
The backstop is Northern Ireland only, and the proposed future relationship leaves open the possibility of regulatory divergence which is specifically says would have consequences for the border, which can only be in the Irish sea.
Today remain lost just as a hard Brexit lost.
So William the game is up for you.
You need to start a campaign to rejoin as we are leaving
Nonsense! BINO and vassal state Brexit agreed today IS the deal everyone can agree is worse than no deal. What’s now so wonderfully clear is May believes brexit means BINO.
Craig needs to read what is being proposed, it literally is the government proposing "let's have this Brexit cake and eat it" with a bit of flourish.
Plus signing the UK away. They're agreeing to a sea border in principle which is huge.
Where does it say that?
It doesn't that I can see. They commit to a backstop, the 'operational legal text' of which hasn't been agreed yet afaik, and William seems to be assuming said backstop we'll agree to will include a sea border.
The backstop is Northern Ireland only, and the proposed future relationship leaves open the possibility of regulatory divergence which is specifically says would have consequences for the border, which can only be in the Irish sea.
That's why the possibility will never be instantiated.
We're not there yet though. They are agreeing the principle of an Irish sea border, which will have a huge impact on the psychology of Northern Irish politics.
I don't think that's so at all. If the EU accepts this proposal, the backstop becomes irrelevant. If they reject it, then there is no deal.
Craig needs to read what is being proposed, it literally is the government proposing "let's have this Brexit cake and eat it" with a bit of flourish.
Plus signing the UK away. They're agreeing to a sea border in principle which is huge.
Citation required.
Search for 'backstop' and 'frictionless border'.
They will sign the backstop which is legally binding on the assumption that it won't be needed, but their proposal for the future relationship does not guarantee a frictionless border, so come next April, the chance of the backstop being activated at the end of transition will be very real.
Did you read Grieve’s comments? There are literally NO Votes in the HoC for splitting the Union- much as you might wish it otherwise....
He is grasping at straws as tonight sealed us leaving the EU
Craig needs to read what is being proposed, it literally is the government proposing "let's have this Brexit cake and eat it" with a bit of flourish.
Plus signing the UK away. They're agreeing to a sea border in principle which is huge.
Where does it say that?
It doesn't that I can see. They commit to a backstop, the 'operational legal text' of which hasn't been agreed yet afaik, and William seems to be assuming said backstop we'll agree to will include a sea border.
The backstop is Northern Ireland only, and the proposed future relationship leaves open the possibility of regulatory divergence which is specifically says would have consequences for the border, which can only be in the Irish sea.
That's why the possibility will never be instantiated.
We're not there yet though. They are agreeing the principle of an Irish sea border, which will have a huge impact on the psychology of Northern Irish politics.
Yes. Theresa May may have to look for cross party support if the DUP defect. That will be interesting.
She would not get cross party support to sustain her in office . If the DUP is no longer prepared to prop up May on Confidence votes then a General Election does beckon.
Craig needs to read what is being proposed, it literally is the government proposing "let's have this Brexit cake and eat it" with a bit of flourish.
Plus signing the UK away. They're agreeing to a sea border in principle which is huge.
Where does it say that?
It doesn't that I can see. They commit to a backstop, the 'operational legal text' of which hasn't been agreed yet afaik, and William seems to be assuming said backstop we'll agree to will include a sea border.
If something like this is agreed, there will be no need for the backstop.
Well yes, but it is clear we still need to agree on a backstop just in case something like this is not agreed, and whether we have accepted a principle of splitting our own country is pretty significant.
NI was created by splitting a country. One day which may be soon or years away it will be reunited again. Think what we could do with the £10bn a year we dole out in subsidy to NI - we could spend it on the NHS instead.
Clearly the "mobility framework" is going to end up as something so close to free movement that you won't be able to tell the difference, except that the UK will honestly, this time we mean it voters, enforce the 90-day deadline for finding work.
Just look at the document. Every red line laid out in detail, with the only thing missing being actual red text. And then the following paragraph is a huge qualification and watering down of the preceding red line.
Even then the EU has never compromised on free movement, they have always insisted on 100%. Also, you're reading things that are not in there. Taken at face value the government has copied the Swiss-EU deal, taken out free movement and proposed it to the EU as the long term solution. To my mind it would be a reasonably good deal, I don't see how Brussels would agree. The danger is that if they reject this then no deal really does come into play and the commission will look incredibly unreasonable.
Craig needs to read what is being proposed, it literally is the government proposing "let's have this Brexit cake and eat it" with a bit of flourish.
Plus signing the UK away. They're agreeing to a sea border in principle which is huge.
Citation required.
Search for 'backstop' and 'frictionless border'.
They will sign the backstop which is legally binding on the assumption that it won't be needed, but their proposal for the future relationship does not guarantee a frictionless border, so come next April, the chance of the backstop being activated at the end of transition will be very real.
Did you read Grieve’s comments? There are literally NO Votes in the HoC for splitting the Union- much as you might wish it otherwise....
The only person I’ve ever heard to be in favour of the Irish Sea customs checks, which would affect Irish businessses and NI businesses anyway, is williamglenn
Don’t be daft. I’m in favour of remaining in the EU.
OK, the question is simple now. Here is what the UK is doing, how much market access does the EU give us based on that arrangement? Not oui, not non, but combien.
And the answer will likely be, almost total free access in sectors of relevance to the Irish border, not so much in GB based sectors, where the EU will cherry pick ruthlessly to their self interest.
I retain the belief that there will be a deal done broadly on May's hard BINO prospectus, where I have deviated from that it was always in speculative mode.
Well a few things to take away from this disgraceful but totally predictable betrayal:
- Javid returned to form, backing a Remainer plan again as soon as he saw the way the wind was blowing. He is now finished as a candidate for next leader. Tory members only backed him because he pretended to be a Leaver. - None of the Cabinet leavers will ever become Tory leader. They will now be ridiculed for the rest of their careers. - The deal will not be rejected by the EU. However, they will just chip away at every piece until all the provisions match whatever they want. There will be no resistance from May. Free movement, payments into the budget and ECJ jurisdiction will all be conceded. The backstop will be agreed per the EU text. The money will be handed over with no links to the trade agreement. The idea that this will go away because the EU will reject it misses the point - May and Robbins are involved in a conspiracy with the EU. This meeting was all about provIng that the Leavers will never resign, nothing else. - If the Government plan to put this White Paper before Parliament, how are they going pass it? Labour support? - Or shall we just watch the Tory Leavers mumble but sit on their hands. It truly is a party of invertebrates. - The Tories have condemned themselves to a massive defeat at the next GE. Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch. The Tory Party has been betraying the country to the EU for 50 years.
It's great isn't it!
Yes, if you are an undemocratic traitor.
This outcome will destroy whatever trust remained in the democratic system. Most Remainers on PB instinctively think that they are smarter than the average member of the public and take it for granted that their worldview will prevail. But the damage that will be done to the fabric of democracy by allowing the Remainers to overturn the reuslt of the referendum is incalculable and will impact the UK far beyond the outcome of Brexit.
Craig needs to read what is being proposed, it literally is the government proposing "let's have this Brexit cake and eat it" with a bit of flourish.
Plus signing the UK away. They're agreeing to a sea border in principle which is huge.
Where does it say that?
It doesn't that I can see. They commit to a backstop, the 'operational legal text' of which hasn't been agreed yet afaik, and William seems to be assuming said backstop we'll agree to will include a sea border.
The backstop is Northern Ireland only, and the proposed future relationship leaves open the possibility of regulatory divergence which is specifically says would have consequences for the border, which can only be in the Irish sea.
Today remain lost just as a hard Brexit lost.
So William the game is up for you.
You need to start a campaign to rejoin as we are leaving
Nonsense! BINO and vassal state Brexit agreed today IS the deal everyone can agree is worse than no deal. What’s now so wonderfully clear is May believes brexit means BINO.
I was always told the EU regretted the Swiss Treaties as they thought the Swiss had outmanoeuvred them in the negotiation.
It's a good comprise deal for everyone involved though and it has a basis in reality. What will be very difficult to sell for the government is putting all of this forwards without the EU saying "yes, but we insist on free movement". I think no deal comes back on to the table if the EU insist on free movement.
There’ll be a fudge. If EU citizens can come here, look for work and get the right to stay with an employment contract that’s FoM in all but name, especially with healthcare reciprocity slapped on in addition.
You're reading stuff that isn't being proposed. Right now the government is proposing that the UK stays in the single market for goods (fine, who gives a fuck about widget standards anyway), has some kind of customs arrangement that looks a lot like pre-clearance, and no free movement of people. The big concession is that we'll leave the single market for services, but that brings as many upsides as downsides, we stop being rule takers and it allows Westminster to be much more proactive in helping grow the services industries, but locks UK based business out of a big market without a capitalised EU based subsidiary.
Overall it's a fair compromise for a 52/48 referendum win. I just don't see how the EU accepts it without insisting on full free movement as they have for Switzerland.
It’s the start of a negotiation. This is not where we’ll end up. FoM will end; but it will remain.
But that's my point, negotiation sure, but the EU would need to insist on full fat free movement which the government would not be ready to accept. As I said, this looks like cakeism dressed up in EU compatible language. They have shown time and again that free movement is a non-negotiable point for them, they have never fudged it.
Clearly the "mobility framework" is going to end up as something so close to free movement that you won't be able to tell the difference, except that the UK will honestly, this time we mean it voters, enforce the 90-day deadline for finding work.
Just look at the document. Every red line laid out in detail, with the only thing missing being actual red text. And then the following paragraph is a huge qualification and watering down of the preceding red line.
Of course FOM will be retained. Just with a slightly different name. That should make HYUFD happy.
The deal being proposed is basically lifted from the existing Switzerland-EU treaty. I mean it's almost identical.
I was always told the EU regretted the Swiss Treaties as they thought the Swiss had outmanoeuvred them in the negotiation.
It's a good comprise deal for everyone involved though and it has a basis in reality. What will be very difficult to sell for the government is putting all of this forwards without the EU saying "yes, but we insist on free movement". I think no deal comes back on to the table if the EU insist on free movement.
There’ll be a fudge. If EU citizens can come here, look for work and get the right to stay with an employment contract that’s FoM in all but name, especially with healthcare reciprocity slapped on in addition.
You're reading stuffbeing rule takers and it allows Westminster to be much more proactive in helping grow the services industries, but locks UK based business out of a big market without a capitalised EU based subsidiary.
Overall it's a fair compromise for a 52/48 referendum win. I just don't see how the EU accepts it without insisting on full free movement as they have for Switzerland.
It’s the start of a negotiation. This is not where we’ll end up.
You'd think so, although to hear some tell it doing anything other than agreeing to what the EU says is cherry picking! (as though the very nature of a negotiation, even between unequal parties, is not a discussion to see which cherries will and won't be picked)
The UK has given a lot of ground, the red lines are turning pink, crucially the Cabinet Brexiteers have been humiliated and emasculated. My guess is that the EU will begin to soften. Any deal that is now done will be unequivocally on their terms and that’s the win they’ve been looking for.
What do you think they will soften on? May and co will need something they can display as a win, but FOM is so hard for the EU to even appear to concede on.
Labour mobility is a marvellous phrase that can mean many things. Put it this way, I find it almost impossible to believe that May would have put this document together - which is so far from what she was talking of only a few months back - without any input from the EU27.
Craig needs to read what is being proposed, it literally is the government proposing "let's have this Brexit cake and eat it" with a bit of flourish.
Plus signing the UK away. They're agreeing to a sea border in principle which is huge.
Where does it say that?
It doesn't that I can see. They commit to a backstop, the 'operational legal text' of which hasn't been agreed yet afaik, and William seems to be assuming said backstop we'll agree to will include a sea border.
The backstop is Northern Ireland only, and the proposed future relationship leaves open the possibility of regulatory divergence which is specifically says would have consequences for the border, which can only be in the Irish sea.
That's why the possibility will never be instantiated.
We're not there yet though. They are agreeing the principle of an Irish sea border, which will have a huge impact on the psychology of Northern Irish politics.
Yes. Theresa May may have to look for cross party support if the DUP defect. That will be interesting.
She would not get cross party support to sustain her in office . If the DUP is no longer prepared to prop up May on Confidence votes then a General Election does beckon.
Yes - I think you are right.
It is ironic that when Parliament comes to vote on the deal, all the hard Brexiteers who voted for a meaningless vote will be the ones voting against the deal.
Well a few things to take away from this disgraceful but totally predictable betrayal:
- Javid returned to form, backing a Remainer plan again as soon as he saw the way the wind was blowing. He is now finished as a candidate for next leader. Tory members only backed him because he pretended to be a Leaver. - None of the Cabinet leavers will ever become Tory leader. They will now be ridiculed for the rest of their careers. - The deal will not be rejected by the EU. However, they will just chip away at every piece until all the provisions match whatever they want. There will be no resistance from May. Free movement, payments into the budget and ECJ jurisdiction will all be conceded. The backstop will be agreed per the EU text. The money will be handed over with no links to the trade agreement. The idea that this will go away because the EU will reject it misses the point - May and Robbins are involved in a conspiracy with the EU. This meeting was all about provIng that the Leavers will never resign, nothing else. - If the Government plan to put this White Paper before Parliament, how are they going pass it? Labour support? - Or shall we just watch the Tory Leavers mumble but sit on their hands. It truly is a party of invertebrates. - The Tories have condemned themselves to a massive defeat at the next GE. Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch. The Tory Party has been betraying the country to the EU for 50 years.
It's great isn't it!
Yes, if you are an undemocratic traitor.
This outcome will destroy whatever trust remained in the democratic system. Most Remainers on PB instinctively think that they are smarter than the average member of the public and take it for granted that their worldview will prevail. But the damage that will be done to the fabric of democracy by allowing the Remainers to overturn the reuslt of the referendum is incalculable and will impact the UK far beyond the outcome of Brexit.
The usually coherent Carswell has to explain his own peculiar comment.
But you denying the direction of travel from no deal better than bad deal, to the We are free from the EU (but actually are no more free of it than Norway) Brexit that is now the governments white paper?
In history books the direction of travel will look like pure comedy.
It will look like political genius.
Book after book will be written about how the Remainer Prime Minister without a majority manged to get Soft Brexit through her own fractious party and the Commons.
If Theresa has betrayed my vote on free movement,she and the tories can Fcuk right off.
Johnno like many people you will have have the option of full freedom of movement, within the single market, as Labour advocates; or a bit less freedom of movement, a bit further from the EU, as TMay now advocates.
Clearly the "mobility framework" is going to end up as something so close to free movement that you won't be able to tell the difference, except that the UK will honestly, this time we mean it voters, enforce the 90-day deadline for finding work.
Just look at the document. Every red line laid out in detail, with the only thing missing being actual red text. And then the following paragraph is a huge qualification and watering down of the preceding red line.
Even then the EU has never compromised on free movement, they have always insisted on 100%. Also, you're reading things that are not in there. Taken at face value the government has copied the Swiss-EU deal, taken out free movement and proposed it to the EU as the long term solution. To my mind it would be a reasonably good deal, I don't see how Brussels would agree. The danger is that if they reject this then no deal really does come into play and the commission will look incredibly unreasonable.
Trust me, the "mobility framework" will be FM in all but name. Just as "due regard" will be CJEU jurisdiction in all but name, and the "customs facilitation agreement" will be CU membership in all but name.
Well a few things to take away from this disgraceful but totally predictable betrayal:
- Javid returned to form, backing a Remainer plan again as soon as he saw the way the wind was blowing. He is now finished as a candidate for next leader. Tory members only backed him because he pretended to be a Leaver.
That's called "Doing a David Cameron" in the business.
If Theresa has betrayed my vote on free movement,she and the tories can Fcuk right off.
I suspect that will not be an uncommon sentiment.
FOM remains the elephant in the room.
Newsnight cruelly playing Boris clips from the campaign....
Tyke highlights the fundamental problem with the whole mess. Many, many voters plumped for Leave to end mass migration, although that wasn't what was actually on the ballot.
Craig needs to read what is being proposed, it literally is the government proposing "let's have this Brexit cake and eat it" with a bit of flourish.
Plus signing the UK away. They're agreeing to a sea border in principle which is huge.
Where does it say that?
It doesn't that I can see. They commit to a backstop, the 'operational legal text' of which hasn't been agreed yet afaik, and William seems to be assuming said backstop we'll agree to will include a sea border.
If something like this is agreed, there will be no need for the backstop.
Well yes, but it is clear we still need to agree on a backstop just in case something like this is not agreed, and whether we have accepted a principle of splitting our own country is pretty significant.
NI was created by splitting a country. One day which may be soon or years away it will be reunited again.
What a silly way of looking at it. You could equally say ROI was created by a splitting a country and therefore it is inevitable that it will reunite with the UK. There are now circa 200 countries in the world, far more than there were 100 years ago, and I doubt most of those that were split will reunite.
The issue is about the splitting of an existing country, the UK.
Craig needs to read what is being proposed, it literally is the government proposing "let's have this Brexit cake and eat it" with a bit of flourish.
Plus signing the UK away. They're agreeing to a sea border in principle which is huge.
Citation required.
Search for 'backstop' and 'frictionless border'.
They will sign the backstop which is legally binding on the assumption that it won't be needed, but their proposal for the future relationship does not guarantee a frictionless border, so come next April, the chance of the backstop being activated at the end of transition will be very real.
Did you read Grieve’s comments? There are literally NO Votes in the HoC for splitting the Union- much as you might wish it otherwise....
He is grasping at straws as tonight sealed us leaving the EU
Bar the fact that we won't elect any MEPs anymore and our PM won't attend the Brussels summits at which the rules we abide by are decided - how will ordinary members of the public actually notice any difference when we 'leave' from being in the EU?
Sajid Javid never was a serious contender for Leader. With Saj, it's all about Saj, never about the Party.... and you can't Lead the Party unless you understand it. Bunnco - Your Man on the Spot
Well a few things to take away from this disgraceful but totally predictable betrayal:
- Javid returned to form, backing a Remainer plan again as soon as he saw the way the wind was blowing. He is now finished as a candidate for next leader. Tory members only backed him because he pretended to be a Leaver. - None of the Cabinet leavers will ever become Tory leader. They will now be ridiculed for the rest of their careers. - The deal will not be rejected by the EU. However, they will just chip away at every piece until all the provisions match whatever they want. There will be no resistance from May. Free movement, payments into the budget and ECJ jurisdiction will all be conceded. The backstop will be agreed per the EU text. The money will be handed over with no links to the trade agreement. The idea that this will go away because the EU will reject it misses the point - May and Robbins are involved in a conspiracy with the EU. This meeting was all about provIng that the Leavers will never resign, nothing else. - If the Government plan to put this White Paper before Parliament, how are they going pass it? Labour support? - Or shall we just watch the Tory Leavers mumble but sit on their hands. It truly is a party of invertebrates. - The Tories have condemned themselves to a massive defeat at the next GE. Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch. The Tory Party has been betraying the country to the EU for 50 years.
It's great isn't it!
Yes, if you are an undemocratic traitor.
You are SeanT and I claim my 21-year-old supermodel wife.
So months/reams of bullshit written about Brexit and a deal is done. Who's have thunk it.?
No deal has been done but that 2 dozen people who should have agreed on something long long before now, have at least agreed a position to try for a deal.
And even then who really believes that Cabinet unity will hold?
So there we have it, 'Brexit means Brexit' or we leave the EU and the single market but maintain harmonisation on trade rules on goods and 'strong reciprocal arrangements in services', freedom of movement still ends but is replaced by a 'mobility framework', we leave the customs union but will stay in 'a combined customs territory', ECJ jurisdiction ends but the UK 'will pay regard to its decisions in areas where common rules were in force' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44747444
I don't think that's so at all. If the EU accepts this proposal, the backstop becomes irrelevant. If they reject it, then there is no deal.
Exactly.
This is a major, major misinterpretation. The EU will never agree this deal, or any other, as part of the withdrawal agreement. There will only be a non binding political declaration. This is for the very simple reason that they will want to go back and renage on the agreement later. Therefore, the NI backstop HAS to be in the withdrawal agreeement.
This is the one place I can see May’s conspiracy falling over. What backstop text will the EU accept that can pass Parliament? Will May seriously propose a backstop that legally splits the UK on the grounds that it won’t be needed? Or will the EU agree to permanent UK membership of the SM/CU until the deal is done?
If Theresa has betrayed my vote on free movement,she and the tories can Fcuk right off.
I suspect that will not be an uncommon sentiment.
FOM remains the elephant in the room.
Newsnight cruelly playing Boris clips from the campaign....
My presumption is that Britain will start applying all the things it can do about EU immigrants that it currently doesn't and call that a hard fought concession.
Clearly the "mobility framework" is going to end up as something so close to free movement that you won't be able to tell the difference, except that the UK will honestly, this time we mean it voters, enforce the 90-day deadline for finding work.
Just look at the document. Every red line laid out in detail, with the only thing missing being actual red text. And then the following paragraph is a huge qualification and watering down of the preceding red line.
Even then the EU has never compromised on free movement, they have always insisted on 100%. Also, you're reading things that are not in there. Taken at face value the government has copied the Swiss-EU deal, taken out free movement and proposed it to the EU as the long term solution. To my mind it would be a reasonably good deal, I don't see how Brussels would agree. The danger is that if they reject this then no deal really does come into play and the commission will look incredibly unreasonable.
Trust me, the "mobility framework" will be FM in all but name. Just as "due regard" will be CJEU jurisdiction in all but name, and the "customs facilitation agreement" will be CU membership in all but name.
Due regard is pretty much how the Swiss treaty works, and more often than not it amounts to nothing and the Swiss just do what they want. Customs facilitation looks like pre-clearance, again pretty much lifted from Switzerland. Mobility framework could mean anything right now, it's a blank piece of paper, the issue, as I said is that the EU has form in insisting 100% free movement with trade deals of this type, no fudges, no 90%, you must sign up to the concept of EU citizenship and them being equivalent to one's own citizens.
I remain open to the idea that the EU would fudge on free movement, but very, very sceptical. To do so would be allowing some form of cakeism and would lead to other nations looking for similar deals on free movement.
I don't think that's so at all. If the EU accepts this proposal, the backstop becomes irrelevant. If they reject it, then there is no deal.
Exactly.
This is a major, major misinterpretation. The EU will never agree this deal, or any other, as part of the withdrawal agreement. There will only be a non binding political declaration. This is for the very simple reason that they will want to go back and renage on the agreement later. Therefore, the NI backstop HAS to be in the withdrawal agreeement.
This is the one place I can see May’s conspiracy falling over. What backstop text will the EU accept that can pass Parliament? Will May seriously propose a backstop that legally splits the UK on the grounds that it won’t be needed? Or will the EU agree to permanent UK membership of the SM/CU until the deal is done?
So there we have it, 'Brexit means Brexit' or we leave the EU and the single market but maintain harmonisation on trade rules on goods and 'strong reciprocal arrangements in services', freedom of movement still ends but is replaced by a 'mobility framework', we leave the customs union but will stay in 'a combined customs territory', ECJ jurisdiction ends but the UK 'will pay regard to its decisions in areas where common rules were in force' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44747444
This could have all been avoided if 'Associate Membership' of the EU had existed 10 years ago perhaps? Too little done too late to deal with the unpopularity of the institution, but work much earlier would have dealt with it.
Craig needs to read what is being proposed, it literally is the government proposing "let's have this Brexit cake and eat it" with a bit of flourish.
Plus signing the UK away. They're agreeing to a sea border in principle which is huge.
Where does it say that?
It doesn't that I can see. They commit to a backstop, the 'operational legal text' of which hasn't been agreed yet afaik, and William seems to be assuming said backstop we'll agree to will include a sea border.
If something like this is agreed, there will be no need for the backstop.
Well yes, but it is clear we still need to agree on a backstop just in case something like this is not agreed, and whether we have accepted a principle of splitting our own country is pretty significant.
NI was created by splitting a country. One day which may be soon or years away it will be reunited again.
What a silly way of looking at it. You could equally say ROI was created by a splitting a country and therefore it is inevitable that it will reunite with the UK. There are now circa 200 countries in the world, far more than there were 100 years ago, and I doubt most of those that were split will reunite.
The issue is about the splitting of an existing country, the UK.
Indeed, I am not clear from which country NI was "split" except from the Irish Free State to which it belonged for less than 24 hours, between 6 December 1922 and 7 December 1922.
So there we have it, 'Brexit means Brexit' or we leave the EU and the single market but maintain harmonisation on trade rules on goods and 'strong reciprocal arrangements in services', freedom of movement still ends but is replaced by a 'mobility framework', we leave the customs union but will stay in 'a combined customs territory', ECJ jurisdiction ends but the UK 'will pay regard to its decisions in areas where common rules were in force' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44747444
Congrats. As I have been saying for months, the Tory party always betrays the UK in Europe. Now, how are you going to cope with the ‘mobility framework’ which is just FOM by another name? Endless rationalisation?
Or you could just try a principled resignation from the Tory party!
I don't think that's so at all. If the EU accepts this proposal, the backstop becomes irrelevant. If they reject it, then there is no deal.
Exactly.
This is a major, major misinterpretation. The EU will never agree this deal, or any other, as part of the withdrawal agreement. There will only be a non binding political declaration. This is for the very simple reason that they will want to go back and renage on the agreement later. Therefore, the NI backstop HAS to be in the withdrawal agreeement.
This is the one place I can see May’s conspiracy falling over. What backstop text will the EU accept that can pass Parliament? Will May seriously propose a backstop that legally splits the UK on the grounds that it won’t be needed? Or will the EU agree to permanent UK membership of the SM/CU until the deal is done?
None of these options look easy to solve.
Straws. Yer clutching at 'em mate.
Do you have an argument or analysis? I assume not.
Clearly the "mobility framework" is going to end up as something so close to free movement that you won't be able to tell the difference, except that the UK will honestly, this time we mean it voters, enforce the 90-day deadline for finding work.
Just look at the document. Every red line laid out in detail, with the only thing missing being actual red text. And then the following paragraph is a huge qualification and watering down of the preceding red line.
Even then the EU has never compromised on free movement, they have always insisted on 100%. Also, you're reading things that are not in there. Taken at face value the government has copied the Swiss-EU deal, taken out free movement and proposed it to the EU as the long term solution. To my mind it would be a reasonably good deal, I don't see how Brussels would agree. The danger is that if they reject this then no deal really does come into play and the commission will look incredibly unreasonable.
There comes a point where domestic political considerations kick in. Now that the UK has so publicly conceded so many points and principles, the No Deal scenario becomes a lot more dangerous for the leaders of the EU27, because even though the UK suffers most there are also serious downsides for their countries. Those would now be a whole lot harder to sell given how much ground the UK has conceded, so sticking absolutely to the four freedoms in such circumstances would invite serious opposition. Very few leaders in the EU are in strong enough positions to face that down. There’ll be a negotiation, lines will be blurred further and a deal will be done. We’ll Brexit and not much will change.
So there we have it, 'Brexit means Brexit' or we leave the EU and the single market but maintain harmonisation on trade rules on goods and 'strong reciprocal arrangements in services', freedom of movement still ends but is replaced by a 'mobility framework', we leave the customs union but will stay in 'a combined customs territory', ECJ jurisdiction ends but the UK 'will pay regard to its decisions in areas where common rules were in force' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44747444
Congrats. As I have been saying for months, the Tory party always betrays the UK in Europe. Now, how are you going to cope with the ‘mobility framework’ which is just FOM by another name? Endless rationalisation?
Or you could just try a principled resignation from the Tory party!
HYUFD will support whatever the Tory party tells him to support.
"Mr Corbyn is in fact presiding over the takeover of the party by three groups: ethnic minorities, particularly Muslims; public-sector professionals; and frustrated millennials, most of them the university-educated children of the salaried middle class, who can’t get their feet on the property ladder."
rcs1000 said the test of the 'right' Brexit would be one utterly anathema to both archerau and William Glenn. Perhaps we're on the right track after all.
So there we have it, 'Brexit means Brexit' or we leave the EU and the single market but maintain harmonisation on trade rules on goods and 'strong reciprocal arrangements in services', freedom of movement still ends but is replaced by a 'mobility framework', we leave the customs union but will stay in 'a combined customs territory', ECJ jurisdiction ends but the UK 'will pay regard to its decisions in areas where common rules were in force' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44747444
Congrats. As I have been saying for months, the Tory party always betrays the UK in Europe. Now, how are you going to cope with the ‘mobility framework’ which is just FOM by another name? Endless rationalisation?
Or you could just try a principled resignation from the Tory party!
By not being in the EU we won’t be bound by welfare rules for EU citizens. Probably reciprocal healthcare will be negotiated.
rcs1000 said the test of the 'right' Brexit would be one utterly anathema to both archerau and William Glenn. Perhaps we're on the right track after all.
Craig needs to read what is being proposed, it literally is the government proposing "let's have this Brexit cake and eat it" with a bit of flourish.
Plus signing the UK away. They're agreeing to a sea border in principle which is huge.
Where does it say that?
It doesn't that I can see. They commit to a backstop, the 'operational legal text' of which hasn't been agreed yet afaik, and William seems to be assuming said backstop we'll agree to will include a sea border.
If something like this is agreed, there will be no need for the backstop.
Well yes, but it is clear we still need to agree on a backstop just in case something like this is not agreed, and whether we have accepted a principle of splitting our own country is pretty significant.
NI was created by splitting a country. One day which may be soon or years away it will be reunited again.
What a silly way of looking at it. You could equally say ROI was created by a splitting a country and therefore it is inevitable that it will reunite with the UK. There are now circa 200 countries in the world, far more than there were 100 years ago, and I doubt most of those that were split will reunite.
The issue is about the splitting of an existing country, the UK.
How many have reunited as a point of interest ?
East and West Germany North and South Vietnam Errr Is that it ?
I’m already seeing Brexiteers saying they’d rather stay in than this.
I think Hannan said so >6 months ago. He and others now need to explain to their 'followers' that Brexit has gone a little bit wrong and might not be the best outcome.
So far the stagecraft and expectation management from no10 has been first rate. We'll know in a couple of days if it has worked.
Yes, a welcome change from the PM's earlier record on stagecraft.
The biggest question now is whether the EU side were informed in advance of the fudge and are buying into it. Michel Barnier seems to have been much more conciliatory in tone today than he has been over the last couple of weeks. It's all reminiscent of the December 2017 shenanigans, so I expect it all has been choreographed in advance.
rcs1000 said the test of the 'right' Brexit would be one utterly anathema to both archerau and William Glenn. Perhaps we're on the right track after all.
The bloody difficult woman seems at last to have put her foot down and disloyal cabinet ministers will be out.
She has seen off a hard Brexit, steared towards a path that Parliament are more likely to approve, a softish Brexit and no doubt in years to come, depending on what happens in the EU, a probable move to re-join.
As far as I am concerned I am content tonight
A Brexit that sees us leave the single market, customs union and ECJ is now considers soft Brexit. What, pray, is hard Brexit now defined as?
We won’t be rejoining BigG. We’d lose our opt outs.
"as if a combined customs territory" looks like a customs union and quacks like a customs union to me. Plus "Due regard" to the CJEU and what seems pretty like the SM in goods
It all seems pretty damn soft to me.
I hope we win at football tomorrow! Then May can go even softer. The Golden Rule of Brexit is that whatever Young Brexit Fogies say is the prognosis, the opposite is true.
Well a few things to take away from this disgraceful but totally predictable betrayal:
- Javid returned to form, backing a Remainer plan again as soon as he saw the way the wind was blowing. He is now finished as a candidate for next leader. Tory members only backed him because he pretended to be a Leaver. - None of the Cabinet leavers will ever become Tory leader. They will now be ridiculed for the rest of their careers. - The deal will not be rejected by the EU. However, they will just chip away at every piece until all the provisions match whatever they want. There will be no resistance from May. Free movement, payments into the budget and ECJ jurisdiction will all be conceded. The backstop will be agreed per the EU text. The money will be handed over with no links to the trade agreement. The idea that this will go away because the EU will reject it misses the point - May and Robbins are involved in a conspiracy with the EU. This meeting was all about provIng that the Leavers will never resign, nothing else. - If the Government plan to put this White Paper before Parliament, how are they going pass it? Labour support? - Or shall we just watch the Tory Leavers mumble but sit on their hands. It truly is a party of invertebrates. - The Tories have condemned themselves to a massive defeat at the next GE. Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch. The Tory Party has been betraying the country to the EU for 50 years.
On what basis? Corbyn's Brexit would be almost identical to this fudged Brexit plus socialism which no Tories are going to vote for. At most UKIP may get a minor boost out of this compromise but Corbyn won't
So there we have it, 'Brexit means Brexit' or we leave the EU and the single market but maintain harmonisation on trade rules on goods and 'strong reciprocal arrangements in services', freedom of movement still ends but is replaced by a 'mobility framework', we leave the customs union but will stay in 'a combined customs territory', ECJ jurisdiction ends but the UK 'will pay regard to its decisions in areas where common rules were in force' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44747444
Congrats. As I have been saying for months, the Tory party always betrays the UK in Europe. Now, how are you going to cope with the ‘mobility framework’ which is just FOM by another name? Endless rationalisation?
Or you could just try a principled resignation from the Tory party!
By not being in the EU we won’t be bound by welfare rules for EU citizens. Probably reciprocal healthcare will be negotiated.
The latter doesn't make sense at all. If anything it would be better for us not to, given that the NHS is completely free. Making EU citizens buy some kind of insurance for NHS cover would be a huge disincentive for unskilled and low wage workers to come. If the oldies in Europe have to pay for insurance in the EU then that's really not our problem.
rcs1000 said the test of the 'right' Brexit would be one utterly anathema to both archerau and William Glenn. Perhaps we're on the right track after all.
I’m already seeing Brexiteers saying they’d rather stay in than this.
This is the BINO, aka Vassal State, option, isn't it? We continue to be bound by EU laws, but no longer have a commissioner or representation in the EU Parliament?
So far the stagecraft and expectation management from no10 has been first rate. We'll know in a couple of days if it has worked.
Yes, a welcome change from the PM's earlier record on stagecraft.
The biggest question now is whether the EU side were informed in advance of the fudge and are buying into it. Michel Barnier seems to have been much more conciliatory in tone today than he has been over the last couple of weeks. It's all reminiscent of the December 2017 shenanigans, so I expect it all has been choreographed in advance.
Comments
They will sign the backstop which is legally binding on the assumption that it won't be needed, but their proposal for the future relationship does not guarantee a frictionless border, so come next April, the chance of the backstop being activated at the end of transition will be very real.
- Javid returned to form, backing a Remainer plan again as soon as he saw the way the wind was blowing. He is now finished as a candidate for next leader. Tory members only backed him because he pretended to be a Leaver.
- None of the Cabinet leavers will ever become Tory leader. They will now be ridiculed for the rest of their careers.
- The deal will not be rejected by the EU. However, they will just chip away at every piece until all the provisions match whatever they want. There will be no resistance from May. Free movement, payments into the budget and ECJ jurisdiction will all be conceded. The backstop will be agreed per the EU text. The money will be handed over with no links to the trade agreement. The idea that this will go away because the EU will reject it misses the point - May and Robbins are involved in a conspiracy with the EU. This meeting was all about provIng that the Leavers will never resign, nothing else.
- If the Government plan to put this White Paper before Parliament, how are they going pass it? Labour support?
- Or shall we just watch the Tory Leavers mumble but sit on their hands. It truly is a party of invertebrates.
- The Tories have condemned themselves to a massive defeat at the next GE. Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch. The Tory Party has been betraying the country to the EU for 50 years.
Has she or hasn't she Andrea? And since the Cabinet has agreed, I assume she would not support any current member of the Cabinet in any contest.
So William the game is up for you.
You need to start a campaign to rejoin as we are leaving
Our non contributory benefits system and free at the point of use healthcare system is the problem. Bar pensioners with S1s Brits moving to Pretty much every eastern and Central European country who dont work - including students - do not have full access to the national healthcare system or welfare if they are resident (and therefore not EHIC eligible). They would need private healthcare. If we can't get it there why should their nationals qualify here?
If welfare and NHS access is retained under this deal how is it different to FOM - a job offer for an unskilled low wage job which means you won't be self sufficient financially without tax credits, HB and more surely can't be sufficient?
Just look at the document. Every red line laid out in detail, with the only thing missing being actual red text. And then the following paragraph is a huge qualification and watering down of the preceding red line.
God forbid.
And the answer will likely be, almost total free access in sectors of relevance to the Irish border, not so much in GB based sectors, where the EU will cherry pick ruthlessly to their self interest.
I retain the belief that there will be a deal done broadly on May's hard BINO prospectus, where I have deviated from that it was always in speculative mode.
This outcome will destroy whatever trust remained in the democratic system. Most Remainers on PB instinctively think that they are smarter than the average member of the public and take it for granted that their worldview will prevail. But the damage that will be done to the fabric of democracy by allowing the Remainers to overturn the reuslt of the referendum is incalculable and will impact the UK far beyond the outcome of Brexit.
It is ironic that when Parliament comes to vote on the deal, all the hard Brexiteers who voted for a meaningless vote will be the ones voting against the deal.
Book after book will be written about how the Remainer Prime Minister without a majority manged to get Soft Brexit through her own fractious party and the Commons.
FOM remains the elephant in the room.
Newsnight cruelly playing Boris clips from the campaign....
The issue is about the splitting of an existing country, the UK.
Bunnco - Your Man on the Spot
And even then who really believes that Cabinet unity will hold?
This is the one place I can see May’s conspiracy falling over. What backstop text will the EU accept that can pass Parliament? Will May seriously propose a backstop that legally splits the UK on the grounds that it won’t be needed? Or will the EU agree to permanent UK membership of the SM/CU until the deal is done?
None of these options look easy to solve.
Everyone happy.
I remain open to the idea that the EU would fudge on free movement, but very, very sceptical. To do so would be allowing some form of cakeism and would lead to other nations looking for similar deals on free movement.
If they don't mind sending their soldiers to defend the Pope maybe they would send their diplomats to help the UK.
Or you could just try a principled resignation from the Tory party!
https://www.economist.com/bagehots-notebook/2018/07/06/labour-is-no-longer-the-party-of-the-traditional-working-class
Perhaps we're on the right track after all.
There is no greater comment on the whole Brexit shitshow than that. It has resurrected these people.
East and West Germany
North and South Vietnam
Errr
Is that it ?
Also TM has told Boris if he steps out of line she will sack him
The biggest question now is whether the EU side were informed in advance of the fudge and are buying into it. Michel Barnier seems to have been much more conciliatory in tone today than he has been over the last couple of weeks. It's all reminiscent of the December 2017 shenanigans, so I expect it all has been choreographed in advance.