Brexit Thread V - The Final Countdown?!?

[Hrothbern]

Metropolitan police commissioner says crashing out of the EU without an agreement would mean having to replace certain structures /.../ which could threaten the police’s crime-fighting capability.
> "scaremongering about police stuff (sic) ever happening".

I guess Christmas is over.

EDIT: Also, there are a whole lot of things people did without in 1603.
I'm sure we'll find out more soon

The big austerity cuts on the police force in the UK have had already far bigger negative effects than any conceivable increase in terrorism.
The other austerity cuts leading to growth of the root causes of criminality lso there.

But yeah... the battle against terrorism always sells good.

 

[Arakhor]

And Robert Cecil didn't need to propose to surrender to the pope to obtain information from the continent.

I know it's popular to blame the Catholic Church these days, but Pope Francis is not to blame for anything to do with Brexit or our chronic inability to negotiate with our erstwhile partners.

Theresa might want to take some tips from him though - the Pope is Europe's only absolute monarch and the Vatican City is not part of the EU.

 

[Hrothbern]

The EU regulations on higher living and working standards, on human rights, free press and rule of law, can be seen very well as the Holy Roman Church meddling in the tribal feudal interests. The compromising of that Church with the Big Nobility comparable with the EU compromising with Big Corporate.

The EU nothing else than the Holy Roman European Empire

And yes
This is not perfectly logical.... but sentiments do not need to be logical.

 

[Arakhor]

I suppose it does fit better if we go back to the 1530s - Henry VIII breaking from the Catholic Church over an ill-conceived and selfish desire for supremacy, causing a great deal of controversy and political upheaval for decades to come.

 

[AmazonQueen]

I suppose it does fit better if we go back to the 1530s - Henry VIII breaking from the Catholic Church over an ill-conceived and selfish desire for supremacy, causing a great deal of controversy and political upheaval for decades to come.

I'm casting Boris as Henry VIII, Moggie as Cromwell, and Cameron as Cardinal Wolsey.

 

[Arakhor]

That leaves Empress Treeza as Anne Boleyn - the short-lived true believer whose machinations were instrumental in causing the schism to go ahead.

 

[Hrothbern]

I'm casting Boris as Henry VIII, Moggie as Cromwell, and Cameron as Cardinal Wolsey.

Boris would fit
Henry VIII was after all the Defender of the Faith before his desire for a son changed everything.

Here, in 2008, Boris is the Defender of the Great EU, sitting in Constantinople, making the argument that Turkey should join the EU.

And Cromwell's fall just after his second big achievement of taking the wealth of all the monasteries and giving the land to protestants to secure them staying protestant.
Like the fall of Cameron shortly after "securing" Brexit.

 

[Arakhor]

JRM has exhibited animal cunning in this process - his accountants have moved his business to Ireland and the spectre of the evil ERG cowed May into submission for two years, but when push came to shove, he failed not once but twice to get his chosen leader in power. Cromwell was a lot more competent than that.

 

[Sofista]

Theresa might want to take some tips from him though - the Pope is Europe's only absolute monarch and the Vatican City is not part of the EU.

It only uses and mints its own Euros, has an open border, relies on an EU state's army for self-defense and until 2008/9 automatically accepted as its own any law said state parliament approved (now it reserves to check first, as the Vatican feels that Italian legislation is moving progressively away from Catholic stances).
Plus, I don't think absolute monarchies are eligible for EU membership.

 

[Arakhor]

Thanks for the input, Sofista. I was aware that there were significant concessions on the Vatican's part to allow for geographical realities, but I wasn't au fait with the specifics.

 

[Hrothbern]

The Prince of Liechtenstein has also absolute powers since a referendum in 2003 granted that to him and his family.
The only real power left to the people is that they can vote to abolish the monarchy.
Which is unlikely to happen if you know Lichtenstein and the way the people there are subsidised to high prosperity by the wealth of the Prince.

The Prince of Liechtenstein has broad powers, which include the appointment of judges, the dismissal of ministers or government, veto power, and the calling of referendums. The Liechtenstein constitutional referendum, 2003 was a proposal put forth by reigning Prince Hans-Adam II to revise parts of the Constitution of Liechtenstein, on the one hand expanding the monarch's power with the authority to veto legislation, while on the other hand securing for the citizenry the option to abolish the monarchy by vote at any time without being subject to princely veto.[2] The right of the parishes that make up the principality to secede was simultaneously recognised.
Prince Hans-Adam had warned that he and his family would move to Austria if the referendum were rejected. Despite opposition from Mario Frick, a former Liechtenstein prime minister, the Prince's referendum was approved by the electorate in 2003. Opponents accused Hans-Adam of engaging in emotional blackmail to achieve his goal and constitutional experts from the Council of Europe branded the event as a retrograde move.[3] A proposal to revoke the Prince's new veto powers was rejected by 76% of voters in a 2012 referendum.[4] On 15 August 2004 Prince Hans-Adam II formally delegated most of his sovereign authority to his son and heir, the Hereditary Prince Alois, as a way of transitioning to a new generation. Formally, Hans-Adam remains head of state.[5]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_Liechtenstein

 

[EnglishEdward]

The May deal is only a divorce deal and is vague on the future EU relation. It protects the soft Irish border and allows for a semi-membership of the UK of 2-4 years to get a real deal.
=> In fact nothing really happens !!!
If the UK is going to burn again all those years with political infighting or taking a break, nothing really happens economically. Except waning trust of domestic business and big investors.
=> Could still go in the direction of a standard comprehensive FTA (like with Canada) with the UK free to strike its own FTA deals with other countries
=> or a very close relationship with the EU. Almost like being member of the EU with very many opt outs including as consequence of the Brexit no voting right.
I think the May deal will continue the Brexit process with another 2-4 years. And as long as that final choice in direction has not been made it will be a huge domestic political fight.

That hardly sells the Michael Barnier (not the Theresa May deal) no real withdrawal deal to us.

The no-deal is more clear.

We can welcome that.

The EU regulations on higher living and working standards, on human rights, free press and rule of law,

We had rising living standards, regulations on working standards, human rights, free press and the rule of law long before we joined the EEC/EC/EU.

 

[Kyriakos]

Are there any recent polls re percentage for each party in a general election to come?

 

[Hrothbern]

We had rising living standards, regulations on working standards, human rights, free press and the rule of law long before we joined the EEC/EC/EU.

The UK was no backward country, much has been achieved before 1973, but many differences as well from the very start
No need to make a comprehensive difference list, and the Thatcher wave did cause a diverge in progress of standards, deepened out by the neo-liberals.
And workers protection, from regulations on petty stuff like social rooms in factories to the real stuff of hire & fire protections, have always been much less than the old EU members.

But key is I think that the EU protections are the compromise of a team of players, and not the result of internal UK struggles.

That hardly sells the Michael Barnier (not the Theresa May deal) no real withdrawal deal to us.

You mean by "us" the Brexiteers or the Lexiteers ? or both ? or the UK people as a whole ?
After wasting 2.5 years, you get time for something orderly....
AND you are forced to recognise the Irish issue as being important enough to be a cornerstone of the EU (Ireland) position for anything agreed now or in the future during that 2-4 years transition negotiating period.

No deal on the Irish issue means no deal with the EU above the level of bare bone WTO.
If that no deal is preferred, there is indeed no benefit in any negotiation.

 

[AmazonQueen]

JRM has exhibited animal cunning in this process - his accountants have moved his business to Ireland and the spectre of the evil ERG cowed May into submission for two years, but when push came to shove, he failed not once but twice to get his chosen leader in power. Cromwell was a lot more competent than that.

Well its very much a remake of Carry On Henry with this lot.

 

[Hrothbern]

Are there any recent polls re percentage for each party in a general election to come?

That depends a lot on the final Westminster positions of the parties on Brexit and their election mamifesto.
Here from a post of me a few pages back the last YouGov poll taking the Westminster positions into account.
The article of Dec 20 written by a former YouGov President:

3. Labour could suffer badly if it ends up facilitating Brexit
Labour is seeking an early general election. YouGov asked people how they would vote if Labour, along with the Conservatives, supported going ahead with Brexit. Labour slumps to third place, with 22%, behind the Liberal Democrats, who would jump to 26%. Those who voted Labour last year and remain the year before say they are more likely to switch to the Liberal Democrats (49%) than stay with Labour (41%). The survey suggests no compensating boost among those who voted leave in the referendum. In fact, it would be the Conservatives who would benefit if both main parties backed Brexit. Their support among leave voters would rise from 62% to 69%. Labour support among leave voters would slip from 21% to 19%.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/20/polls-stay-eu-yougov-brexit-peoples-vote

 

[AmazonQueen]

That depends a lot on the final Westminster positions of the parties on Brexit and their election mamifesto.
Here from a post of me a few pages back the last YouGov poll taking the Westminster positions into account.
The article of Dec 20 written by a former YouGov President:

Atm I wouldn't vote Labour and I have in every general election since 1983. It wouldn't be so bad if Corbyn's approach seemed realistic and/or honest but it doesn't seem either to me. Wouldn't vote Liberal Democrat either. Haven't decided between Green and Plaid Cymru yet.

 

[EnglishEdward]

@ Hrothbern

Yes, by "us" I refer to the "UK people as a whole"

If that no deal is preferred, there is indeed no benefit in any negotiation.

Many of us in the UK perceive that "no deal" is indeed the European Commission's perspective.

They and I know that an arrangement whereby the UK cannot leave the
EU Customs Union without the permission of the EU is not a deal.

While people may talk about switching to the Liberal Democrats;
if it is a two horse Conservative and Labour race in their constituency,
they usually vote for what they perceive as the least worst of them.

 

[Senethro]

https://twitter.com/ukhomeoffice/status/1078206349148708865

A subtle threat as part of a bargaining position or just regular bureaucratic misery? Brought to you by the same people that delivered the Windrush scandal.

 

[Arakhor]

Many of us in the UK perceive that "no deal" is indeed the European Commission's perspective.

They and I know that an arrangement whereby the UK cannot leave the EU Customs Union without the permission of the EU is not a deal.

Then you should be blaming the Prime Minister for her farcical red lines that cut off all other avenues of negotiation.