Is Britain about to leave the EU?

[innonimatu]

As I was writing in another thread, it is impossible to negotiate with entrenched bureaucracies, or with the staff of institutions who has something to lose with change. The one way to deal with these things is to accept that they are enemies and behave accordingly.

If I was PM in the UK I would take a few months to build up customs and frontier services to greater capacity, prepare necessary legislation and make sure enough votes would be had in parliament. And when that was in place, I would just declare the Treaty of Lisbon null and void regarding the UK. And call the ambassadors or each and every EU m,ember country and offer them treaties on commerce, justice, and migration: take it or leave it. To hell with article 50 or exit negotiations with "EU officials": there is nothing to negotiate with them, they don't want to negotiate. The UK is there, right besides Europe, and each national government can either deal with it, or childishly start pretending pretend the UK doesn't exist.

They'd all come and seek deals. They must, weak as they are already - if one doesn't its neighbours might and gain an advantage. And the EU's bureaucracy and all its claims would be put in their place, exposed as the useless parasites they are.
And I strongly suspect this is how it will go in the end. The right move when the rules are stacked against you is not to play: dump the rules, throw the table, and attack the problem from a new angle.

 

[JohannaK]

I'm not sure it would quite work.

 

[innonimatu]

What can the EU do, declare an embargo against the UK? That's the sole thing they can try as a retaliation. Otherwise trade defaults to WTO rules.

And the situation of each country's citizens in the UK must still be solved, and that is a hugely important political problem for many. The UK takes in far more "eu citizens" than the opposite. Worse for the EU, it depend on the country, another incentive for bilateral negotiations. And of those that have UK immigrants I say hell will freeze over before Spain or Portugal expel UK citizens, instead of grabbing any offered reciprocal treaty. If someone on EU level tries to block that they will be told to go to said hell.

What incentive does each country have to agree to any "retaliation" against the UK? I do wish, really wish, that the french-german axis try a "with us or against us" move...

If the british government wasn't so worried about favoring its financial businesses they would have called the bluff already. It's the sole card the EU has, and they can't play it outright because it's potentially destabilizing for the EU also.

 

[Arakhor]

I know that you favour "hell or high water" reactions, but even the hardest of "hard Brexit" Tories aren't going to adopt that premise, so your post simply comes down to political onanism on your end.

 

[Verbose]

Considering recent developments, we just might get to see the UK try something like that.

No one really wants to be wrong alongside the UK, if the alternative is to be wrong with the rest of the EU. No upside to it.

 

[Kyriakos]

Considering recent developments, we just might get to see the UK try something like that.

No one really wants to be wrong alongside the UK, if the alternative is to be wrong with the rest of the EU. No upside to it.

Not that the UK is some beacon of light, but do recall how the current EU is basically majority former soviet block client states of a specific country

That the UK voted due to intuition instead of actual harm by the EU, does not negate the fact that the vote would not result to this had the EU not ruined itself in the best part of the last decade. UK helped trigger this, by agreeing/promoting the 2003 expansion. But it isn't the core issue now by far.

 

[really]

Twelve weeks till the end of March.

I wonder when we will see the plan.

 

[FriendlyFire]

What can the EU do, declare an embargo against the UK? That's the sole thing they can try as a retaliation. Otherwise trade defaults to WTO rules.

And the situation of each country's citizens in the UK must still be solved, and that is a hugely important political problem for many. The UK takes in far more "eu citizens" than the opposite. Worse for the EU, it depend on the country, another incentive for bilateral negotiations. And of those that have UK immigrants I say hell will freeze over before Spain or Portugal expel UK citizens, instead of grabbing any offered reciprocal treaty. If someone on EU level tries to block that they will be told to go to said hell.

What incentive does each country have to agree to any "retaliation" against the UK? I do wish, really wish, that the french-german axis try a "with us or against us" move...
If the british government wasn't so worried about favoring its financial businesses they would have called the bluff already. It's the sole card the EU has, and they can't play it outright because it's potentially destabilizing for the EU also.

As I posted before default WTO rules would be deverstating for much of the UK economy which relies on open border without time delaying inspections as well as UK passporting (backdoor for other countries to import into the EU)
One faction of the Brexiters want more immigration, which the other faction wants less. Well find out which holds the whip hand soon enough.
Then there is the question of working EU citizens in the UK and UK citizens in the EU. Brexiters going start mass deportation ? Because that what Hard Brexit means along with all UK nationals living in the EU being deported back to the UK

why dosnt the UK pass its own labour laws instead ? Germany has a law saying all jobs must goto a german citizen first before eu citizen.
I have a feeling that after the UK leaves the EU its going to find out many of its problems which are blamed on the EU are actually of there own making.

 

[EnglishEdward]

Someone else coming out and saying that the government's timetable is unrealistic? Well, shiver my timbers.

It seems to me that it is rather difficult for him to say that about a timetable that in my mind does not actually exist.

I simply do not regard the two sentence statement

"The UK voted to leave the European Union in the 23 June 2016 EU referendum. The government is now preparing to leave
the EU in the best possible way for the UK’s national interest as we look to trigger Article 50 by the end of March 2017."

at https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/brexit as being a timetable.

However competent Sir Ivan Rogers is; he has for several years been operating on the basis of (i) negotiating the
United Kingdom's interest as an active member of the European Union and looking forward to future developments.

That is a separate context from (ii) negotiating the UK's exit and (iii) negotiating with the EU or (iv) with the member states.

Indeed being fine tuned or optimised with respect to (i) may have made him mistuned with respect to (ii), (iii) and/or (iv).

And I question the value of having Remainers, who are understandardly half hearted, overtly involved in the key roles.

Twelve weeks till the end of March.

I wonder when we will see the plan.

Sir, your statement implies that a UK government plan already exists of which I am rather doubtful.

The EU at least seems to have a plan, we will offer the UK the Norway plan but claim extra costs and damages.

 

[EnglishEdward]

Germany has a law saying all jobs must goto a german citizen first before eu citizen.

Can you provide us with a URL pointing to that particular German law?

 

[EnglishEdward]

As I was writing in another thread, it is impossible to negotiate with entrenched bureaucracies, or with the staff of institutions who has something to lose with change. The one way to deal with these things is to accept that they are enemies and behave accordingly.

If I was PM in the UK I would take a few months to build up customs and frontier services to greater capacity, prepare necessary legislation and make sure enough votes would be had in parliament. And when that was in place, I would just declare the Treaty of Lisbon null and void regarding the UK. And call the ambassadors or each and every EU m,ember country and offer them treaties on commerce, justice, and migration: take it or leave it. To hell with article 50 or exit negotiations with "EU officials": there is nothing to negotiate with them, they don't want to negotiate. The UK is there, right besides Europe, and each national government can either deal with it, or childishly start pretending pretend the UK doesn't exist.

They'd all come and seek deals. They must, weak as they are already - if one doesn't its neighbours might and gain an advantage. And the EU's bureaucracy and all its claims would be put in their place, exposed as the useless parasites they are.
And I strongly suspect this is how it will go in the end. The right move when the rules are stacked against you is not to play: dump the rules, throw the table, and attack the problem from a new angle.

A hard Brexit may result in foreigners needing to obtain some sort of visa for staying in the UK, and UK citizens in the EU, for stays over a set period of time.

This would mean that the UK could limit the supply of surplus would be workers or benefit tourist complainants.

It would also mean that Spain and Portugal could limit further ex patriat UK retirees.

For people already lawfully established in the other state, requesting such visas would likely be no more than an internet form filling exercise
and granted automatically, subject to criminal records checks. But running visa systems costs, so there'd likely be a significant charge.

 

[GoodSarmatian]

why dosnt the UK pass its own labour laws instead ? Germany has a law saying all jobs must goto a german citizen first before eu citizen.

That sounds made up and would be against EU rules.

I have a feeling that after the UK leaves the EU its going to find out many of its problems which are blamed on the EU are actually of there own making.

Of that I am certain. The new "sovereignty" will first express itself in an attack on workers' rights,

 

[Gigaz]

If the Brexiter had to acknowledge that expertise on the EU is correlated with Remainism, and that they need such expertise, that would indeed pose a problem, both philosophically and practically.

 

[EnglishEdward]

If the Brexiter had to acknowledge that expertise on the EU is correlated with Remainism, and that they need such expertise, that would indeed pose a problem, both philosophically and practically.

Yes, I believe that most detailed expertise held by UK nationals regarding the details of the people and power structures within EU institutions and the details of EU rules is probably
held by Remainers because of first self selection by individuals (only those who were pro EU would be interested in obtaining that) and secondly selection by EU individuals and
institutions (who'd have been far more likely to share knowledge with those they perceive as enthusiastic or at least sympathetic to the European cause of ever closer union).

By the way, I do not regard this expertise as making them any better qualified to vote in the Referendum, because such people can often become biased by the sunk investment
already made in their time in acquiring such expertise and, being blinded by too much detail, incapable of having a wider perspective (i.e. can not see the wood because of the trees).

Such individuals could no doubt play a useful role in briefing Leavers, but it seems they feel that would be coming down in the world and would rather quit working for the UK.

However as Innonimatu has stated there is little point in negotiating with an entrenched bureaucracy, so the problem is of less significance.

I do not know what advice Sir Ivan Rogers gave Theresa May, but if he said that negotiating a trade deal with the EU would take ten years and that might not even be ratified by
the other member states; one might ask why he was comunicating about that, the do everything deal, is not possible rather than communicating about what might be possible?

 

[Silurian]

It is a job of an ambassador to communicate everything that he knowns. They would be failing if they started selecting information. It is the job of their superiors to weight that information against other sources. We saw in Iraq what happens if you start selecting your sources.

 

[Gigaz]

Yes, I believe that most detailed expertise held by UK nationals regarding the details of the people and power structures within EU institutions and the details of EU rules is probably
held by Remainers because of first self selection by individuals (only those who were pro EU would be interested in obtaining that) and secondly selection by EU individuals and
institutions (who'd have been far more likely to share knowledge with those they perceive as enthusiastic or at least sympathetic to the European cause of ever closer union).

By the way, I do not regard this expertise as making them any better qualified to vote in the Referendum, because such people can often become biased by the sunk investment
already made in their time in acquiring such expertise and, being blinded by too much detail, incapable of having a wider perspective (i.e. can not see the wood because of the trees).

Such individuals could no doubt play a useful role in briefing Leavers, but it seems they feel that would be coming down in the world and would rather quit working for the UK.

The problem may be significantly worse than you're giving it credit for.
Because if you're an advisor, what advice do you give? The advice that you give is functionally identical to your personal and political opinion on the matter, because what else would it be? Of corse the pro Remain-Advisors can still make good predictions in hypothetical scenarios with different kinds of Brexits, but they will necessarily all be doom and gloom.
No matter your disregard for experience and expertise as opposed to the simple wisdom of the common man, but Theresa May will never find an honest advisor on EU matters who thinks that Brexit is a good idea.

 

[Takhisis]

Not that the UK is some beacon of light, but do recall how the current EU is basically majority former soviet block client states of a specific country

The German Democratic Republic?

Twelve weeks till the end of March.

I wonder when we will see the plan.

Sir, your statement implies that a UK government plan already exists of which I am rather doubtful.

Besides Edward's point, I will tell you that I am filing your comment under ‘March, bewared the ides of’.

 

[FriendlyFire]

Why are you leaving the EU again ? Just do what Germany is doing by changing the laws ?
German Labour laws which mention job preferances

Isn't this what the UK wanted to do before it voted to leave the EU?

No. When ex-British Prime Minister David Cameron agreed upon new EU rules with his European counterparts in February, he wrestled an “emergency brake” from them.

Under this system EU immigrants could be denied benefits for up to four years, but crucially this would have applied to in-work benefits and rights to social housing. In-work benefits include social welfare payments to support low-income earners and tax credits.

https://www.thelocal.de/20161013/how-germanys-welfare-restrictions-could-affect-you

So much for putting one’s own citizens first. Germany unveiled new legal “integration” measures on Thursday that, in part, temporarily suspend a law requiring employers give German or European Union job applications preference before considering refugees. In other words, a non-EU citizen couldn’t be hired “unless there is no EU citizen willing or qualified to take the job.” Those job safeguards will now be suspended for three years.

Under the coalition government’s measures, announced on Thursday morning, asylum seekers face cuts to support if they reject mandatory integration measures such as language classes or lessons in German laws or cultural basics.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2016/04/15/germanys-new-integration-law-n2148825

 

[Kyriakos]

^That says Eu citizens, germans still are part of those, it doesn't say they give preference to german job applicants over other eu applicants in the original law. You can't even understand an article in simple english, m8.

 

[EnglishEdward]

The problem may be significantly worse than you're giving it credit for.
Because if you're an advisor, what advice do you give?

It is probably best for them to advise on the facts and step outside the predictions business altogether.

The advice that you give is functionally identical to your personal and political opinion on the matter, because what else would it be?

I do not dispute that.

Of corse the pro Remain-Advisors can still make good predictions in hypothetical scenarios with different kinds of Brexits, but they will necessarily all be doom and gloom.

World is uncertain. Very few people can make good predictions. I recognise my own fallability. For instance I did not predict a Trump win.

No matter your disregard for experience and expertise as opposed to the simple wisdom of the common man,

Most of us did not bow down to those with experience and expertise, as infallible authorities, and vote as they instructed us. That is democracy.