Scrutable

TopBadger wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 13, 2021 9:54 pm

It will be interesting to see what actions the EU take to encourage us to stick to a border in the Irish Sea, this situation has to come to a head eventually.

For the UK audience, if they persist with a mince war, the ground is being nicely set for the Northern Singapore “f.ck the lot of you, we’ll tear up the rulebook” model.

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 11, 2021 5:09 pm

plodder wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 11, 2021 4:33 pm

it’s not about sympathy, it’s about creating wriggle room. And pointing out that it’s an arbitrary ban when the UK is still in complete alignment is a fair point.

I've actually been quite surprised at how much wriggling the UK has got away with so far.

The EU is pursuing legal means. But they'll take time.

The problem for the EU is that now that the agreement has been signed and ratified in practice it has far less leverage. It could start retaliating with things like tariff increases, but that would harm the EU as well as the UK, and the dispute would probably rattle on in the WTO for years.

It very much depends on whether sectarian tensions arise in NI. I suspect this could be addressed to some extent with the good old fashioned pork barrel. Britain’s global reputation will be partly dependent on our getting out of this mess without getting hamstrung too badly by the EU.

Speaking utterly hypothetically, what would the 'constitutional procedure' be for expelling Northern Ireland from the UK ?
A majority in Parliament and force the Lords and HRH to agree ?

I mean, the US has also been pretty clear it wants the UK to respect the deals it's signed (GFA and NI Protocol). So the UK's reputation with the two wealthiest non-dictator blocks seemingly depends more on being able to negotiate deals it understands and is able and willing to implement.

For a North Atlantic Singapore model to work, I suspect the UK would need trading partners on at least one side of the Atlantic that trust it. Maybe Canada likes wriggling?

noggins wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 14, 2021 10:34 am

Speaking utterly hypothetically, what would the 'constitutional procedure' be for expelling Northern Ireland from the UK ?
A majority in Parliament and force the Lords and HRH to agree ?

Give them a referendum, after a couple more years of brexit chaos, English Tory contempt and ignorance, and Scotland successfully rejoining the EU.

The situation reminds me of the time that Russia banned food imports from the EU, in response to the EU applying sanctions. The sanctions were for annexing Crimea. So not exactly having the moral high place.

The effect of the food embargo was to increase food prices and variety in Russia, just what the Russian consumer wants. I have some half-memory of seeing an assesssment it was equivalent to an income reduction of about 5% for the median Russian wage-earner. Doubtless that has ameliorated as new sources of supply have opened up, including a degree of re-export through places like Belarus.

But Putin successfully portrayed it as a patriotic measure, and got no comeback. It's what all politicians want, an enemy to demonise, and distract from the real issues.

IvanV wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 14, 2021 3:31 pm

But Putin successfully portrayed it as a patriotic measure, and got no comeback. It's what all politicians want, an enemy to demonise, and distract from the real issues.

Success in portraying the inconvenience as the result of malign external forces and not as an inevitable result of your state's bad actions would depend on there being a compliant media - so the other view isn't presented.

Yup, it would work here too

Gfamily wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 14, 2021 3:48 pm

IvanV wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 14, 2021 3:31 pm

But Putin successfully portrayed it as a patriotic measure, and got no comeback. It's what all politicians want, an enemy to demonise, and distract from the real issues.

Success in portraying the inconvenience as the result of malign external forces and not as an inevitable result of your state's bad actions would depend on there being a compliant media - so the other view isn't presented.

Yup, it would work here too

Yes. This is why it’s being portrayed as all about mince. It’s helpful that it is actually all about mince, too.

The rest of the world won’t care that we’re wriggling like crazy. What else are we supposed to do?

plodder wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 14, 2021 4:28 pm

Gfamily wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 14, 2021 3:48 pm

IvanV wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 14, 2021 3:31 pm

But Putin successfully portrayed it as a patriotic measure, and got no comeback. It's what all politicians want, an enemy to demonise, and distract from the real issues.

Success in portraying the inconvenience as the result of malign external forces and not as an inevitable result of your state's bad actions would depend on there being a compliant media - so the other view isn't presented.

Yup, it would work here too

Yes. This is why it’s being portrayed as all about mince. It’s helpful that it is actually all about mince, too.

The rest of the world won’t care that we’re wriggling like crazy. What else are we supposed to do?

Well, it did seem to overshadow parts of the G7 meeting, with Biden and Trudeau both commenting publicly along with the euros.

As for "what else to do", the suggestion from the US and EU seems to be to stick to the thing they signed at the end of last year: the main UK-EU border that the UK wants is going in the Irish Sea.

The fact that they're finding it tricky to implement that border six months later suggests that they signed something they hadn't read, hadn't understood, or never intended to stick to it. Whichever is the case, people negotiating deals with the UK absolutely will care.

no they won’t care, unless that deal has a really entrenched and complex border arrangement with centuries of bad feeling attached to it.

plodder wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 14, 2021 6:11 pm

no they won’t care, unless that deal has a really entrenched and complex border arrangement with centuries of bad feeling attached to it.

Yes you are correct. The UK breaking the terms of a major international agreement within two years of signing it will have no impact on other countries' willingness to make new agreements with them. Especially if the prime minister who both signed and broke the agreement is still in power.

The EU are really losing the battle for good optics here.

WFJ wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 14, 2021 6:45 pm

plodder wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 14, 2021 6:11 pm

no they won’t care, unless that deal has a really entrenched and complex border arrangement with centuries of bad feeling attached to it.

Yes you are correct. The UK breaking the terms of a major international agreement within two years of signing it will have no impact on other countries' willingness to make new agreements with them. Especially if the prime minister who both signed and broke the agreement is still in power.

The EU are really losing the battle for good optics here.

I am correct. We're sticking to everything apart from the bit both sides knew was impossible when they signed up. We've all been saying, for years, that it's an impossible circle to square. Everyone knows it, even trade experts from other countries who we negotiate with.

plodder wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 14, 2021 6:52 pm

I am correct. We're sticking to everything apart from the bit both sides knew was impossible when they signed up. We've all been saying, for years, that it's an impossible circle to square. Everyone knows it, even trade experts from other countries who we negotiate with.

It is was an impossible circle to square (aren't all circles impossible to square?) only according to the conditions set by Johnson et al. Hence Johnson having to capitulate at the last minute, and effectively accepting what was the EU's initial negotiating position back in 2017, in order to get a deal and not completely crash the UK economy. Breaking that agreement now is only a short-term win for Johnson in the eyes of Mail-reading Kippers.

who cares about why? Everyone knows why. It’s irrelevant.

plodder wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 14, 2021 7:37 pm

who cares about why? Everyone knows why. It’s irrelevant.

Everyone knows why what?

Your claim was that the UK had some sort of negotiating leverage due to bad optics of a mince or sausage war waged by the EU. Outside the UK nobody is talking about this, so it is only bad optics in the eyes of people in the UK who already hate the EU. Why would the EU care about the views of these people?

To the outside world this is seen as the UK being an unreliable and dishonest partner, who will say anything for short-term benefit before reneging at the first opportunity. Why do you think this will have no effect on the UK's future ability to make agreements and trade deals, especially under the current government?

because money talks and the only unreliable bit is the bit literally everyone knew would be unreliable.

eta so both sides are talking up to their respective audiences. the rhetoric doesn’t really matter, and once the mince starts flowing and it’s all been kicked into the long grass again it’ll be on to the next thing.

It's not true that nobody's talking about it - Biden and Trudeau have both made statements, and they weren't exactly calling the EU silly sausages.

yeah but the US is just reminding everyone to play nicely. it’s just talk at a summit. They’ll be some more huffing and puffing and posturing, and some temporary muscle flexing, but as long as the UK bribes the fundie nutters in NI and stops things kicking off it’ll be manageable.

And it’s nicely paving the way for an aggressive low regulation environment that will restore the competitive balance (at what cost to nice things? god knows), but at least the poshos get to pay less tax.

or, for the hundredth time: neither side will build the border infrastructure. so it’s always going to be a fudge.

plodder wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 14, 2021 8:38 pm

because money talks and the only unreliable bit is the bit literally everyone knew would be unreliable.

eta so both sides are talking up to their respective audiences. the rhetoric doesn’t really matter, and once the mince starts flowing and it’s all been kicked into the long grass again it’ll be on to the next thing.

So you think the EU are facing some sort of reputational damage because the Daily Express writes some headlines about sausage wars, but the UK will not suffer from breaking international agreements because everyone knew Bozza would stick it to them Europeans? Do you view all world politics through the varifocals of a 60 year old housewife from Margate?

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 14, 2021 8:38 pm

It's not true that nobody's talking about it - Biden and Trudeau have both made statements, and they weren't exactly calling the EU silly sausages.

Exactly. That was what I meant. Plodder's point about the negative optics of mince or sausage wars waged by the EU is nonsense. That is purely a UK tabloid spin on the story that Johnson is trying to play up. The view from outside is very different and the damage done to the UK's reputation is real.

oh yeah? evidence please. Macron or Biden’s posturing is no more relevant than Johnson’s.

Everyone knows this was going to be sticky, no one is surprised, everyone is interested to see how it pans out, no one cares about mince, everyone cares about keeping the nutters with the car bombs under control. The test is the latter.

I’ve been very clear that the EU mince wars rhetoric is for the 60 year old Margate lady in your post, and it’s working.

plodder wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 14, 2021 8:57 pm

oh yeah? evidence please. Macron or Biden’s posturing is no more relevant than Johnson’s.

Everyone knows this was going to be sticky, no one is surprised, everyone is interested to see how it pans out, no one cares about mince, everyone cares about keeping the nutters with the car bombs under control. The test is the latter.

Macron's comments may not be, as an interested party, but how is the US officially criticising the UK government not evidence of reputational damage in the outside world?

plodder wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 14, 2021 9:00 pm

I’ve been very clear that the EU mince wars rhetoric is for the 60 year old Margate lady in your post, and it’s working.

Then as I said in my previous post. Why would the EU, or anyone else, care?

cause it’s just talk. The rhetoric isn’t for the EU. They’re grown ups and they also understand the rules of the game.