Fixing Brexit

[Woodchopper]

Good report here:

Fixing Brexit: A New Agenda for a New Partnership With the European Union

to;dr Provides a realistic assessment of what might be feasible. UK public opinion is leaning toward support for London and Brussels negotiating a closer relationship. But this will take time as Britain will need to put in a lot of effort into rebuilding trust before meaningful talks can begin.

IMHO if Starmer wins a majority in 2024 then his first term could be spent rebuilding trust. The Labour manifesto for the 2028 election could include a commitment to ask Brussels to start talks on the UK rejoining the Single Market. The length of the negotiations and their outcome would depend a lot on how much trust had been built.

[plodder]

Problem is the Brexiteers know they’re on borrowed time and need to get fixes in place quickly, that can’t be easily undone. Changes in domestic legislation that prevent single market re-entry etc. I’m still unclear as to what Sunak’s plans are now Rees-Mogg etc are out of the way but I note Steve Baker currently has a prominent role in NI.

[IvanV]

Good report here:
Fixing Brexit: A New Agenda for a New Partnership With the European Union

I'm not impressed by the section on Northern Ireland. Sets out the problems, but doesn't set out any solutions. Just says, solve them, which is easier said than done, short of rejoining the single market, etc. No one has ever had any other solutions.

[plodder]

Good report here:
Fixing Brexit: A New Agenda for a New Partnership With the European Union

I'm not impressed by the section on Northern Ireland. Sets out the problems, but doesn't set out any solutions. Just says, solve them, which is easier said than done, short of rejoining the single market, etc. No one has ever had any other solutions.

Well, Baker has always claimed NI is a straightforward fix, and he's in charge of fixing it, so I guess we'll find out soon enough.

[IvanV]

Well, Baker has always claimed NI is a straightforward fix, and he's in charge of fixing it, so I guess we'll find out soon enough.

So he has "always" had a straightforward fix, and we have never heard what it is, or worked it out for ourselves. I'm not holding my breath.

Or perhaps has a fix like how Manston is a fix for small boat migrants.

[plodder]

Well, Baker has always claimed NI is a straightforward fix, and he's in charge of fixing it, so I guess we'll find out soon enough.

So he has "always" had a straightforward fix, and we have never heard what it is, or worked it out for ourselves. I'm not holding my breath.

Or perhaps has a fix like how Manston is a fix for small boat migrants.

I think it's that sort of fix, yeah. He claims to have lots of spreadsheets showing why everyone else is an idiot.

[Woodchopper]

An extraordinary cross-party summit bringing together leading leavers and remainers – including Michael Gove and senior members of Keir Starmer’s shadow cabinet – has been held in high secrecy to address the failings of Brexit and how to remedy them in the national interest, the Observer can reveal.

The two-day gathering of some of the country’s most senior Labour and Tory politicians from both sides of the Brexit debate, together with diplomats, defence experts and the heads of some of the biggest businesses and banks, was held at the historic Ditchley Park retreat in Oxfordshire on Thursday afternoon and evening, and on Friday.

Documents from the meeting, obtained by the Observer, describe it as a “private discussion” under the title: “How can we make Brexit work better with our neighbours in Europe?”

Those in attendance from the pro-Brexit side included the former Tory party leader Michael Howard, former Tory chancellor Norman Lamont and former Labour Europe minister Gisela Stuart, one of the leading figures of the leave campaign.

Among the prominent remainer politicians present were shadow foreign secretary David Lammy, shadow defence secretary John Healey and the former European commissioner and Labour cabinet minister Peter Mandelson, who acted as chairman. From the Tory remainer camp, the ex-cabinet minister and long-serving minister for Europe, David Lidington, attended.

Non-political attendees included John Symonds, chair of the pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline; Oliver Robbins, Goldman Sachs managing director and former chief Brexit negotiator for the government from 2017 to 2019; Tom Scholar, the former Treasury permanent secretary; and Angus Lapsley, Nato assistant secretary general for defence policy and planning.

[…]

“The main thrust of it was that Britain is losing out, that Brexit it not delivering, our economy is in a weak position,” said the source. “It was about moving on from leave and remain, and what are the issues we now have to face, and how can we get into the best position in order to have a conversation with the EU about changes to the UK-EU trade and cooperation agreement when that happens?”

[…]

In terms that will anger ardent Tory Brexiters, the summit documents said that while on the European side there was “little interest in further wrangling over Brexit and little time being devoted to the relationship with the UK … there is also clear European as well as British strategic interest in a productive and closer relationship.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -of-brexit

The last paragraph is most important.

It’s striking that discussions on how to have a better relationship with the EU didn’t include anyone from the EU. Of course Ursula von der Leyen wasn’t going to attend. But someone like a well connected former minister of a country like the Netherlands or Denmark could have, and given vital opinions on what the EU and it’s member states might accept.

So far it’s just Brits talking to each other. They’re not serious.

[headshot]

Maybe a discussion with EU representatives is the next stage.

[temptar]

They are not interested in dealing with the UK unless you have your ducks in a row. Johnson has assured you of that thanks to the immediate crapping around with his own agreement. The UK patently can’t even agree amongst its governing party which has an 80 seat majority.

So yeah, maybe the British need to talk to each other first and start facing reality. This is the sort of thing that should have been done in 2016 before invoking Article 50. There is an obvious answer but the rank stupidity of your idiot previous Tory governments maybe making that increasingly hard.

[Millennie Al]

An extraordinary cross-party summit bringing together leading leavers and remainers ...

So far it’s just Brits talking to each other. They’re not serious.

Well, to be fair to them, it was "to address the failings of Brexit and how to remedy them in the national interest". I wouldn't expect foreigners to be involved in debate about furthering our national interest. If they are serious, this should be followed by something which does include EU representatives.

[Imrael]

Interesting precedent in the agreement with Ukraine, although it is structured as a step towards membership. More appropriate in my view than Switzerland or Norway models.

[Woodchopper]

Yes, everyone, they may invite someone connected to the EU to another discussion.

But still, to me it seems to follow the same dynamic as over the past seven years since the referendum. British people decide amongst themselves what they say they want and then are outraged when the EU isn’t interested.

[Little waster]

Meanwhile the gaslighting f.ckers continue to insist that Brexit is doing swimmingly and that any suggestion that things might not be going to plan is just the sad delusions of bitter Remoaner dead-ender elitists.

[Woodchopper]

Hints of a fudge on the NI protocol.

Green lane for goods destined for NI which aren’t checked.
Red lane for goods destined for EU which will be checked.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-64778848

Seems similar to the current scheme whereby trusted traders can declare that certain goods are not at risk of being exported into the EU.

Could work if the two are combined and the green channel is reserved for pre-registered businesses. Supermarkets etc should be able to track the destinations of goods.

But problems are likely if anyone can use the green route.

[IvanV]

Hints of a fudge on the NI protocol.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-64778848

There is no expectation in Westminster that the DUP will endorse the deal immediately and many believe it will not be enough to tempt them back to Stormont, [the BBC's correspondent, who has been talking to anonymous government sources,] added.

So this started, apparently, with trying to get something to placate the DUP, and has ended up with the government looking for a way out of the negotiation that enables them to say "we got something", even if it is nowhere near what would satisfy the DUP. Though of course we all recognise that the DUP were unsatisfiable with anything that the EU would ever voluntarily give.

[noggins]

I dont grasp why a tory government with a huge majority needs to give a gnat’s sh.t what the DUP thinks.

[IvanV]

I dont grasp why a tory government with a huge majority needs to give a gnat’s sh.t what the DUP thinks.

It depends how annoying not having an administration in Stormont is to them.

When the Tories got a comfortable majority, and no longer relied on the DUP to get stuff through Westminster, as May had, Johnson realised that he could just shaft the DUP. And so he shafted them and signed his Brexit deal.

But then the DUP closed down Stormont, saying that they wouldn't go back in until they got satisfaction on European matters. On the surface, that seems to be what prompted Johnson to try and satisfy them by promoting his legislation to unilaterally strike down the protocol.

Though some suspect the real reason the DUP aren't in Stormont is because there would be an SF First Minister, and they are just using the EU stuff as a more respectable cover story.

And some might suspect that Johnson promoted the legislation to unilaterally abrogate the protocol out of Trumpish chaos games, and satisfying the DUP was just his cover story.

[Woodchopper]

Windsor Framework documents published: https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... -framework

[Lew Dolby]

IThough some suspect the real reason the DUP aren't in Stormont is because there would be an SF First Minister, and they are just using the EU stuff as a more respectable cover story.

This absolutely. They'll find some other reason, whatever.

[Woodchopper]

The DUP is expected to accept the Protocol deal which has been finalised by the Prime Minister with the European Union.

According to a source with knowledge of the DUP's thinking, a dinner has been pencilled in for this evening in London with party supporters to explain the DUP's rationale for their acceptance of the deal.

https://www.irishnews.com/news/northern ... s441rif44T

[jimbob]

The DUP is expected to accept the Protocol deal which has been finalised by the Prime Minister with the European Union.

According to a source with knowledge of the DUP's thinking, a dinner has been pencilled in for this evening in London with party supporters to explain the DUP's rationale for their acceptance of the deal.

https://www.irishnews.com/news/northern ... s441rif44T

The DUP's WHAT?

[IvanV]

IThough some suspect the real reason the DUP aren't in Stormont is because there would be an SF First Minister, and they are just using the EU stuff as a more respectable cover story.

This absolutely. They'll find some other reason, whatever.

The deal on the Irish Protocol presents the Assembly with powers to deal with certain European matters. Under the deal, a small amount of existing EU legislation will apply in Northern Ireland. There is a process to decide on whether items of new EU legislation should extend to Northern Ireland. The Northern Irish will only be able to argue about it if they can get a positive vote to argue about it in the assembly.

My guess that has been designed as quite a strong incentive to them to get back into the Assembly.

[IvanV]

The deal on the Irish Protocol presents the Assembly with powers to deal with certain European matters. Under the deal, a small amount of existing EU legislation will apply in Northern Ireland. There is a process to decide on whether items of new EU legislation should extend to Northern Ireland. The Northern Irish will only be able to argue about it if they can get a positive vote to argue about it in the assembly.

My guess that has been designed as quite a strong incentive to them to get back into the Assembly.

I've just read DAG's article on this "brake" mechanism. And it's somewhat ornamental, a lot of hoops to jump through to use it. So perhaps not much of an incentive to get the DUP back into the Assembly.

[Trinucleus]

"I'd find it hard to vote for the Windsor deal" says Boris.

Obviously - as that would involve turning up in Parliament

[TopBadger]

"I'd find it hard to vote for the Windsor deal" says Boris.

Obviously - as that would involve turning up in Parliament

And admitting it's better than his deal...