Brexit talks on the verge of collapse - Page 3 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in Europe's nation states, the E.U. & Russia.

Moderator: PoFo Europe Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. This is an international political discussion forum, so please post in English only.
#15141609
B0ycey wrote:would otherwise rot

What your government expects when it all turns to shit...

Revealed: The 'reasonable worst case' if EU talks collapse

a) Dead people? The flow rates of medicines and medical products will be reduced which will impact the supply of medicines and medical products across the UK.

b) Martial law? There will be a rise in public disorder and community tensions. Protests and counter-protests will take place across the UK and absorb significant amounts of police resources.

c) Cod wars? EU and UK fisherfolk will clash over lost access to their historic fishing grounds. There will be a significant uplift in illegal fishing activities.

d) Dead people/illegal immigrants? The competing demands on the UK government and devolved administration maritime agencies and their assets will put maritime security enforcement and response capabilities at risk.

e) Hungry people? There will be a reduction in the food supply, especially of certain fresh products. Critically, the food supply chain will also suffer.

f) Hungry people? Low-income groups will be disproportionately affected by any price rises in food and fuel.

g) Sick people? Border delays, tariffs, and new regulatory barriers will result in the disruption of the supply of critical chemicals used in the UK leading to the disruption of essential services such as food, energy, water, and medicine. Economic factors could result in some chemicals suppliers reducing operations or closing.

h) Job losses? Border delays will lead to local fuel shortages.

i) Sick animals/dead people? The reduction in the supply of medicines for UK veterinary use will reduce your ability to prevent and control disease outbreaks, with potentially detrimental impacts for animal health and welfare, the environment, wider food safety/availability, and zoonotic disease control which can directly impact human health.

j) Job losses? Trucks traveling to the EU are not ready for new border controls. This will reduce flow across the short channel crossing, leading to queues of trucks in Kent and delays of up to two days or more.

k) Terrorist attacks? The transition from internal security cooperation with the EU to non-EU mechanisms will not be smooth and seamless and will result in a mutual reduction in the capability to tackle crime and terrorism.

l) Chaos? Around one in 20 local authorities are at risk of financial collapse as a result of higher service demand.

There are plenty of other risks identified in the document.


:)
#15141612
B0ycey wrote:So no starvation then?

Don't be too sure...

10% of children in the UK are reported by UNICEF to be living in households affected by severe food insecurity, and that's without a 23% 'no-deal' rise in food prices.


:lol:
#15141613
ingliz wrote:Don't be too sure...

10% of children in the UK are reported by UNICEF to be living in households affected by severe food insecurity, and that's without the 23% 'no-deal' rise in food prices.


:lol:


So no starvation again. It is clear food prices will go up because of tariffs on EU foods. The only winner on no deal is the rest of the world as rather than getting our fruit and veg from Europe they will get it from South America or Israel. Good bye shitposter as you cannot back up your claim.

:)
#15141614
B0ycey wrote:no starvation

Figures from the Office for National Statistics show malnutrition was the underlying cause or a contributory factor in 351 deaths in NHS hospitals in England and Wales in 2016. Are you saying you don't believe these figures will go up with a 23% rise in food prices? An estimated 8.4 million people in the UK struggle to get enough to eat now.


:)
#15141617
ingliz wrote:Figures from the Office for National Statistics show malnutrition was the underlying cause or a contributory factor in 351 deaths in NHS hospitals in England and Wales in 2016. You don't believe these figures will go up with a 23% rise in food prices? An estimated 8.4 million people in the UK struggle to get enough to eat now.


I believe that food prices will go up. That means supply will revert to new markets. And that consumerism as a consequence will be hit. The poverty figure today and in the future of a potential no deal is a consequence not of supply but minimum wage or welfare not keeping up with inflation. That is a domestic issue away from Brexit not a repercussion of it. This can be addressed by taxing the higher pay threshold.
#15141618
B0ycey wrote:This can be addressed by taxing the higher pay threshold.

The Tories are cutting benefit payments to Universal Credit claimants in the new year.

"DWP confirms £1,000 benefits cut for millions on Universal Credit"


:lol:
#15142147
Why are the UK and EU wasting their time on trying to make a deal with zero tariffs when they should be making a deal with tariffs. If the UK wants to make trade deals and the EU wants to maintain the integrity of the single market whilst protecting their businesses from outside competition, then they should work out the sectors they fear the most from outside competition and place agreed mutual tariffs on these areas. Why are we sending clowns to Brussels that cannot see this.
#15142233
@B0ycey, true, we should just agree to have tariffs and then decide on which tariff we want to reduce by how much. The problem is Northern Ireland. As soon as we have tariffs, no matter how low, there needs to be a customs border somewhere.
#15142235
Atlantis wrote:@B0ycey, true, we should just agree to have tariffs and then decide on which tariff we want to reduce by how much. The problem is Northern Ireland. As soon as we have tariffs, no matter how low, there needs to be a customs border somewhere.


Wasn't it meant to be down the Irish Sea? Besides, you could agree this in principle and then have a transition to decide the final details on this specific detail in paticular. I don't know. I am not in the meetings. But what I do know we are going to have tariffs anyway, so just have them that suits both parties as this affects NI anyways.
#15142239
B0ycey wrote:Wasn't it meant to be down the Irish Sea?


That is what Theresa May and even Boris Johnson agreed to initially until the Orangemen from Ulster threw a spanner into the works. The Unionists in NI won't have anything that looks remotely like a border between NI and the rest UK. They are scared as hell to get onto a slippery slope that'll end in Irish reunification.

With their fanaticism they could very well trigger a political dynamic that'll lead to what they fear most: reunification.

That just goes to show that politics is the art of the compromise and that the fanatics are ultimately doomed by their own fanaticism.
#15142241
Atlantis wrote:That just goes to show that politics is the art of the compromise and that the fanatics are ultimately doomed by their own fanaticism.


Indeed. But I thought this could be done digital in any case. Or that was Mays initial argument. So I'd like to think if a transition could be agreed this point could be ironed out and made to work in that time. And if it was long enough it could even mean a new PM or party to make sure it definitely work in any case. As long as the principle is agreed, I cannot see why this wouldn't make both parties happy. Because for me this issue isn't so much to do with trade than it is to maintain relationships. I don't think we can wait 4 years until Labour comes in of bad relationships.
#15142245
Rancid wrote:Question, could the UK rejoin the EU, and if so, would it be under less favorable terms? If yes, why? Just to spite them, or just circumstance?

Spite, primarily. The EU benefits from a completely undeserved assumption of benevolence in major news media, so they can be as intransigent as they like and it will actually be praised.

If you don't believe me, check out the reaction from Very Smart People to the recent FT story that the EU plans to ban British citizens from entering *at all* from 1 January if talks fail, ostensibly due to Covid travel regulations.

If Britain were doing that to EU citizens, we'd be treated to crocodile tear-soaked editorials from the same people about how cruel and heartless it was. When the EU does it - after manufacturing the circumstances by letting the French make insane demands over fishing rights - we get "lol stupid brits".

To be clear, I don't support or approve of the way the British government has handled these negotiations, and I've said so several times over the last few years. But I really want to counter the narrative that Britain is insane and irrational while the EU is the picture of kindness and generosity.

In reality, we're watching two groups of dickheads playing chicken with millions of people's lives for a point scoring exercise.
#15142375
Heisenberg wrote:Spite, primarily. The EU benefits from a completely undeserved assumption of benevolence in major news media, so they can be as intransigent as they like and it will actually be praised.

If you don't believe me, check out the reaction from Very Smart People to the recent FT story that the EU plans to ban British citizens from entering *at all* from 1 January if talks fail, ostensibly due to Covid travel regulations.


Now look, another Farage spreading BS about the EU. The EU has banned all tourist travels from outside the Schengen area with the exception of a few countries with low infection rates such as NZ and South Korea. Americans are banned from traveling to Europe. Why on Earth should we make an exception for the Brits?

That's nothing to do with spite. You want to leave the club without losing club membership. That is an infantile fantasy. Start to grow up.
#15142381
The EU's threat is quite vindictive regardless how you spin it. British insistence on fishing is also very vindictive because it punishes businessmen who have invested a lot and disrupts their trade when the Brits also have and will maintain access to EU fishing grounds.

British fishing demands are incompatible with free competition and the avoidance of disruption for EU & UK business and citizens that the spirit of a deal is all about after all.
#15142455
Atlantis wrote:Now look, another Farage spreading BS about the EU. The EU has banned all tourist travels from outside the Schengen area with the exception of a few countries with low infection rates such as NZ and South Korea. Americans are banned from traveling to Europe. Why on Earth should we make an exception for the Brits?

That's nothing to do with spite. You want to leave the club without losing club membership. That is an infantile fantasy. Start to grow up.

Oh, of course, the sacred EU rules which are decided by no one at all and simply exist as absolute, hard coded laws of nature, much like the laws of thermodynamics. Only someone with particularly severe Asperger's could believe this, and even then it would be a stretch.

Why should there be an "exception" for Britain? Because we haven't done the same thing to EU citizens - or even hinted at it - and as far as I can tell there's no indication we will, even after such a petty move. Which is odd, given that Britain is painted as some kind of fascist rogue state itching to kick out all the innocent Europeans.

You guys are hiding behind a technicality, once again, to justify behaving like children. Keep telling yourself otherwise as much as you want, but don't expect me to fall for it. :lol:
#15142482
@Heisenberg, the UK have travel corridors. That is not different given national states can decide for themselves. I don't understand why you have an issue with being a third nation, given that was the point of Brexit. And more importantly, you don't live here any more. So what the fuck has this got to do with America and how is this to effect you?

As this wave seems to be associated with summer holidays, I don't think going away is perhaps a sensible cause of action in any case. And by the summer, we should be in a stronger position to allow movement. So what I am saying is don't be bitter given that the EU has realised a dossier where they have been flexible in areas that indeed could have been vindictively phyrric. Understand the position and understand it relates to health not politics.
#15142493
A united Ireland and an independent Scotland would be ideal. Scotland is so weak and cucked it would make an excellent EU Russian base, and Ireland without the UK lording over it would sell itself out to China instantly. UK is so decrepit and rotten it needs to be terminated from existence. England on its own might be nice. Turn it back into a proper monarchy, kick the Germans out and install an English family. Even french royals would be a better fit.
#15142495
The Guardian view on Boris Johnson in Brussels: not to be truste

Boris thinks he can outsmart the EU - with a reputations like his' :lol: :lol: :lol:

The EU is wise not to believe the prime minister. The result is a tragedy in the making for Britain

Boris Johnson got where he is today by telling lies about Europe. He made stories up as a journalist. He told fibs on an industrial scale in the referendum campaign. Now he is telling whoppers as prime minister too. There was an “oven-ready” EU trade deal. Not true. The chances of no deal were “absolutely zero”. Same again. Britain was prepared for any outcome after 31 December. Utterly false. The prospect of EU tariffs on British goods was “totally and utterly absurd”. Another porkie.

Mr Johnson was again having us on when he gave the impression that he was going to Brussels on Wednesday to get an EU withdrawal trade deal over the line. A good deal is there to be done, he told the Commons. But in the evening it was the very opposite. Mr Johnson arrived in Brussels to tell the EU that Britain was not ready to make a fisheries agreement, would never accept the European court of justice as the arbiter on future disputes, and could not agree to any form of agreement on trading standards that tied Britain’s hands to EU rules. The two sides now remain far apart, the Commons was told on Thursday.

A prime minister who wanted a deal to continue trading with this country’s largest market would not have said any of this. The fishing industry is not so large that its needs should prevent a wider agreement. There is no overriding reason of practice or principle why an arbitration system involving the ECJ cannot be devised. Most important of all, Britain ought to agree that some regulatory alignment with the single market to ensure a level playing field is overwhelmingly in its own economic interest.

The last of these is now the great stumbling block. Mr Johnson and his party affect a false naivety about it. They dress the issue up in terms of Britain’s supposedly inviolable sovereignty. By doing so, they refuse to accept that the enlightened sharing of sovereignty is involved in every trade deal that Britain or any other nation will ever strike and is fundamental to the working of international relations. And they play dumb when faced with the EU’s concerns about maintaining the single market and preventing Britain from setting itself up as a low regulation Singapore-on-Thames.

Mr Johnson pretends Britain wants no more than Canada or Australia would do. But Britain’s position in relation to the EU is radically different. Britain is on Europe’s doorstep. Our economy and commerce have been deeply integrated with the EU’s for 45 years. Neither of these is true of Canada or Australia. It is entirely right for the EU to make the granting of preferential trade access conditional on at least some form of continuing alignment on subsidies, tax, labour standards, competition rules and environmental safeguards.

Any other approach involves trusting Britain not to break its word. Why should the EU do that, especially in the wake of the UK’s internal market bill which, until this week, contained clauses that allow Britain to ignore international law and its own treaties? Proximity counts in trade. It would not be fair to allow UK companies to externalise their costs through lower regulation and then freely enter an EU market in which European businesses have to bear their true costs.

Moreover, why should a rules-based union like Europe trust Mr Johnson? Telling lies about Europe is one of the few consistent themes in his chaotic life and politics. It would be a foolish leap of faith to suppose he is going to change now. Politics and economics occasionally pull Mr Johnson in opposite directions on Europe. But in the end he mostly puts party politics ahead of the national economic interest. So it is again now. Because of him and his catastrophic cause of regaining some imaginary lost British greatness, this country now stands on the brink of rupture with Europe. There are only three weeks to go before it happens. It would be a desperate emergency for this country to face at the best of times. It is all the more tragic that it is happening when, amid the pandemic, it is so badly led and thus so ill-prepared to deal with it.


@Heisenberg, the UK has unilaterally introduce Covid travel restrictions for a number of European countries. EU countries are pooling their resources and coordinate Covid restrictions. The UK doesn't want to be part of that.

You have joined you liar-in-chief Boris Johnson in spreading absurd lies about the EU. Like Trump, you obviously don't care about how absurd your lies are. You guys think you can screw the EU with your absurd lies. In the end, it is the British working man you are screwing by turning the UK in a neoliberal wet dream of a totally deregulated Singapore-on-Thames.

@Heisenberg, I don't know if it's any consolation in your future sweat shop if can freely enjoy the chlorinated chickens Uncle Sam is going to stuff down your throat or play attack dog in Uncle Sam's wars around the globe. Say goodbye to national health and welcome Uncle Sam's ideas of your sovereignty. Say goodbye to workers rights and welcome to corporate control.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 11

So for the usual three stat collections: https&#[…]

How to deal with Trump?

A century ago, an ambassador had a lot of indepen[…]

US bombs Syria

And you didn't? No, I didn't. I've already e[…]

Key Rasmussen Polls

@late , funny you should mention Quinnipiac, t[…]