UK Politics: This Country is Going to the Moggs

[A Horse Named Stranger]

Yes, however it always felt like bemused had a somewhat lighter connotation than bewildered or confused.

So I would've probably gone for bewildered (although outraged is probably a better describtion altogether) to describe JRM's let's return to the good old days of the Irish border remarks.

While the M11 (or the longest urinal in the World if the goverment's plans are to be enacted), is more really more a, what? Is this for real? Thing.

If that's wrong, I stand corrected and learnt something.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

Anyway.

It's been a while since we had an insight to where this whole mess is going besides doomsday scenarios, fantasies, and some comedy gold.

The author gives properly a somewhat realistic assessment where we are, and where things are going, at least as far as one can tell from the outside. I am somewhat more sceptical of the situation, and I'd still put my money on a no-deal scenario as an outcome. But apparently there still is some narrow path to avoid it.

[Werthead]

3 hours ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Anyway.

It's been a while since we had an insight to where this whole mess is going besides doomsday scenarios, fantasies, and some comedy gold.

The author gives properly a somewhat realistic assessment where we are, and where things are going, at least as far as one can tell from the outside. I am somewhat more sceptical of the situation, and I'd still put my money on a no-deal scenario as an outcome. But apparently there still is some narrow path to avoid it.

The principle problem is that a no-deal Brexit is immensely damaging to the British economy, not to mention the fact it is practically undeliverable and the WTO rules require a massive infringement on British control of goods at the border (so we can't simply unilaterally agree to accept EU goods into the country without checks without doing the same for every other country on the planet, which would be hugely dangerous). The position, especially in the EU, seems to be that the UK has been talking a lot about no-deal effectively as a bluff, and at the last moment we will agree to something else once the EU backs off a bit on other core issues (the main one being Ireland). The problem with that is that the EU is unlikely to respond to bluffs and we may crash out essentially in error. The EU have already indicated that in a choice between backing the Irish position and no-deal, they will back Ireland.

The biggest obstacle remains the Irish border. If a way forward can be found there, other issues can be batted off into the transitional arrangement. If it can't, no deal becomes more likely. What was encouraging in that link was that the EU has found the framework in which various areas where a NI-UK border is in place already (such as on VAT, energy and the SAP checks) and suggested a border control system could be inserted there, but the DUP has shot that down, and it also doesn't help the just-in-time delivery system between companies in the rest of the UK and their Northern Irish branches (supermarkets is a particularly big one).

So we now have seven weeks to resolve the Irish border - which we've failed to do in eighteen months - and present a workable plan that the Conservative Party and the DUP and the Irish government and the EU as a whole will accept, and we have the Tory Party Conference in the middle of it all which could blow up in May's face altogether if the party is convinced to shoot down Chequers altogether.

This will be fun.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

6 minutes ago, Werthead said:

and it also doesn't help the just-in-time delivery system between companies in the rest of the UK and their Northern Irish branches (supermarkets is a particularly big one).

That one had me scratching my head a bit. As the supermarket supply chains involve food from the continent. So if the UK crash out, those supply chains will collapse anyway. Or am I missing something important here?

9 minutes ago, Werthead said:

So we now have seven weeks to resolve the Irish border - which we've failed to do in eighteen months - and present a workable plan that the Conservative Party and the DUP and the Irish government and the EU as a whole will accept, and we have the Tory Party Conference in the middle of it all which could blow up in May's face altogether if the party is convinced to shoot down Chequers altogether. This is a remarkable situation to be in.

Yep, that's the fun part we more or less discussed here back in december I think, and then again, when May backtracked on the backstop agreement she signed up to (which no PM could ever accept). Presumably, when she understood what she signed up to. She made irreconcilable promises to different parties to keep the goverment afloat. But reality had to bite her sooner or later. Now it's basically three choices, she can more or less tell the DUP to get lost and accept the Whole Ireland Solution, she can tell JRM, Boris and the other far right loons to f... off and sign up to an EEA Norway solution, or she can crash out.

Two solutions will be the immediate death of her goverment, the third will be an economic disaster for the UK.

[Werthead]

13 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

That one had me scratching my head a bit. As the supermarket supply chains involve food from the continent. So if the UK crash out, those supply chains will collapse anyway. Or am I missing something important here?

The supply chains from the mainland EU to Britain and Ireland generally involve vehicles and containers either travelling through the Channel Tunnel or on container ships into British ports on the south and east coasts. They are then taken by lorry right across the country and transferred onto other boats headed for Ireland and Northern Ireland. Goods in Ireland (north or south) can therefore spend a day extra in transit, which for perishables is an issue. Delaying them even longer in border checks is therefore something to be avoided.

The EU and the Republic of Ireland are working out ways around this, including using direct mainland Europe-RoI shipping routes completely bypassing the UK altogether, but those are still in the process of being set up, and they won't help the North as goods will still get stuck at the border.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

14 minutes ago, Werthead said:

The supply chains from the mainland EU to Britain and Ireland generally involve vehicles and containers either travelling through the Channel Tunnel or on container ships into British ports on the south and east coasts. They are then taken by lorry right across the country and transferred onto other boats headed for Ireland and Northern Ireland. Goods in Ireland (north or south) can therefore spend a day extra in transit, which for perishables is an issue. Delaying them even longer in border checks is therefore something to be avoided.

 

Yes, but that is not really answering my question/problem. If the UK crashes out, those supply chains are disrupted anyway. And given the sheer amount of goods, well food alone, those delays at border checks will be more than a day extra. Thus the Kent Motorway Lorry Park(ing lot). I mean a good part of the food goes (like you said) thru the tunnel, to the UK, and from there to NI. Well, jsut reread the link from one of my older post about what WTO Brexit looks like with regards to food. 

14 minutes ago, Werthead said:

 The EU and the Republic of Ireland are working out ways around this, including using direct mainland Europe-RoI shipping routes completely bypassing the UK altogether, but those are still in the process of being set up, and they won't help the North as goods will still get stuck at the border.

Not if the North remains in allignment with the Republic. That's the whole point of that excercise. If the North were to remain effectively in the EEA bypassing the UK altogether there would be no hard border/custom checks on the Irish Island. 

Unless I am missing something.

 

Edit: if the bypassing the UK routes work that is.

[Errant Bard]

I wonder if the neighbouring countries will have time to put up effective border checks, when even this close to the deadline nobody seems to know what will have to be done. It's in times like that where asking for more YEARS in some instances becomes funny (for example the french productivist agricultural lobby's cries of "not having enough time" to transition out of neo nicotinoids, asking for two more years, even though they knew it was coming years in advance)

 

Anyway, in other news, some people are going to float a khan in bikini blimp to denounce the rise of criminality in London. Because everyone knows that ruling against sexist advertisements makes people knife each other, and the best way to attack someone is to have a go at their insecure toxic masculinity. Meanwhile, khan has been quoted as saying that he preferred bikinis of other colours. I kind of like that guy, seen from afar. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/30/sadiq-khan-bikini-blimp-to-fly-over-central-london

[Which Tyler]

No deal it is then
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45385421

Well, unless she goes for another U-turn of course, but that would be impossible and unprecedented under her strong and stable leadership.

[Which Tyler]

2 hours ago, Errant Bard said:

Anyway, in other news, some people are going to float a khan in bikini blimp to denounce the rise of criminality in London. Because everyone knows that ruling against sexist advertisements makes people knife each other, and the best way to attack someone is to have a go at their insecure toxic masculinity. Meanwhile, khan has been quoted as saying that he preferred bikinis of other colours. I kind of like that guy, seen from afar. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/30/sadiq-khan-bikini-blimp-to-fly-over-central-london

I thought the Khan thing was openly acknowledged as being a Trumpist "Well see if free speech works both ways (because we all know it won't)" thing.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-45381628

"The fundraising page for the balloon said: "In light of the Donald Trump 'Baby Trump' balloon being allowed to fly over London during his visit to the UK, let's get a 'baby Khan' one and see if free speech applies to all."

 

The knife crime thing is just the "rationale" to try not to look inordinately petty and proven-wrong

[polishgenius]

Yeah, they were for some baffling reasons expecting it to be banned so they could make a scene and when it wasn't they had to go through with it.

They're now popping up on social media going "SEE? LEFTISTS TRIGGERED!!!" and the entire London left is just going .

[A Horse Named Stranger]

1 hour ago, Which Tyler said:

No deal it is then
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45385421

Well, unless she goes for another U-turn of course, but that would be impossible and unprecedented under her strong and stable leadership.

From your link.

Quote

Writing in the Sunday Telegraph, the prime minister says she will "not be pushed" into compromises on her Chequers agreement that are not in the "national interest".

Well, maybe having food is in the national interest. I think this one is open for interpretation. Besides, this is probably more for domestic consumption like so many other postures. But let's see, where this is going.

Quote

But Mrs May also warns she will not "give in" to those calling for a second referendum on the withdrawal agreement.

She says it would be a "gross betrayal of our democracy and... trust".

By that logic no more elections, as the people have spoken once, and it would be a gross betrayal of democracy and trust to ever ask them again. Tbf I can see where she is coming from with that argument. That argument made sense in the direct aftermath of the referendum, but that's been nearly two years and a lot of things have happened. Most campaign promises have been found out as either lies or fantasies, and there was also this minor problem of the campaign overspending, and Banks basically funneling in Russian money for the leave campaign.

But overall yes, I agree with you, I also think this is heading for no-deal.

[Werthead]

8 hours ago, Errant Bard said:

Anyway, in other news, some people are going to float a khan in bikini blimp to denounce the rise of criminality in London. Because everyone knows that ruling against sexist advertisements makes people knife each other, and the best way to attack someone is to have a go at their insecure toxic masculinity. Meanwhile, khan has been quoted as saying that he preferred bikinis of other colours. I kind of like that guy, seen from afar. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/30/sadiq-khan-bikini-blimp-to-fly-over-central-london

Absolutely, and of course the rise in crime in London (which - inconveniently for the narrative - began under his predecessor) has absolutely nothing to do with ideologically-driven cuts to the policing budget and resulting drop in officers mandated by the government. London now has the lowest rate of police numbers per head since 1997 and if current rates of decline are maintained, London's police force will drop by another 3,000 in the next three years, having dropped by over 2,000 in the last two.

The fact that morons like this don't even seem aware of where the money and responsibility to deal with the problem comes from is completely unsurprising.

[mormont]

On 9/2/2018 at 7:41 AM, Which Tyler said:

No deal it is then
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45385421

Well, unless she goes for another U-turn of course, but that would be impossible and unprecedented under her strong and stable leadership.

And on cue:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45392105

What could possibly be causing this new eruption of 'I'm going to be tough on the EU!'/'Well, I'd be tougher than you!'? I rack my brains. Oh wait, it's the fucking Tory party conference. 

Yet again, important negotiations are derailed so the other side can be used as punching bags. Yet again, time is wasted despite having made zero real progress. Yet again, the good of the nation is shoved to one side to deal with another round of the interminable battle to lead the Conservative party. This party should never be trusted again to run anything, including a nursery school bring and buy sale. 

[SirArthur]

On 9/2/2018 at 8:41 AM, Which Tyler said:

No deal it is then
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45385421

Well, unless she goes for another U-turn of course, but that would be impossible and unprecedented under her strong and stable leadership.

from my outside perspective:

No deal was always the most likely outcome. The pressure and hatred towards the EU, build up in the aftermatch of the referendum, will not go away. And any PM will always be pressured to be more tougher at the negotiations. Even though nobody knows how a successful "deal" will even look like. 

It is a magnificent play and the UK should charge money for the entertainment it provides. 

[BigFatCoward]

21 hours ago, Werthead said:

Absolutely, and of course the rise in crime in London (which - inconveniently for the narrative - began under his predecessor) has absolutely nothing to do with ideologically-driven cuts to the policing budget and resulting drop in officers mandated by the government. London now has the lowest rate of police numbers per head since 1997 and if current rates of decline are maintained, London's police force will drop by another 3,000 in the next three years, having dropped by over 2,000 in the last two.

The fact that morons like this don't even seem aware of where the money and responsibility to deal with the problem comes from is completely unsurprising.

At my not to be named outer london borough, a night shift is supposed to have 14 pc's, for 215000 people. We are lucky if we have 12. Cuts are killing already. 

[HexMachina]

41 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

At my not to be named outer london borough, a night shift is supposed to have 14 pc's, for 215000 people. We are lucky if we have 12. Cuts are killing already. 

During my ill-fated and ultimately aborted induction to the police earlier this year, I met the force I was going to be part of, toured the station, looked around the ward. They were supposed to have, I think, something like 8 officers to cover the area (which was pretty substantial). Due to cuts, they had one.

 

And the Khan thing was an obvious attempt by some right wing crybaby annoyed by the Trump blimp who had hope to get approval rejected so he could cry free speech. An obvious attempt at provoking leftists which as far as I can tell had about as much success as Farage's attempts to become an MP

[A Horse Named Stranger]

3 hours ago, mormont said:

Yet again, important negotiations are derailed so the other side can be used as punching bags. Yet again, time is wasted despite having made zero real progress. Yet again, the good of the nation is shoved to one side to deal with another round of the interminable battle to lead the Conservative party. This party should never be trusted again to run anything, including a nursery school bring and buy sale. 

No, the really amazing thing is, that May and her allies still pretend that chequers is still going to fly and not dead in the water. It's really thhe political equivalent of May going to a McDonald's ordering a box of chicken nuggets to go, walk outside, open the box, throw the chicken nuggets in the air while screaming "You are free, FLY!" While Johnson, JRM and the other right wingers chide her for the sole reason "that the nuggets won't fly, because they have no feathers. Duh." 

I mean Barnier basically rejected that checquers white paper in an interview in an interview with German Newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung. And the FAZ (or in this case their sunday edition FAS) is a really respected newspaper (a bit like the Times if you want a comparission to the British paper market). And the reason for the rejection are hardly new or surprising for anybody who has paid attention.

Usually you are right, that whole drama should be enough to never ever have a Tory goverment again, ever. But then you look at what Labour's doing, and the answer is... not very much. They haven't come up with a much more credible alternative of their own. There it's still the a customs Union but not the customs Union. Which is (to go back to my fast food analogy) a bit like Corbyn insisting, they should've gone to KFC instead of McDonalds.

 

[mormont]

1 hour ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

No, the really amazing thing is, that May and her allies still pretend that chequers is still going to fly and not dead in the water.

I'm reading this as a position she needs to stick to in order to survive the party conference. If she does that, Chequers will probably then be discarded, though this will be sold as 'updated' or 'amended'. 

[A Horse Named Stranger]

3 minutes ago, mormont said:

I'm reading this as a position she needs to stick to in order to survive the party conference. If she does that, Chequers will probably then be discarded, though this will be sold as 'updated' or 'amended'. 

Maybe you can enlighten me.

This chequers zombie has pretty much been dead at conception (let's be blunt here, it's sort of Frankenstein's monster composed of the coprse of her already dismissed customs partnership idea). But that was as good offer she could make to the EU given the weakness of her own position. So where would she get the political juice to come up with something palatable? Even worse, as the clock is mercilessly ticking down, she really has no time to come up with another version of her customs partnership nonsense that will be equally dead in the water. Her next move really has to be either walk away, or sign pretty much anything at the dotted line, with very little space in between.

[mormont]

Chequers is indeed dead, and was never alive.

However, should May at present acknowledge the faintest possibility that Chequers is dead, she will immediately be accused of 'giving in to the EU'. Indeed, that's just what Johnson has done anyway, but she would be lending credence to his accusations. So for now, she can't acknowledge that. I take that to be the reason why she's insisting that she won't give ground on a proposal that is not ever going to be acceptable to the EU, or to the Brexiters either: she has to be seen to be standing firm.

You're right that the next question is, where do you go from there? But of course, May's Brexit strategy has always consisted entirely of 'hang on until the weekend and hope like hell something comes up'. That isn't going to change.

But if she can survive the party conference, she may be thinking that in itself will lend her political juice, at least diminishing the chances of an internal challenge based on the support of the grass roots. She can then hope to stall or fudge some of the other issues to be dealt with during the transition.

But she'll still need an Irish solution, and there just isn't one. Nor is one going to magically appear. That's the deal-killer here.