Re: Priti Patel omg : Mon Mar 02, 2020 2:51 pm
sally cinnamon wrote:
Because of the complexity of Brexit and the fact that the incoming Ministers did not have a plan for Brexit, they campaigned for the general vague idea of Brexit and then thought they'd work it out after.
I guess if Corbyn had got in, he'd have said to the civil service "deliver free broadband for everyone, its the will of the people" and then when the civil service started explaining the complexity of it, and Ministers started to shy away from the unfortunate trade offs they hadn't considered, things would have got delayed, we'd be 3 years down the line and still no free broadband, and the hard left would be saying it was because of the obstructive civil service.
With Brexit, a lot of the problem in the years 2016-19 was that Ministers had been sold various myths during the referendum about the UK holding "all the cards" and a lot of them came in thinking basically we could leave the EU but negotiate away all the inconveniences that would involve because of our super strong position. Hence Theresa May's government was trying to simultaneously issue strict red lines on freedom of movement, regulatory alignment and jurisdiction of the European courts and also talk about "comprehensive, ambitious, deep" relationship and all these various terms.
The EU were very matter-of-fact, as they always are in trade deals with other countries: if you want those red lines, this is the most we give you, we're willing to offer you more, just ditch those red lines.
May's government thought they could push the EU in to giving away more but they couldn't. Of course part of this got blamed on a conspiracy of Olly Robbins being in league with the EU.
So then Boris came in and he's basically realised the situation which is why he is being much more realistic about what is available. When he wanted to solve the "Irish backstop" issue, he defaulted to the original EU idea of a border between NI and mainland GB. Back in the original talks, the EU had pushed for that and May had pushed against it saying no UK PM could accept a trade border inside British territory, so she compromised by bringing the entire UK inside a large degree of regulatory and customs alignment. Boris didn't want that, the EU said ok so its back to the border down the Irish sea, and unlike May, Boris was willing to compromise.
But Boris has also realised that the UK isn't going to negotiate special favours. He might sideline Olly Robbins but the hard truth is, the UK has no experienced trade negotiators! We haven't done trade negotiations for years. The main negotiation strategy tried in the Theresa May era was "divide and rule" to try and talk to individual member states bilaterally and play them off against the Commission, but the member states didn't go along with that, they knew that the EU's hand is stronger when they act as a block.
So all this talk now about "Australia style partnership", which is basically no deal, is Boris and his government realising that there will be no special favours and the UK will just have to deal with the fall out.
The unavoidable truth of that, is that it is going to introduce a lot of extra costs and conveniences that consumers and businesses will not like. They will no doubt try a strategy of blame on the civil service/BBC/EU/immigrants/wokeness but they are the ones in charge who will face hard questions from people saying, since Boris's government got in I'm facing a higher grocery bill - why? And businesses saying, I operate on tight margins, I can't afford these extra costs.
With Corbyn and the hard left of Labour subsiding, a Starmer-led Opposition will be more credible and they will start to see elements of the old Blair coalition ebbing back to them, as well as the youth vote, so Boris' seemingly impregnable position now will go in to decline.
I guess if Corbyn had got in, he'd have said to the civil service "deliver free broadband for everyone, its the will of the people" and then when the civil service started explaining the complexity of it, and Ministers started to shy away from the unfortunate trade offs they hadn't considered, things would have got delayed, we'd be 3 years down the line and still no free broadband, and the hard left would be saying it was because of the obstructive civil service.
With Brexit, a lot of the problem in the years 2016-19 was that Ministers had been sold various myths during the referendum about the UK holding "all the cards" and a lot of them came in thinking basically we could leave the EU but negotiate away all the inconveniences that would involve because of our super strong position. Hence Theresa May's government was trying to simultaneously issue strict red lines on freedom of movement, regulatory alignment and jurisdiction of the European courts and also talk about "comprehensive, ambitious, deep" relationship and all these various terms.
The EU were very matter-of-fact, as they always are in trade deals with other countries: if you want those red lines, this is the most we give you, we're willing to offer you more, just ditch those red lines.
May's government thought they could push the EU in to giving away more but they couldn't. Of course part of this got blamed on a conspiracy of Olly Robbins being in league with the EU.
So then Boris came in and he's basically realised the situation which is why he is being much more realistic about what is available. When he wanted to solve the "Irish backstop" issue, he defaulted to the original EU idea of a border between NI and mainland GB. Back in the original talks, the EU had pushed for that and May had pushed against it saying no UK PM could accept a trade border inside British territory, so she compromised by bringing the entire UK inside a large degree of regulatory and customs alignment. Boris didn't want that, the EU said ok so its back to the border down the Irish sea, and unlike May, Boris was willing to compromise.
But Boris has also realised that the UK isn't going to negotiate special favours. He might sideline Olly Robbins but the hard truth is, the UK has no experienced trade negotiators! We haven't done trade negotiations for years. The main negotiation strategy tried in the Theresa May era was "divide and rule" to try and talk to individual member states bilaterally and play them off against the Commission, but the member states didn't go along with that, they knew that the EU's hand is stronger when they act as a block.
So all this talk now about "Australia style partnership", which is basically no deal, is Boris and his government realising that there will be no special favours and the UK will just have to deal with the fall out.
The unavoidable truth of that, is that it is going to introduce a lot of extra costs and conveniences that consumers and businesses will not like. They will no doubt try a strategy of blame on the civil service/BBC/EU/immigrants/wokeness but they are the ones in charge who will face hard questions from people saying, since Boris's government got in I'm facing a higher grocery bill - why? And businesses saying, I operate on tight margins, I can't afford these extra costs.
With Corbyn and the hard left of Labour subsiding, a Starmer-led Opposition will be more credible and they will start to see elements of the old Blair coalition ebbing back to them, as well as the youth vote, so Boris' seemingly impregnable position now will go in to decline.
Johnson has to deliver Brexit - either with or without a deal - otherwise he and the Tories are finished. Yes there will be some consequences but they could be positive e.g. French wine - prices will have to fall - the tariffs in the US have seen to that. Business is a pretty flexible beast and they will soon adapt to the new reality - the idea that the country will come to a complete halt is bonkers.
There will gains and losses - tariffs that currently exist with the EU will go so some products will reduce in price - perhaps there will be drive to use more of our own home grown products?
You can't have a leave that is basically remain - so freedom of movement has to go so does the ECJ etc. The EU want to keep the UK locked in to their decision-making it simply will not work.
I agree under Starmer Labour will look more credible and Boris needs to up his game.
