Where are we on Brexit?

[andrewducker]

No real news at the moment about Brexit. There's a lot of background ongoing murmuring, but no change. Britain still hasn't found a way to live up to the Good Friday agreement, polls continue to show a small (but consistent) lead for Remain, Boris continues to say "We can do this if we all think positive thoughts", but has no concrete proposals. Rees Mogg continues to spout horrific nonsense, while having a total of around 70 MPs who will back No Deal (out of 650) and no chance of actually getting it through. Oh, and the UK's customs proposals continue to not be acceptable to the EU.

However, my brain keeps latching on to Brexit, and to try and exorcise it for a few days, I thought I'd order the plausible results by my preferences.

1) Staying in the EU. Brexit is cancelled, we don't carry on with the idiocy any more. I can't see this happening through MPs saying "We are ignoring the fraudulent marginal advisory referendum", but I can see them either saying "We are rerunning the fraudulent marginal advisory referendum" or "We are replacing the fraudulent marginal advisory referendum with a general election".

2) We find a compromise agreement on Northern Ireland and enter the transition period. Nobody is happy - such is the way of compromises. We spend the next couple of years arguing with the EU about trade deals, which is long enough for Brexit to be cancelled (or turned into EEA membership). A few years from then we go back into the EU, only this time we're a member of Schengen, and don't have any of our other opt-outs, because the EU isn't going to let us get away with our nonsense any more.

3) Negotiations fail. We go no-deal next March. After about three days of awfulness even the people who stockpiled supplies realise how doomed things are. We frantically join the EEA. See the second part of (2)

4) Negotiations fail. We go no-deal next March. The government refuses to admit the sheer horror of its mistake. Things get very, very bad. They do a deal with the US rather than the EU, in an attempt to save face. Britain's trading status is destroyed, the economy is put back by a huge distance, inequality rockets, and the whole country goes to hell. Eventually there is an election of more sensible, and the new government joins the EEA (See (2)). But before that point lots of people die.

The only good news recently is that in the case of Brexit Scottish Independence has a majority and so does Irish Unification (by 56% to 40%). And while I'd be delighted to be cut free of the horror of Westminster, I feel enough sympathy with my friends in England that I'd prioritise getting Brexit stopped over Scotland getting Independence.

Comments

[danieldwilliam]

I think is also the possibility that our government becomes so dysfunctional that we lurch from inconclusive General Election to inconclusive General Election and the outcome becomes essentially random.

[zotz]

One thing that you will learn if you read what pollsters themselves (such as, for example, Anthony Wells of YouGov) have to say about their trade is that people are not good at judging how they will react to hypothetical situations. Everyone seemed very sure that a vote to leave would push up support for Scottish independence and there were certainly some polls agreeing with that. Well, it did, but for less than a month.

Another is that one poll means very little. There have been very notable outliers on this topic before which have misled people horribly.

[calimac]

Re the last sub-option under 1), what plausible general election result would lead to the cancellation of Brexit?

[hilarita]

Can we even join the EEA that quickly?

[andrewducker]

1)Theresa May is unable to get a majority for any alternative and calls an election*. Alternatively enough Conservatives support a new election to force a no confidence vote in order to avoid a no deal.


2)Labour looks at the polling that shows that the Northern Labour heartlands have turned against Brexit, and stands on an anti Brexit platform. This is, indeed, what the polling shows, and what a lot of senior Labour people want. So it depends on persuading Corbyn.

3) And wins. Which the current polling would show then doing.

Which combination is unlikely, but within the bounds of plausibility. Personally, I think a new referendum is more likely.

*Stupid, but she's already done it once.

[andrewducker]

The EU seem quite keen on the idea, if only it didn't cross Theresa May's red lines.

[mountainkiss]

I think your (2) is the most likely under the current administration. It helps to remember that we are negotiating a withdrawal agreement rather than any future relationship agreement.

If there is a change in Conservative party leadership then I think a No Deal option becomes most likely, by default as the clock ticks out.

What I can't gauge is the likelihood of that change.

[andrewducker]

I'm not sure how we're going to manage (2) when the UK won't budge on NI remaining entirely part of the UK and the EU won't budge on NI not having a border with the Republic.

I don't think that May will lost a vote of no confidence. I don't think most Conservative MPs want a change at this point.

[andrewducker]

Oh yes. I'm by no means convinced that Scotland would vote for Independence. But I actually expect that as more comes out about the horrors of No Deal it'll look more appetising for most voters.

[andrewducker]

Could be. At some point I'll hope that the balance of power is such that a party that demands PR gets a voice.

[mountainkiss]

I think they’ll fudge it.

[andrewducker]

What fudge do you think might be acceptable?

[mountainkiss]

Something that everyone knows is a fudge but is better than a chaotic no-deal Brexit for all parties.

[andrewducker]

Aah. I think that the EU are looking for something actually legalistic here, which will definitely act as a backstop. I don't think they trust Britain anywhere near enough to allow a fudge that they don't think will actually work if needed.

[armiphlage]

"they do a deal with the US rather than the EU"

The UK may wish to see how well that is working with Canada and Mexico. The US has historically ignored the North American Free Trade Agreement whenever convenient (imposing tariffs on Canadian softwood in the past, and now on Canadian steel and aluminum), while holding Canada and Mexico strictly to the terms of the treaty. As the UK would start off with an even smaller amount of trade with the US than either Canada or Mexico, its negotiating power would be even weaker.

[mountainkiss]

It’s an interesting space. Arguably they have it in the Dec 2017 agreement but I don’t know as I’d count on it being kept to. I suppose what I’m groping towards is that I don’t know that I think legalistic is as cut and dried as this makes it sound. I think anything agreed will still be subject to a number of interpretations.

[andrewducker]

Oh yes, it would be an appalling decision.

Which doesn't, sadly, make it unlikely that our current overlords wouldn't try it.

[andrewducker]

Looks like the EU are offering to fudge the language, and there are enough people on the UK side who aren't willing to accept it (largely, I suspect, for other reasons):
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-talks-risk-collapse-irish-border-compromise-uk-eu-a8527531.html

[mountainkiss]

That could change as 29 March approaches. This is exactly what happened in December.

[andrewducker]

Yeah. Lots of variables here. I am hoping that at some point soon the ERG platform gets entirely leaked so that it can be thoroughly discredited.

[mountainkiss]

I don't know that I think they have a platform.

[andrewducker]

They have at least a horrifying _something_ that's been partially leaked to The Times:
https://twitter.com/ianbirrell/status/1038689473347891201?s=09

[mountainkiss]

Yes, I'd be interested to see that.

[hano]

'one chapter suggests... setting up a permanent expeditionary force to defend the Falkland Islands'
What utter fuckwittery is this? Has he no knowledge of the garrison down there? There's a reinforced infantry company, a frigate and four Typhoon FGR4s on permanent guard duty. Not to mention the 5000ft runway long enough to take the heavy transport aircraft that would bring in the rapid reaction assets that would no doubt be deployed at the first sign of trouble. Does he actually have a fucking clue about anything?

[andrewducker]

I'll take QTWTAIN for 100€.

[hano]

And that's before we get into whether Argentina has the desire to attempt another invasion. (It doesn't). And it certainly doesn't have the military capability, a couple of years ago one of their few remaining operational warships sank while in harbour which tells you everything you need to know about the state of the Argentine Navy.
It's as if JRM is just making this shit up as he goes along and hoping that he'll hit enough hardright/facist dog whistles to engender enough suport to camouflage the ugliest right wing power grab attempt since Oswald Mosley's.
Oh wait...

[danieldwilliam]

Hopefully, but I think we're in for a bit of a wait on that.

The parties strongly in favour of PR have other fish to fry over the next 18 months. The Lib Dems would take a second Brexit referendum over PR. The SNP some sort of Scottish constitutional change over PR.

[mountainkiss]

I read this comment and thought "this reads as though it's by Phil" before I saw it actually was.

[mountainkiss]

I block Twitter during the working day so can't link to this, but there's a very good thread (from yesterday I think) by Peter Foster (@pmdfoster I think) supporting your thesis here.

[andrewducker]

Thank you, that aligns well with my understanding!

[mountainkiss]

It’s a difficult one. My best guess is that although the EU will choose the integrity of the four freedoms over a deal, they will seek routes (such as delaying tactics) to avoid no deal where possible, in the hope that UK politics manages to get itself out of the hole it is in. The consequence of no deal is worse for us than them but it is bad for them, especially for Ireland whose interests they are keen to protect.