Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 1001 posts

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#391

Post by jandrese »

jcriddle4 wrote: post #215
SolaceQuantum wrote: post #99

I'll be the first to admit: I'm an American. I fundamentally do not understand Brexit. I understand the following timeline: 1. A largely disseminated, nation-wide vote occurs, bolstered by nationalist sentiment, that the EU is bad for the UK. This vote results in a conclusion that UK should leave the EU. 2. This is controversial, due to the majority of the populace in general not desiring to leave the EU, but not vot…

For many Pro-Brexit people they felt May's deal didn't really leave the EU. A very major sticking point is that provisions in the exit agreement, refereed to as the "backstop", that in theory and possibly in practice could legally trap the UK in a half completed transition deal forever with the UK always subject to EU rules. Overall the agreement May put forward is basically an agreement to start the next phase of ne…

My understanding from Brussels is that there is no second phase of negotiations. They just voted for a hard Brexit.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#392

Post by philwelch »

yholio wrote: post #303
derriz wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it does not. It simply requires that the UK ensure that no hard (customs) border is required in Ireland. A key component of the Good Friday Agreement which ended 3 decades of bloodshed on the island of Ireland was that physical border checks between the two states whould be phased out. All it requires is that the UK accepts that EU customs checks are performed between Britain and Ireland rather than at the Irish b…

> I have no idea why the extreme brexiteers find this idea so objectionable? Because it's a slippery slope that looks very much like ceding territory. It's not just border checks, but Northern Ireland would be effectively in the EU as far as customs rules and tariffs. Otherwise, you could circumvent the EU tariffs by importing in the UK, moving the goods "internally" to NE then loading them on a truck and unloading s…

The alternative is a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, which the UK specifically agreed not to do in the Good Friday Agreement.

A hard border, combined with the overwhelming preference of North Irish to remain in the EU, increases the chance of a successful North Irish referendum for unification with Ireland. If the UK allows such a referendum and Ireland unifies, then the UK is ceding territory anyway. So there's really a no-win scenario assuming that the UK leaves the EU customs union.

If the UK wanted to commit a further violation of the Good Friday Agreement and act to prevent an Irish reunification referendum, or ignore the results of one, the Troubles would very likely start all over again, and the UK would be in no position to negotiate any kind of cease-fire because they would have demonstrated twice over that they can't be trusted in such things.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#393

Post by hardlianotion »

philwelch wrote: post #344
cm2187 wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

War between who and who?

Not necessarily "large scale", but it's hard to leave the EU customs union without introducing a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, and specifically not having a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland was part of the peace agreement that ended the Troubles.

I disagree. The Single Market is what is very hard to get out of without a hard border on the Irish border. Customs documentation can be addressed away from the border and is potentially fixed with technology, but the necessity of physical checks for standards conformance that cannot be fudged is the real problem.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#394

Post by dv_dt »

At this point a no deal Brexit looks substantially different from the possible-Brexit that was voted upon. Shouldn't there be a new referendum of basically a new question of a no deal Brexit vs Remain? I know very little of British politics, is there some other dynamic at work that pushes to what seems like a strongly economically destructive no deal Brexit?

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#395

Post by amriksohata »

The main issue is that the majority of parliament are remainers and so don't really represent the 52 percent, further signyfing why the public feel parliament are out of touch with them. Britain is further teetering towards a no deal, meaning an even harder Brexit.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#396

Post by lurquer »

jpfr wrote: post #360
yholio wrote: post #41

The Brexit promise is something nobody can deliver on. It was a lie, you cannot force the EU to accept an unfavorable trade deal. If only for the reason that it would set an exceptionally bad precedent and everybody would want their own deal, to pick and choose the parts of EU membership that are favorable to them, leading the EU to implode. Somebody needs to own up to that lie and accept that a "no deal" outcome, wh…

> A "no deal" outcome, which is clearly bad, is still the best thing brexiters can actually deliver. It could go much much worse than just "bad". The UK imports a lot of food from EU neighbors. In case of a hard Brexit, this will just ... stop. The question is whether all supermarkets can immediately redo their supply chains. That is not likely. Especially since the UK will loose all trade agreements with the non-EU…

Corpses in the street?

The UK imports around 25% of food-related commodities from the EU. Even with no deal, these imports will continue (as the EU has to sell them to someone.) Even if the EU stopped, there would not be corpses in the street as there happens to be a very wealthy English-speaking country not too far away that happens to produce more food than any country on the planet and is more than willing to trade with the UK.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#397

Post by hardlianotion »

johanek wrote: post #126
ceejayoz wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He was an MP, is still a MEP, and cofounded a party that once commanded "major party" status and nearly 20% of the vote in 2014. He's clearly representing some folks.

He's never been a MP, UKIP has never been considered a "major party" (how is this even defined?), there was no election in 2014, UKIP won 12.6% in 2015. He's clearly representing some people but your facts are way off.

As an electoral force, UKIP were very successful in European elections. It is reasonable to say that they were a major consideration in deciding to call the referendum.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#398

Post by stale2002 »

jpfr wrote: post #360
yholio wrote: post #41

The Brexit promise is something nobody can deliver on. It was a lie, you cannot force the EU to accept an unfavorable trade deal. If only for the reason that it would set an exceptionally bad precedent and everybody would want their own deal, to pick and choose the parts of EU membership that are favorable to them, leading the EU to implode. Somebody needs to own up to that lie and accept that a "no deal" outcome, wh…

> A "no deal" outcome, which is clearly bad, is still the best thing brexiters can actually deliver. It could go much much worse than just "bad". The UK imports a lot of food from EU neighbors. In case of a hard Brexit, this will just ... stop. The question is whether all supermarkets can immediately redo their supply chains. That is not likely. Especially since the UK will loose all trade agreements with the non-EU…

None of what you are saying is true, and it is clear that you have no idea how trade works.

The EU and the UK already have a trade deal. It is called the World Trade Organization rules.

Yes, some taxes and tariffs might be higher, but it is a complete lie, born of either ignorance or maliciousness, to claim that a country would literally starve to death.

Once again, go look up the WTO trade rules. WTO trade rules cover most of the world.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#400

Post by n4r9 »

jandrese wrote: post #371
sparkie wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They will make concessions. I'll put money on it. The UK leaving with no deal would be the beginning of the end of the EU. There is already growing anti-EU sentiment in Italy (4th largest economy in the block), Hungary, Austria, Poland. The UK leaving could set off a chain reaction which would either end the EU project or drastically reduce its size. The EU simply can't afford to have the UK leave completely, because…

That sort of assumes that the UK is all hunky dory after it leaves. If it gets slammed with an immediate recession/raising unemployment/etc... then that's leverage the EU has to convince other members to stay.

Agreed, and frankly, the whole process has been such a calamity that if I were an EU country leader I wouldn't even attempt to exit without a very strong mandate for a detailed, specific and clear process of leaving.
Post reply on HN