UK in/out referendum on the EU (Brexit vs Bremain)

I think its in Huff Post UK

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/civil-servants-unhelpful-narratives-on-brexit_uk_5d5664a1e4b0d8840ff12a87?utm_hp_ref=uk-homepage

{{ Well the Brexit catastrophe is freewheeling along to disaster just fine it seems.

Where to start!

First with the leak. Someone leaked the governments assessment of what we might face if there is a No Deal Brexit, it doesn't make for pretty reading-

'The dossier says leaving the EU without a deal could lead to:

Fresh food becoming less available and prices rising
   
A hard Irish border after plans to avoid checks fail, sparking protests
   
Fuel becoming less available and 2,000 jobs being lost if the government sets petrol import tariffs to 0%, potentially causing two oil refineries to close
   
UK patients having to wait longer for medicines, including insulin and flu vaccines
   
A rise in public disorder and community tensions resulting from a shortage of food and drugs
   
Passengers being delayed at EU airports, Eurotunnel and Dover
   
Freight disruption at ports lasting up to three months, caused by customs checks, before traffic flow improves to 50-70% of the current rate'

So just to be clear it would be a disaster, this is civil service speak for we'd be fucked. Not least because the one thing Boris claims he wants to avoid, a hard border in Ireland, is precisely what they predict will happen if they go ahead with Boris' plan. And 'sparking protests' is possibly this years winner of the Civil Service understatement award.
It  would also immediately negate any chance of striking a trade deal quickly with the US, as preserving the Good Friday Agreement is a condition of it passing the US House.

In response Gove, whose now in charge of Brexit planning had this to say about the leaked document-

'"It's certainly the case that there will be bumps in the road, some element of disruption in the event of no-deal.
But the document that has appeared in the Sunday Times was an attempt, in the past, to work out what the very, very worst situation would be so that we could take steps to mitigate that.
And we have taken steps."

So just some bumps in the road then and not to worry steps have been taken to solve everything. Steps no less- not saying what they are of course but rest assured steps have been taken. Granted they appear to be steps closer to the edge of a looming cliff edge with sharp rocks below but steps!

Meanwhile in la-la land Corbyn is about to announce that there must be a general election before Brexit. Not only is that logistically almost impossible before the deadline, but what the buggery would be the point? Corbyn has no more a credible plan to unite the House than the Tories have, Corbyn has an even more fractious party than the Tories, not just on Brexit but on everything from defence to nationalisation and Scottish independence. It would be a classic case of rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic.

Boris is off to the G7 meeting whilst this disaster unfolds where he says he will insist to the EU that they have to change position on the withdrawal agreement. Which seems unlikely, and as this leak rather shows what a bad shape we will be in if Boris carries out his threat they are more likely, I think, to reckon Boris has more cause to blink first than them. }}

{{ Update on the leak, seems Gove's attempts to claim it was out of date, from the past and a previous administration, ie May's, might not be entirely true- what a surprise!

'a government source confirmed it was presented at a ministerial planning meeting just three weeks ago.'

That's within the Boris administration. And it was presented to Boris's cabinet. Where Gove is telling the truth is that technically 3 weeks ago is indeed 'the past' and that it was begun before Boris became PM, as these things take time to collate, but it was presented as still valid by the civil service after he took over. }}

Thanks for the update Petty!
Amazing! Horrifying, appalling, but amazing!

You make a reference to deckchairs on the Titanic, but I'm starting to think more of Dr Strangelove... the inevitable bureaucratic march toward insanity despite every effort by saner minds to find and use the recall code....

So what do you think? Are there any viable options at this point?

nope. we are fucked.

Since Boris is a Churchill scholar, maybe he's hoping to bring back the "good old days" of WWII?

{{ Boris has written to the EU saying the backstop has to go.

I'm including the link to the full published letter here as I find the lack of clarity at this stage in what he says, the even less clarity apparent in what he proposes as alternative solutions, to be utterly shocking at this late stage in affairs.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/826166/20190819_PM_letter_to_His_Excellency_Mr_Donald_Tusk.pdf

For those without time to read the whole thing in summary Boris says the backstop is undemocratic and somehow (despite being designed to preserve peace) undermines the Good Friday Agreement, he says it has to go and in its place Boris proposes,  "flexible and creative solutions" and "alternative arrangements" - based on technology. None of which currently exists anywhere in the world- if you could just have borders with just tech and no infrastructure that's how everyone would do it!

'the backstop should be replaced with a commitment to put in place such arrangements as far as possible before the end of the transition period - currently the end of 2020 under Mrs May's deal. '

Here he is proposing a solution which doesn't physically exist be used throughout the transition period in the hopes they can invent it in time.

And if they cant invent something in time to solve the border issue?

'were these arrangements not fully in place by the end of the transition period..we are ready to look constructively and flexibly at what commitments might help.'

And that's your lot.

So to be clear, Boris is saying the backstop has to go, it should be replaced in the meantime (until 2020) by 'a flexible and creative solution' or 'alernative arrangements', no detail at all but allegedly a spurious technological border solution that doesn't actually exists yet, and if they cant invent it in time for 2020 then they will look at being 'flexible and constructive.'

Yeah. Sounds like a great plan.
I dont even know how the EU are supposed to respond to this, there is nothing of substance in it bar a demand to remove the backstop with a pie in the sky replacement.
I cant see Southern Ireland wanting anything to do with this, and if they say no the EU will say no is my belief. Though I suspect they would say no anyway just based on the content, or lack of, in this letter. }}

{{ Well the EU have responded, and its exactly the sort of response you'd expect from such a pathetic outline of a 'plan' to replace the backstop. }}

'"The backstop is an insurance to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland unless and until an alternative is found...It (the letter from Boris) does not set out what any alternative arrangements could be...and recognises that there is no guarantee such arrangements would be in place by the end of the transitional period".

'Mr Tusk said those opposing the arrangement without "realistic alternatives" supported re-establishing a hard border.
This was the reality "even if they do not admit it", he added....The European Commission said Mr Johnson's letter did not contain a "legally operational solution" to prevent a hard Irish border.'- BBC

{{ In the meantime in other evil Tory news, scary new Home Secretary Patel has said that she is going to end Freedom of Movement on 31st October, revoking the May plan to have a 2 year transitional period after we leave the EU in which EU nationals who have been living and working here since Brexit was announced could stay on and make their applications.

There were several good reasons for May's plan- first its insane to turn people who are here working into illegal immigrants overnight. Secondly we cant afford the work force drain. Thirdly we don't have either the physical nor the administrative capabilities to undertake it or process them all yet in place. Fourthly there is no guarantees EU countries will treat UK overseas workers any better now as that was implicit on us treating EU worker fairly.

This doesn't seem so much a sane policy as it does an insane attempt to heap pressure on the EU to change their stance on the withdrawal agreement. I think the madness now is if we keep announcing crazy damaging stuff we will do if the EU don't blink, it will somehow make them blink watching us maim ourselves repeatedly! }}

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/pension-age-rise-iain-duncan-smith-state-centre-for-social-justice-pension-age-75-a9071396.html

Thankfully I'm long term unemployed and have suffered from mental health problems for most of my life, otherwise I would have found the notion of working to 75 depressing, I'm already depressed enough half the time and A) Doubtful I'll have much of a pension b) Find the idea of living and working to the age of 75 in a post brexit tory version of England shitty enough on its own to not bother getting worried about this to much.

Don't worry Malick, nobody will vote for a government who makes people work to 75, its not going to happen. Also I think brexit and the Tories are going to come to a sticky end.

Johnson is now in full on Trump lying mode, he says the backstop is 'undemocratic' but doesn't say why, maybe because its bullshit. He, or more likely Cummings, are now trying to blame everyone but themselves and if brexit fails he can say it was all 'their' fault, eg, Parliament of the EU or remainers, but he will probably run off if it looks like he will fail.

Mrs Figg wrote:Don't worry Malick, nobody will vote for a government who makes people work to 75, its not going to happen. Also I think brexit and the Tories are going to come to a sticky end.

Yeah I know (I'm fine, just got rejected for two jobs today so I'm a bit down) and I hope so...but I think my constituency has elected Conservative MP's in a unbroken run since 1885(?)...

Of those I know who voted Leave in 2016, only one has changed his mind, everyone else seems to have lost interest in the debate and politics in general, not sure if that is better or worse than being raging hardcore Brexiteers though...

Mrs Figg wrote:Johnson is now in full on Trump lying mode, he says the backstop is 'undemocratic' but doesn't say why, maybe because its bullshit. He, or more likely Cummings, are now trying to blame everyone but themselves and if brexit fails he can say it was all 'their' fault, eg, Parliament of the EU or remainers, but he will probably run off if it looks like he will fail.

Johnson comes across as a blustering narcissistic idiot, but he's a shrewder politician than he shows, I'm starting to wonder if his strategy is to deliberately screw up brexit and loose a VONC or call (and loose) a general election, leaving Labour to deal with the mess so he can bugger off with his money and pretend he was the thwarted champion of the people.

Or maybe he's just a lying arsehead.

{{ Actually I am finding it very hard indeed to work out Boris game plan or motivations, particularly regarding the letter.

It seems beyond belief that he is stupid enough to think the EU will agree to just dump the backstop all together based on nothing more than Boris saying they have to and promising we will think of 'something' in the future to replace it.

That leaves the only other logical assumption being he is offering the EU something he knows they can't agree too in order to blame them for its failure. But then why would you be this blatant in doing so? That only works if it at least looks like your making credible offers that they are being unreasonable about- Boris is not even pretending here to have credible alternatives- worse he not only says they don't have one but will think of 'something', he can't guarantee the 'something' will be ready at end of the transition period in 2020.

So the point of this letter, and making it public baffles me. If its meant to be a credible attempt at a negotiating position its laughable.
If its meant to be a means to blame the EU for being intransigent its far too blatant to work as the UK are the ones who come off as being unreasonable not the EU.

Its a puzzler.    }}

It is a puzzler if you look at it from our standpoint, logical, but he is playing to his audience, the politically ignorant Telegraph readers and/or hardline ERG fanatics. If you see it from their perspective it looks like Johnson is playing hardman and triumphing over the Europeans, even his tone is going to please them, the snide sarcastic blustering tone will go down a treat. They will love it because logic, reality or facts are not of concern, they don't care, they justwannagetaaaht.

{{ Hats off to Merkel for calling Boris's bluff.
For those who missed it during their press bit Merkel said yes, the backstop could be renegotiated, and then cheekily went so far as to set a time limit on it- 30 days!
With one caveat- all the UK have to do is come up with an actual workable, real alliterative in those 30 days!

"It was said we will probably find a solution in two years," she (Merkel) said. "But we could also find one in the next 30 days, why not?"...Mrs Merkel indicated that an alternative might be possible, stressing that the onus was on the UK to find a workable plan.'- BBC

Boris replied (presumably through gritted teeth to this) with the brilliantly funny claim he was "more than happy" with that "blistering timetable".

Nice one Merkel

Today Boris meets Macron, who has a more traditionally French view of the English position, once they stop laughing, and has indicated his line will be 'nothing is open to renegotiate, deal as is or fuck off, but do one or the other as your ruining the ambiance for everyone else still at the party.'

So in short Merkel has stitched him up with a Herculean size task- find a solution to something no one has done for three years and do it in30 days and Macron is indicating he will happily wave us out the door on the 31st of October if we don't achieve the near impossible task.
This 'no deal make the EU blink first' bluff is going great Boris!! }}

{{ OK, Brexit!

Where to start this time.

Its the G7 meeting.
So do we start with Trump promising an amazing trade deal, Boris pretending he can dictate the terms of it, or Trump praising Boris by insulting the rest of the EU?

Or perhaps Boris admitting that his previous statement, that a no deal Brexit was a million to one chance was in need of refining, down to 'touch and go'.
Or Boris effectively appearing to be looking for a no deal.
Or the EU noting that the promises of a ready to operational replacement to the backstop were so far non existent.
Or Boris threatening to hold the Eu to ransom if it doesn't give in.

Its been a bit exhausting keeping up.

So ok trade talk first.

Boris says this-

'Mr Johnson said the US must open up its markets if a post-Brexit trade deal is to be agreed. "I don't think we sell a single joint of British lamb in the United States, we don't sell any beef," the PM said...Before his talks with the US President, Mr Johnson spoke about "massive opportunities for the UK to prise open the American market".... Mr Johnson said: "Melton Mowbray pork pies, which are sold in Thailand and in Iceland, are currently unable to enter the US market because of, I don't know, some sort of food and drug administration restriction."
He continued: "UK bell peppers cannot get into the US market at all. Wine shipments are heavily restricted. If you want to export wine made in England to the US you have to go through a US distributor. There is a tax on British micro-breweries in the US that doesn't apply to US micro-breweries in the UK."
The government added that tariffs on some UK goods in the US can reach up to 28% for fashion, 15% for machinery and 35% for food and drink.'

and Trump said-

'Mr Trump said a deal with the UK would happen "quickly".
"We're going to do a very big trade deal, bigger than we've ever had with the UK," he said.
"And now at some point they won't have the obstacle, they won't have the anchor around their ankle, because that's what they have."

Neatly insulting the EU by describing it as an anchor on its members.

Boris did however admit that how quickly a deal could be done, with recent talk making it sound like it was all but signed and ready to go come Brexit Day, was maybe not as quick as expected-

"My own experience of the way Americans work, the size and complexity of the deal we want to do probably means we won't be able to do within a year.
When asked if it could take five years, he replied: "No, we'll do it faster than that.
"We need to do it fast, but to get the whole thing done from soup to nuts within a year is going to be a big ask."

and in terms of what Boris seems to think he can demand from such a deal, and under these circumstances a more realistic note perhaps was struck by UK director of the European Centre For International Political Economy who said-

'the US "would be loathe" to get rid of the barriers intended to protect US producers.
He added: "The US is quite protectionist - the US have never done a trade deal the likes of which Mr Johnson is describing.
"The question is whether the US is prepared to give the UK something and what we would have to give them in return. It is less clear what Trump wants in terms of trade altogether."

Boris has in an interview admitted that not only will the trade deal take at least a year, but that he plans to keep most of the 39billion we owe to the EU under the agreement to withdraw, if we leave without a deal.
Effectively saying to the EU do as we say or we are keeping the money we owe you.

Bearing in mind Brexit Day has to be fairly quickly followed by 'try to strike a new trade deal with the EU block day.' The same people he is threatening to withhold the money from.
This does not seem a wise course of action to me!

Boris is still doing the weird thing of claiming he hopes to get, and still thinks he can get a new deal in time-

"I think in the last few days there has been a dawning realisation in Brussels and other European capitals what the shape of the problem is for the UK."
Mr Johnson said he was an "optimist" and thought the EU would understand there is an "opportunity to do a deal".

whilst simultaneously the EU say -

Mr Tusk repeated the EU's position that any alternatives to the Irish backstop would have to be "realistic" and "immediately operational".
An EU official added the meeting had "mainly restated known positions" and Brussels had been hoping for "new elements to unblock the situation".

Which is EU speak for they are offering us nothing new at all, not a sausage.

And Boris keeps saying things like-

"I think it's going to be touch and go. But the important thing is to get ready to come out without a deal."

So what to make of all this? What is Boris's game plan?

Well despite all this Boris's tough stance is playing well with the core conservative and Brexit base, so its doing him no harm there.

More importantly Corbyn remains unelectable, and polling continues to show that. And the latest polling indicates if there were a snap election the Tories would stay in power and increase on their 1 seat advantage.

Some therefore reckon Boris will go for a snap election in early October and so be in a position where he has the mandate for no deal Brexit from the people.

But that is a risk, look what happened to May when the polling told her she would increase her majority with a snap election, she got it slashed. Though Corbyn has fallen in many people's estimation since then. But its still a risk. At the recent EU elections if you added up all the pro-brexit votes and all the pro-Remain votes remain narrowly won it.

Others seem to think he is serious in his threats to find a way to effectively close down the Parliament so that it is not sitting during the Brexit exit period, making it impossible for MP's to do or debate anything which could prevent a no deal until it was already done.

This one has been floating about for a while, and its now known Boris has sought legal advice on how he could do it. I haven't gone into it before here as I never took it as a serious threat, but now, who knows.

Incidentally the last time someone did something like this-  closed down Parliament so it couldn't stop them doing something - it was one of the King Charles's.
It caused a civil war and he ended up with is head on a spike and Parliament back in control.
And that's another final issue with the proposition of shutting Parliament, doing so would involve the Queen. She would have to grant it, or prevent it. And as she can't do either without upsetting a large part of the population its a catch-22 for a Monarchy which survives on a public perception of no political influence.
Boris will certainly know his history, and the Constitutional Pandora's Box it might open, which is why I assumed it was just a bluff and have dismissed it.
But hard to tell how crazy this might yet get before all's done. }}}

Thanks Petty! I'll have to read this through again tonight and see if I can get my head around it all. Much popcorn needed.

{{ A quick add to this, or follow up of sorts. You may recall in his attempts to argue any trade deal with the US would have to open up US markets to the UK, Boris choose a very specific example-

"Melton Mowbray pork pies, which are sold in Thailand and in Iceland, are currently unable to enter the US market because of, I don't know, some sort of food and drug administration restriction."

You'd think therefore he would be pretty sure of his facts here.
He wasn't. At all.
Melton Mowbray don't in fact export to either Iceland or Thailand, let alone ever trying to go to the US, prompting the Head of the trade board representing said pie makers to tweet that "We don't actually export to Thailand or Iceland. It is certainly available in Iceland the shop."

Turns out Mowbray pies have a short shelf life,making export of them uneconomic.
Not a huge deal in the grand scheme of Brexit, but a worrying note that our PM would make such a specific reference and yet still be so utterly wrong about almost part of what he said about it.
Did he know it was untrue and not care just to make the point? And if so why not pick another product that does face genuine restrictions?
And if it was mistake how? How do you pick something so specific as your example and get the example wrong?
Either way it strikes a slightly worrying note about Boris.}}

It's the same with kippers. Giving a speech rant about how irate producers from the Isle of Man now, due to the EU, have to use ice packs when sending out packs of kippers. It's all the evil EU making us do things that make no sense and cost money.

Only the EU has nothing to do with it. It's UK legislation.

Pettytyrant101 wrote:
Not a huge deal in the grand scheme of Brexit, but a worrying note that our PM would make such a specific reference and yet still be so utterly wrong about almost part of what he said about it.
Did he know it was untrue and not care just to make the point? And if so why not pick another product that does face genuine restrictions?
And if it was mistake how? How do you pick something so specific as your example and get the example wrong?
Either way it strikes a slightly worrying note about Boris.

I don't think he cares. I think he's gambling on most of the people hearing or reading it not to do any research on it. It's the same ideology as Trump, say the same lies enough and enough people believe you.

Nagual wrote: It's the same ideology as Trump, say the same lies enough and enough people believe you.

At least BJ seems to be able to stay somewhat on the topic of trade during the G7. Meanwhile our President is currently tweeting about NOT nuking hurricanes

Donald J. Trump wrote: The story by AXIOS that President Trump wanted to blow up large hurricanes with nuclear weapons prior to reaching shore is ridiculous. I never said this. Just more FAKE NEWS!

Nagual wrote:I don't think he cares. I think he's gambling on most of the people hearing or reading it not to do any research on it. It's the same ideology as Trump, say the same lies enough and enough people believe you.

Bingo.  Trump counts on the laziness of people who want to believe; Boris no doubt will do the same.  But with Boris it's perhaps more vile because he actually does have a firm grasp on truth.  I suspect that means he'll tell smaller lies that are harder to ferret out.  Trump's lying is usually blatantly obvious (though his followers swallow it anyway).

{{More lies unravelling before our eyes.
Remember Operation Yellowhammer? The dossier listing how shit it will get if there is a no deal? The dossier Gove, minister currently in charge of Brexit preparations and man in search of his soul, said was out of date, made by and for May's administration and in any case only outlined the absolute worst case scenario?

Well turns out the Times has got hold of the entire document this time, and its dated August 2019, it was prepared for Boris's government, presented to them and is completely up to date. And rather than outline a worse case scenario it is very specific in saying it is outlining the 'expected outcomes' of a no deal Brexit.

So basically absolutely every word Gove said about the dossier was a complete lie. }}