Brexit Discussion Thread.

[Alf Bentley]

More Brexit news: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38498839

 

"The UK's ambassador to the EU, Sir Ivan Rogers, has resigned. Sir Ivan, appointed to the job by David Cameron in 2013, had been expected to play a key role in Brexit talks expected to start within months.The government said Sir Ivan had quit early so a successor could be in place before negotiations start".

 

To save Brexiteers wasting their time, could I say that this constitutes further proof of how well-prepared we are for Brexit negotiations, which will inevitably prove a great success, yielding a booming economy, improved living standards, great new trade deals and the elimination of all foreigners. Indeed, neutral (non-BBC) sources have already observed roses sprouting from Boris Johnson's rectum. Rule Britannia! 

[leicsmac]

6 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

I wasn't even aware of the Petrov incident and had to Wiki it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanislav_Petrov (I'd have been in the vineyards of Beaujolais, picking grapes, that's my excuse)

 

"On September 26, 1983, just three weeks after the Soviet military had shot down Korean Air Lines Flight 007, Petrov was the duty officer at the command center for the Oko nuclear early-warning system when the system reported that a missile had been launched from the United States, followed by up to five more. Petrov judged the reports to be a false alarm, and his decision is credited with having prevented an erroneous retaliatory nuclear attack on the United States and its NATO allies that could have resulted in large-scale nuclear war. Investigation later confirmed that the Soviet satellite warning system had indeed malfunctioned". 

 

Seriously scary stuff - and I didn't even know it had happened. Still, everything should be much more secure now that Donald & Vladimir are in charge....

 

 

 

Yep, continued civilisation likely owes it's existence to one cool-headed Russian commander. He deduced, correctly, that such a small number of missiles could not constitute an American first strike as rather than seeking to eliminate their opponents, all it would do was guarantee an immediate Russian second strike.

 

(Interestingly enough though, there are schools of thought in nuclear game theory that stipulate that such an attack might well be the best way for a neutral third party to start such a war these days, for the exact reason that most of those at the consoles would, as Petrov did, believe it to be a false alarm up until the missile hits. Then of course there would be immediate catastrophic escalation.)

 

I wonder how many other similar incidents happened during those years that are still classified away in some dusty filing cabinet somewhere?

[SMX11]

15 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

More Brexit news: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38498839

 

"The UK's ambassador to the EU, Sir Ivan Rogers, has resigned. Sir Ivan, appointed to the job by David Cameron in 2013, had been expected to play a key role in Brexit talks expected to start within months.The government said Sir Ivan had quit early so a successor could be in place before negotiations start".

 

To save Brexiteers wasting their time, could I say that this constitutes further proof of how well-prepared we are for Brexit negotiations, which will inevitably prove a great success, yielding a booming economy, improved living standards, great new trade deals and the elimination of all foreigners. Indeed, neutral (non-BBC) sources have already observed roses sprouting from Boris Johnson's rectum. Rule Britannia! 

Oh dear a poor Sir Humphrey throws his toys out the pram 

 

Maybe someone competent and pragmatic like Digby Jones can be installed as the negotiation should be mainly be about trade. 

[Webbo]

39 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

More Brexit news: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38498839

 

"The UK's ambassador to the EU, Sir Ivan Rogers, has resigned. Sir Ivan, appointed to the job by David Cameron in 2013, had been expected to play a key role in Brexit talks expected to start within months.The government said Sir Ivan had quit early so a successor could be in place before negotiations start".

 

To save Brexiteers wasting their time, could I say that this constitutes further proof of how well-prepared we are for Brexit negotiations, which will inevitably prove a great success, yielding a booming economy, improved living standards, great new trade deals and the elimination of all foreigners. Indeed, neutral (non-BBC) sources have already observed roses sprouting from Boris Johnson's rectum. Rule Britannia! 

He was going to leave in November any way. Makes sense to have someone on board who a) agrees with Brexit and b) will see it through to the end.

[Alf Bentley]

25 minutes ago, SMX11 said:

Oh dear a poor Sir Humphrey throws his toys out the pram 

 

Maybe someone competent and pragmatic like Digby Jones can be installed as the negotiation should be mainly be about trade. 

 

I heard that Digby was too busy scoffing a trough full of vol-au-vents at a business conference on the need to boost competitiveness through "flexible labour" and corporate tax avoidance.

 

If we're going to hand the diplomacy/politics over to non-specialists, perhaps we could appoint Steve Walsh (either of them)?

 

If we're serious about leaving the Single Market, surely there won't be much to discuss about trade for the next 2 years? We'll just be leaving the Single Market and then starting trade negotiations in 2 years time, won't we? The 2-year negotiating period relates to the terms of the Brexit divorce, not new trade deals. There are other minor issues to discuss, such as on what terms several million EU citizens stay in the UK (if they do), likewise a couple of million Brits in Europe. Not really Digby's field of expertise.

[Nick]

On 28 December 2016 at 16:09, foxinexile said:

A couple of weeks ago, in a bar in Leeds, whilst waiting to be served, I got called a "****ing Pole" and  told to "**** off back to my own country" (despite being born in Leicester!). I could use Brexit as the scapegoat, however that would be giving credit to the mindless idiot and assuming he had enough brain cells to actually vote in the first place. A lot of scum will use Brexit as justification to indulge themselves in this kind of behaviour but to lay the blame at the referendum result is ridiculous. Jo Cox's killer was not a Leave voter, he was a deranged lunatic; the idiot who abused me was just that...an idiot. To apportion blame to Brexit and give these "people" a vehicle to justify their behaviour is insulting to the vast, vast majority who voted according to their beliefs and principles. I was, and still am, very firm in my belief that the UK should remain in the EU, however to try and marry these incidents of racism, xenophobia and, sadly, murder, with the referendum is a dangerous game. 

Thats just my general experience of being in Leeds to be honest.

[Alf Bentley]

15 minutes ago, Webbo said:

He was going to leave in November any way. Makes sense to have someone on board who a) agrees with Brexit and b) will see it through to the end.

 

Civil servants don't have to agree with a particular government's policy. It's their job to offer expert advice and to implement whatever policies the government decides on. They are used to serving under different governments.

To have reached such a high level, Rogers must have served as a successful diplomat under New Labour, the Coalition and the Tories. I was a civil servant for 3-4 years under the Thatcher Govt (though hardly a Thatcherite or a Sir Humphrey!). 

 

Point taken re. a November handover, though appointing a new head diplomat just before negotiations start doesn't seem ideal either. Which is better in football, changing your manager mid-season or appointing a new bloke in August?

 

It does seem a bit of a coincidence that he's gone just after he'd told the government some info it didn't like (part of a good diplomat's job, provided the info is true). Presumably, as you say, they'll now appoint someone who'll offer a rosier assessment of prospects....let's hope that rosier outlook is justified when the negotiations start/conclude.

 

[Webbo]

4 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Civil servants don't have to agree with a particular government's policy. It's their job to offer expert advice and to implement whatever policies the government decides on. They are used to serving under different governments.

To have reached such a high level, Rogers must have served as a successful diplomat under New Labour, the Coalition and the Tories. I was a civil servant for 3-4 years under the Thatcher Govt (though hardly a Thatcherite or a Sir Humphrey!). 

 

Point taken re. a November handover, though appointing a new head diplomat just before negotiations start doesn't seem ideal either. Which is better in football, changing your manager mid-season or appointing a new bloke in August?

 

It does seem a bit of a coincidence that he's gone just after he'd told the government some info it didn't like (part of a good diplomat's job, provided the info is true). Presumably, as you say, they'll now appoint someone who'll offer a rosier assessment of prospects....let's hope that rosier outlook is justified when the negotiations start/conclude.

 

Apparently he's the bloke who told Cameron not to ask for too much during the negotiations. If Cameron had got a better deal the referendum result might have been different.

[Alf Bentley]

1 minute ago, Webbo said:

Apparently he's the bloke who told Cameron not to ask for too much during the negotiations. If Cameron had got a better deal the referendum result might have been different.

 

Define "apparently" (i.e. source?). All speculation either way, unless someone has obtained a record of his advice and of the other side's bottom line.

[Webbo]

21 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Define "apparently" (i.e. source?). All speculation either way, unless someone has obtained a record of his advice and of the other side's bottom line.

Just what I've read in various press articles since the referendum. It's supposed to be the ambassador's job to advise on these things isn't it?

 

I read a serialisation of one of the remain camps leaders' book and he believed they lost because they didn't get a good enough deal.

 

According to the Guardian he conducted the negotiations.

 

Quote

Rogers, who conducted David Cameron’s renegotiation with the EU before the referendum,

 

[Alf Bentley]

20 minutes ago, Webbo said:

Just what I've read in various press articles since the referendum. It's supposed to be the ambassador's job to advise on these things isn't it?

 

I read a serialisation of one of the remain camps leaders' book and he believed they lost because they didn't get a good enough deal.

 

I'm sure the ambassador, among others, did advise on the initial negotiations (as he did about the poor prospects for an early trade agreement, according to the recent leak). 

 

Obviously, poor advice might have led to a poor outcome. But a poor outcome might have come about in other ways - because good advice was ignored by politicians, because the political negotiators were incompetent or because a good deal was simply impossible on terms acceptable to UK Eurosceptics, even if everyone from diplomats to politicians did a superb job.

 

I think you'd need some exceptionally good research and access to very good sources to have a proper idea of why a "better deal" was not obtained.

[Webbo]

6 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

I'm sure the ambassador, among others, did advise on the initial negotiations (as he did about the poor prospects for an early trade agreement, according to the recent leak). 

 

Obviously, poor advice might have led to a poor outcome. But a poor outcome might have come about in other ways - because good advice was ignored by politicians, because the political negotiators were incompetent or because a good deal was simply impossible on terms acceptable to UK Eurosceptics, even if everyone from diplomats to politicians did a superb job.

 

I think you'd need some exceptionally good research and access to very good sources to have a proper idea of why a "better deal" was not obtained.

If you read this article  http://reaction.life/farewell-sir-ivan-rogers-unlikely-hero-brexiteers/  there's a precis of a book on Brexit (not the one I read, I don't think) outlining his, and the civil service in general role in the negotiations.

[Alf Bentley]

9 minutes ago, Webbo said:

If you read this article  http://reaction.life/farewell-sir-ivan-rogers-unlikely-hero-brexiteers/  there's a precis of a book on Brexit (not the one I read, I don't think) outlining his, and the civil service in general role in the negotiations.

 

To be fair, the Shipman book you mention is getting universally good reviews on Amazon & is endorsed by people who are "not the usual Brexiteer suspects" (e.g. Andrew Marr). It sounds like a good book, but I'm still dubious about whether anyone could pin down why Cameron didn't get a deal more acceptable to Brexiteers....and no deal would have been acceptable to a lot of Brexiteers, surely? They just wanted out.

 

On a positive note, as an anti-Brexiteer, it is becoming ever less possible for the Brexit crew to blame others if this does all go tits up. If Brexit does ruin the British economy, British society, British living standards, British race relations and prospects for British youth, it won't be the fault of pampered Europhile Sir Humphreys, the liberal elite, Gordon Brown, the BBC, the unions or anyone else. It will be the fault of this Tory Brexit government and the people who supported it.

[Strokes]

8 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

To be fair, the Shipman book you mention is getting universally good reviews on Amazon & is endorsed by people who are "not the usual Brexiteer suspects" (e.g. Andrew Marr). It sounds like a good book, but I'm still dubious about whether anyone could pin down why Cameron didn't get a deal more acceptable to Brexiteers....and no deal would have been acceptable to a lot of Brexiteers, surely? They just wanted out.

 

On a positive note, as an anti-Brexiteer, it is becoming ever less possible for the Brexit crew to blame others if this does all go tits up. If Brexit does ruin the British economy, British society, British living standards, British race relations and prospects for British youth, it won't be the fault of pampered Europhile Sir Humphreys, the liberal elite, Gordon Brown, the BBC, the unions or anyone else. It will be the fault of this Tory Brexit government and the people who supported it.

I'll happily lie in my bed if it does.

[Webbo]

13 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

To be fair, the Shipman book you mention is getting universally good reviews on Amazon & is endorsed by people who are "not the usual Brexiteer suspects" (e.g. Andrew Marr). It sounds like a good book, but I'm still dubious about whether anyone could pin down why Cameron didn't get a deal more acceptable to Brexiteers....and no deal would have been acceptable to a lot of Brexiteers, surely? They just wanted out.

 

On a positive note, as an anti-Brexiteer, it is becoming ever less possible for the Brexit crew to blame others if this does all go tits up. If Brexit does ruin the British economy, British society, British living standards, British race relations and prospects for British youth, it won't be the fault of pampered Europhile Sir Humphreys, the liberal elite, Gordon Brown, the BBC, the unions or anyone else. It will be the fault of this Tory Brexit government and the people who supported it.

I certainly wanted Cameron to negotiate I could vote for, whether that could ever had been possible I don't know. But the pathetic deal he negotiated and the way he was dismissed by the other European leaders made my mind up for me.

 

I don't think the civil servant will be pro Brexit (Does 1 exist?) he just won't be so anti-Brexit.

[Buce]

14 hours ago, Strokes said:

I'll happily lie in my bed if it does.

 

You might as well, Strokes - we'll all be too poor to afford electricity, so there'll be no need for sparkies.

[Strokes]

1 minute ago, Buce said:

 

You might as well, Strokes - we'll all be too poor to afford electricity, so they'll be no need for sparkies.

And my back up plan of emigrating to Poland if that happens has gone to shit too 

[Steven]

The email in full.  My own italics.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jan/04/quote-sir-ivan-rogers-resignation-eu-brexit-email-in-full

 

Quote

“Dear All,

“Happy new year! I hope that you have all had/are still having, a great break, and that you will come back refreshed and ready for an exciting year ahead.

“I am writing to you all on the first day back to tell you that I am today resigning as permanent representative.

“As most of you will know, I started here in November 2013. My four-year tour is therefore due to end in October – although in practice if we had been doing the presidency my time here would have been extended by a few months.

“As we look ahead to the likely timetable for the next few years, and with the invocation of article 50 coming up shortly, it is obvious that it will be best if the top team in situ at the time that article 50 is invoked remains there till the end of the process and can also see through the negotiations for any new deal between the UK and the EU27 [the other European Union member states].

“It would obviously make no sense for my role to change hands later this year.

“I have therefore decided to step down now, having done everything that I could in the last six months to contribute my experience, expertise and address book to get the new team at political and official level under way. This will permit a new appointee to be in place by the time article 50 is invoked.

“Importantly, it will also enable that person to play a role in the appointment of [Shan Morgan’s] replacement as DPR [deputy permanent representative]. I know from experience – both my own hugely positive experience of working in partnership with Shan, and from seeing past, less happy, examples – how imperative it is that the PR and DPR operate as a team, if UKRep [UK permanent representation to the EU] is to function as well as I believe it has done over the last few years.

“I want to put on record how grateful I am to Shan for the great working relationship we have had. She will be hugely missed in UKRep, and by many others here in Brussels, but she will be a tremendous asset to the Welsh government.

“From my soundings before Christmas, I am optimistic that there will be a very good field of candidates for the DPR role. But it is right these two roles now get considered and filled alongside each other, and for my successor to play the leading role in making the DPR appointment. I shall therefore stand aside from the process at this point.

“I know that this news will add, temporarily, to the uncertainty that I know, from our many discussions in the autumn, you are all feeling about the role of UKRep in the coming months and years of negotiations over Brexit. I am sorry about that, but I hope that it will help produce earlier and greater clarity on the role that UKRep should play.

“My own view remains as it has always been. We do not yet know what the government will set as negotiating objectives for the UK’s relationship with the EU after exit. There is much we will not know until later this year about the political shape of the EU itself, and who the political protagonists in any negotiation with the UK will be.

“But in any negotiation which addresses the new relationship, the technical expertise, the detailed knowledge of positions on the other side of the table – and the reasons for them, and the divisions among them – and the negotiating experience and savvy that the people in this building bring, make it essential for all parts of UKRep to be centrally involved in the negotiations if the UK is to achieve the best possible outcomes.

“Serious multilateral negotiating experience is in short supply in Whitehall, and that is not the case in the Commission or in the Council. The government will only achieve the best for the country if it harnesses the best experience we have – a large proportion of which is concentrated in UKRep – and negotiates resolutely. Senior ministers, who will decide on our positions, issue by issue, also need from you detailed, unvarnished – even where this is uncomfortable – and nuanced understanding of the views, interests and incentives of the other 27.

“The structure of the UK’s negotiating team and the allocation of roles and responsibilities to support that team, needs rapid resolution. The working methods which enable the team in London and Brussels to function seamlessly need also to be strengthened.

“The great strength of the UK system – at least as it has been perceived by all others in the EU – has always been its unique combination of policy depth, expertise and coherence, message coordination and discipline, and the ability to negotiate with skill and determination. UKRep has always been key to all of that. We shall need it more than ever in the years ahead.

“As I have argued consistently at every level since June, many opportunities for the UK in the future will derive from the mere fact of having left and being free to take a different path. But others will depend entirely on the precise shape of deals we can negotiate in the years ahead. Contrary to the beliefs of some, free trade does not just happen when it is not thwarted by authorities: increasing market access to other markets and consumer choice in our own, depends on the deals, multilateral, plurilateral and bilateral that we strike, and the terms that we agree. I shall advise my successor to continue to make these points.

“Meanwhile, I would urge you all to stick with it, to keep on working at intensifying your links with opposite numbers in DExEU [Department for Exiting the European Union] and line ministries and to keep on contributing your expertise to the policy-making process as negotiating objectives get drawn up. The famed UKRep combination of immense creativity with realism ground in negotiating experience, is needed more than ever right now.

“On a personal level, leaving UKRep will be a tremendous wrench. I have had the great good fortune, and the immense privilege, in my civil service career, to have held some really interesting and challenging roles: to have served four successive UK prime ministers very closely; to have been EU, G20 and G8 Sherpa; to have chaired a G8 presidency and to have taken part in some of the most fraught, and fascinating, EU negotiations of the last 25 years – in areas from tax, to the MFF [Multiannual financial framework] to the renegotiation.

“Of all of these posts, I have enjoyed being the permanent representative more than any other I have ever held. That is, overwhelmingly, because of all of you and what you all make UKRep: a supremely professional place, with a fantastic cooperative culture, which brings together talented people whether locally employed or UK-based and uniquely brings together people from the home civil service with those from the Foreign Office. UKRep sets itself demanding standards, but people also take the time to support each other which also helps make it an amazingly fun and stimulating place to work. I am grateful for everything you have all done over the last few years to make this such a fantastic operation.

“For my part, I hope that in my day-to-day dealings with you I have demonstrated the values which I have always espoused as a public servant. I hope you will continue to challenge ill-founded arguments and muddled thinking and that you will never be afraid to speak the truth to those in power. I hope that you will support each other in those difficult moments where you have to deliver messages that are disagreeable to those who need to hear them. I hope that you will continue to be interested in the views of others, even where you disagree with them, and in understanding why others act and think in the way that they do. I hope that you will always provide the best advice and counsel you can to the politicians that our people have elected, and be proud of the essential role we play in the service of a great democracy.”

 

[Innovindil]

12 hours ago, Webbo said:

I certainly wanted Cameron to negotiate I could vote for, whether that could ever had been possible I don't know. But the pathetic deal he negotiated and the way he was dismissed by the other European leaders made my mind up for me.

 

I don't think the civil servant will be pro Brexit (Does 1 exist?) he just won't be so anti-Brexit.

I truly believe this is one of the main things that had people riled up enough to vote for brexit in the first place. 

 

We keep constantly being told it's better to stay and reform within, yet every time we ask for something to be reformed (like the ridiculous free movement of people) it can't even be DISCUSSED. I've got no problem having a debate about it and coming to a fair compromise, but being told we're not even allowed to talk about it is nothing short of ludicrous. 

[Buce]

1 hour ago, Innovindil said:

I truly believe this is one of the main things that had people riled up enough to vote for brexit in the first place. 

 

We keep constantly being told it's better to stay and reform within, yet every time we ask for something to be reformed (like the ridiculous free movement of people) it can't even be DISCUSSED. I've got no problem having a debate about it and coming to a fair compromise, but being told we're not even allowed to talk about it is nothing short of ludicrous. 

I don't see freedom of movement as the issue - it's freedom of employment that is the problem.

 

I'd be happier to see them separated.

[Alf Bentley]

45 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

We keep constantly being told it's better to stay and reform within, yet every time we ask for something to be reformed (like the ridiculous free movement of people) it can't even be DISCUSSED. I've got no problem having a debate about it and coming to a fair compromise, but being told we're not even allowed to talk about it is nothing short of ludicrous. 

 

 

If numerous countries had wanted to renegotiate freedom of movement, maybe it would have happened. But we were in a tiny minority and would have been seeking to renegotiate an international treaty signed by 28 democratically-elected national governments/parliaments after painstaking negotiations lasting years. I can understand why the EU wanted nothing to do with that.

 

Personally, I'd like to renegotiate the terms of our last-minute defeat at Arsenal last season. Unfortunately, that's not possible as we lost according to the agreed rules and none of the other clubs wants to overturn the result.

[Innovindil]

26 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

 

If numerous countries had wanted to renegotiate freedom of movement, maybe it would have happened. But we were in a tiny minority and would have been seeking to renegotiate an international treaty signed by 28 democratically-elected national governments/parliaments after painstaking negotiations lasting years. I can understand why the EU wanted nothing to do with that.

 

Personally, I'd like to renegotiate the terms of our last-minute defeat at Arsenal last season. Unfortunately, that's not possible as we lost according to the agreed rules and none of the other clubs wants to overturn the result.

Hence brexit. What works for the majority doesn't necessarily work for all. 

[leicsmac]

9 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Hence brexit. What works for the majority doesn't necessarily work for all. 

And, at a fundamental level, this is what it keeps coming back to. The idea of individualism against collectivism. Only played out using entire constructs of groups of humans, rather than actual individuals.

[Innovindil]

5 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

And, at a fundamental level, this is what it keeps coming back to. The idea of individualism against collectivism. Only played out using entire constructs of groups of humans, rather than actual individuals.

Indeed. I have no problem admitting my voting for brexit was because I expect (and it already has) improved my way of life.

[leicsmac]

8 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Indeed. I have no problem admitting my voting for brexit was because I expect (and it already has) improved my way of life.

As has been debated on here before, self interest is a double edged sword. When used well in a competitive fashion, it can result in great advancement and success that can be used to the benefit of all.

 

However, that same instinct also results in a lot of misery for those who lose (it's not a zero sum game, but people view it as such and so it becomes that, belief matters) and it won't help us at all against the REALLY big problems in the future.