What Is Our "good Reason"?

[ToraToraTora]

When the EUSSR granted the last extension they said that it would be the last "without good reason" - now I know that the bill currently in the Lords contains the actual wording of the request. What is in there that constitutes a good enough reason for the EUSSR to grant yet another extension? Is there a chance they will not grant the extension assuming it is actually asked for?

[Old_Geezer]

"shows No Deal to be damaging"

Of course there'll be a hit. Other political decisions in the past have hit too. There is a cost to any reorganisation.

If one rules out no-deal one is accepting having no say in matters and being under control of the other party, which is exactly what we are trying to shake off. Saying one wants Brexit is incompatible with refusing to accept it is possibly without a deal. Folk should keep their desires consistent and accept the price of doing the right thing.

[Old_Geezer]

Don't call that beating down. I call it being amused that some politician wanted to make out they'd achieved something and thought splitting their nation in twain so part of it stays in, better than remaining a single unit. When they'd stopped laughing they must have jumped at the chance of having the illusion that they'd compromised.

[andy-hughes]

I can see the EU granting an extension, because it enables them to enjoy the pleasure of watching the UK carrying on being unable to sort anything out, and increasing the chances of an exit happening at all.

I have stated, as have others, that the notion of us 'crashing out' (was there ever a more meaningless hyperbolic nonsensical phrase?) is based on fear and doom-mongering which are unlikely to mean anything.

Yes there will be disruption, but that will apply deal or not - but as I have also said, if we leave without a deal, the EU will re-align its trading rules so fast in will make the Remoaners' ears burn - because they need our trade more than we need theirs.

[jno]

The EU have done their sums, and calculate that a no-deal Brexit would cost them 90 euros per head in the first year. They think they can manage that.

By and large, they think they’ve wasted enough time on Britain already - a new and more useless PM every year and insanely ignorant negotiators who think they’ll get an easy trade deal with Germany and don’t know that there’s cross-Channel business.

[jim360]

// Of course there'll be a hit. //

Now that we've accepted that point, I'll make a point to not bring it up so often when addressing you, OG. The thing I *do* want to add is that I get where you're coming from -- as far as it's possible for a Remain supporter to get it. But roughly half of the country didn't want Brexit at all, and somewhere around a quarter of those who did want Brexit don't seem to want No Deal.

[Old_Geezer]

Ok, but I think I've consistently said I'd expect a hit. What is debatable is the size and affect. And duration. All of which are just estimates whoever makes the claim.

[jim360]

// Yes there will be disruption, but that will apply deal or not... //

On the other hand, I won't tire of arguing the point with andy. Every single credible study I've seen shows that a No Deal exit will be significantly more disruptive than one with an organised deal. And you shouldn't even need credible studies to tell you that -- it's plain common sense that a gradual transition will be less disruptive than an abrupt one.

As to the // they need our trade more than we need theirs //, this again is based on a massive mistake. We run a trade deficit with the EU, but what matters far more is the proportional hit. If we leave without a deal and in the resultant trading mess, about half of our total volume of trade will be affected negatively. On the other hand, closer to 10% of the EU's total trading volume will be hit. Again, it should be a matter of plain common sense who will suffer the most, proportionately, in a disruptive No Deal Brexit.

This isn't the first time I've pointed it out to you, but I am pretty sure I'm still waiting for the first time for you to reply to the point. "They need us more than we need them" has been undoubtedly one of the biggest and most costly lies of the last few years.

[andy-hughes]

jim - // But roughly half of the country didn't want Brexit at all, and somewhere around a quarter of those who did want Brexit don't seem to want No Deal. //

Fortunately, the democratic process did not work on the concept of 'roughly' - and if the vote had been 'roughly' to remain, I doubt there would have been an iota of the nonsense the Remainers have created.

As for not wanting a 'No Deal' Brexit, no-one with any sense would want a No-Deal Brexit, but to try and negotiate on the basis that No Deal is not an option, is not to negotiate at all, as I have explained at length elsewhere.

[jim360]

// ... to try and negotiate on the basis that No Deal is not an option, is not to negotiate at all, as I have explained at length elsewhere. //

Yes, I saw your most recent post on the subject. Did you have a chance to see my reply?

[andy-hughes]

Jim - If 'they' don;t need us more than we need them, why are 'they' being so monumentally disruptive about us planning to leave?

If it's no big deal (sorry!) - they can just wave us goodbye and make the adjustments, why the need to fight for three years to put obstacles in our way?

[jim360]

For the same reason that we don't want No Deal. It's in everybody's interests to find a smooth transition to the next stage. But, every time the negotiation period has been extended, it's because the UK asked for it, and the EU acquiesced. If we didn't ask, then the EU wouldn't force us to stay in, nor would they suddenly capitulate.

[gulliver1]

Think there will be a few sad people on A/B on the 1ST of Nov , when we are still in the E/U/. Gosh.

[jim360]

Totally unrelated to the last post, but let me disassociate myself from any notion that there's anything in the present situation to gloat about. I won't pretend not to be relieved if we are still in the EU come November, but it will still represent a failure of politics to agree on anything. And the more that any hope of compromise is destroyed, the more likely it becomes that the country will be pushed to extreme wings on either side. There is nothing to celebrate in that.

[gulliver1]

Jim I was not taking the P I just can not see us leaving on the 31st

[ToraToraTora]

we've waited 46 years gully we'll wait some more if we have to.

[naomi24]

We could always tell them that if they carry on granting extensions this country will never leave the EU - and that will suit both them and the Remainers just fine …. but I’ve no doubt they know that….

[Mozz71]

Good reason? The EU want to see how many AB blood vessels they can burst.

[jim360]

There is no sense to the idea that the UK perpetually on the verge of leaving suits the EU. Or suits Remainers, for that matter. Even though there's no agreement on how to resolve this, everyone wants this situation to be resolved, as soon as possible.

[naomi24]

There's sense in the idea that the EU likes our money and is reluctant to forego it.

[jim360]

As and when the UK leaves then I'm sure that other EU countries could step in and cover the shortfall. What is it you've said about No Deal in the UK that we'll "survive - and thrive"? Stands to reason that, if that's true, then the EU will more than cope too.