4 ms·

This thinking is narrow. There is a parliamentary majority, and a majority within her own party, for an EEA-style solution.

pjc50 8y ago
But the DUP have vetoed it, and they're all that matters unless someone can assemble the alleged EEA majority into a government.
- hardlianotion 8y ago
  All it would take would be someone in government to suggest it, the position would have cross-party support. DUP would be irrelevant in this situation. Having said that, DUP are actually agnostic to the form of exit the UK takes. Their red line is that they will not be treated differently to the rest of the UK. People often forget that. I actually think this is the most likely outcome right now.
  - pjc50 8y ago
    Remember that EEA now requires a hasty renegotiation of the deal, including continuing ECJ jurisdiction and free movement. Someone has to tell the kippers that the Poles will stay.
    - hardlianotion 8y ago
      True. The situation is very shit. ECJ jurisdiction is - strictly speaking (and I know I am fudging a little here) - over. EFTA-style court is what would rule instead, and that would cover a much smaller set of legislation than we currently enjoy from the EU. As for kippers, there were 17 million votes for leave and a surprisingly large number don't have immigration as their major concern. Also, if we take Switzerland as an example, free movement doesn't seem to have precisely the same implications for an EEA member outside the union, but there is a tradeoff as to the access you get if you try to restrict movement. This was something the Swiss experimented with a few years back. Not altogether happily, I seem to recall, but I am hazy.
      - davidgay 8y ago
        > This was something the Swiss experimented with a few years back. Not altogether happily, I seem to recall, but I am hazy. The people voted (constitutional amendment) to limit free movement. The EU said "hmm, no", so they basically fudged it. There's a summary (in French) at https://www.eda.admin.ch/missions/mission-eu-brussels/fr/home/dossiers-prioritaires/libre-circulation-personnes.html https://www.eda.admin.ch/missions/mission-eu-brussels/fr/hom... which basically says the Swiss parliament passed a law that respected the requirements of that constitutional amendment while still meeting Switzerland's free-movement treaty obligations.
        pjc50 8y ago
        Hmm, that is a huge fudge; it's not been implemented at all as written, but there's some changes to make sure that Swiss jobseekers get first pick of the available jobs. At least the Swiss are clear on what they're trying to achieve.
dragonwriter 8y ago
> There is a parliamentary majority, and a majority within her own party, for an EEA-style solution. But is there unanimous support among the remaining EU members? Because, I mean, every single UK politician (or citizen) could agree on an EEA-style solution, and it still wouldn't be a real option without that required support in the EU.
- hardlianotion 8y ago
  The problem is the possible need for an extension, and it is late. I believe that this would be given the time it needs. Nobody wants a crisis and even now, the UK is not an international pariah.
  - dragonwriter 8y ago
    > Nobody wants a crisis “Nobody wants a crisis” is a far cry from “everyone supports this as a mitigation of the otherwise pending crisis”.
    - hardlianotion 8y ago
      I understand that. Nevertheless, I believe this is the likely outcome.

pjc50 8y ago

But the DUP have vetoed it, and they're all that matters unless someone can assemble the alleged EEA majority into a government.

hardlianotion 8y ago
All it would take would be someone in government to suggest it, the position would have cross-party support. DUP would be irrelevant in this situation. Having said that, DUP are actually agnostic to the form of exit the UK takes. Their red line is that they will not be treated differently to the rest of the UK. People often forget that. I actually think this is the most likely outcome right now.
- pjc50 8y ago
  Remember that EEA now requires a hasty renegotiation of the deal, including continuing ECJ jurisdiction and free movement. Someone has to tell the kippers that the Poles will stay.
  - hardlianotion 8y ago
    True. The situation is very shit. ECJ jurisdiction is - strictly speaking (and I know I am fudging a little here) - over. EFTA-style court is what would rule instead, and that would cover a much smaller set of legislation than we currently enjoy from the EU. As for kippers, there were 17 million votes for leave and a surprisingly large number don't have immigration as their major concern. Also, if we take Switzerland as an example, free movement doesn't seem to have precisely the same implications for an EEA member outside the union, but there is a tradeoff as to the access you get if you try to restrict movement. This was something the Swiss experimented with a few years back. Not altogether happily, I seem to recall, but I am hazy.
    - davidgay 8y ago
      > This was something the Swiss experimented with a few years back. Not altogether happily, I seem to recall, but I am hazy. The people voted (constitutional amendment) to limit free movement. The EU said "hmm, no", so they basically fudged it. There's a summary (in French) at https://www.eda.admin.ch/missions/mission-eu-brussels/fr/home/dossiers-prioritaires/libre-circulation-personnes.html https://www.eda.admin.ch/missions/mission-eu-brussels/fr/hom... which basically says the Swiss parliament passed a law that respected the requirements of that constitutional amendment while still meeting Switzerland's free-movement treaty obligations.
      - pjc50 8y ago
        Hmm, that is a huge fudge; it's not been implemented at all as written, but there's some changes to make sure that Swiss jobseekers get first pick of the available jobs. At least the Swiss are clear on what they're trying to achieve.

dragonwriter 8y ago

> There is a parliamentary majority, and a majority within her own party, for an EEA-style solution. But is there unanimous support among the remaining EU members? Because, I mean, every single UK politician (or citizen) could agree on an EEA-style solution, and it still wouldn't be a real option without that required support in the EU.

hardlianotion 8y ago
The problem is the possible need for an extension, and it is late. I believe that this would be given the time it needs. Nobody wants a crisis and even now, the UK is not an international pariah.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  > Nobody wants a crisis “Nobody wants a crisis” is a far cry from “everyone supports this as a mitigation of the otherwise pending crisis”.
  - hardlianotion 8y ago
    I understand that. Nevertheless, I believe this is the likely outcome.