Brexit discussion thread VII (Please read OP before posting)

downcow

Midlife wrote: »

And it all comes back to this.

Fine fine, the EU are being horrible dictatorial autocrats not giving an inch.

So, please tell us...

Please...

What do they need to do to make this OK?

What is Britian's demand in negotiations?

If no-one can answer this, then i can hardly see how Tusk is being unreasonable in calling out those that pushed this through knowing it would lead their country to a massive recession.

Look I don’t expect you to agree.
But how can Uk sign up to an indefinite length arrangement that they cannot get out of with the permission of roi (or any of 27 others). I honestly think that is rediculous and I think we have no choice but to go no deal if that is the option.
I could live with a 10 year arrangement but not indefinite. Is that fair?

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

Look I don’t expect you to agree.
But how can Uk sign up to an indefinite length arrangement that they cannot get out of with the permission of roi (or any of 27 others). I honestly think that is rediculous and I think we have no choice but to go no deal if that is the option.
I could live with a 10 year arrangement but not indefinite. Is that fair?

Prove that there are actually alternatives that you have consistently said there are? Then the UK can have the backstop removed.

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You are doing what the UK have done from the start...running away from questions, evading and being disingenuous. And you are getting called on it now, just like Tusk has called out the Brexiteers - expect more of this as we get closer to No Deal. There are a lot of angry people out there.

I have no problem with hard debate. But bear in mind I was reprimanded for saying “nail on head” when I agreed with someone else and was told a comment like that was not contributing to the debate. I was also reprimanded for posting a very civil video with a comment and was told I shouldn’t post videos without a comment. And of course others are doing it regularly. So it is difficult to engage in debate if I am afraid to say one wrong word while I’m being called a liar etc.

FrancieBrady

Nice to see Boris will be unaffected by a No Deal anyhow.

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2019/0206/1027992-boris-johnson/?fbclid=IwAR2bijPGvC3ld7ESO_KnP0rDkwDnKS8Jz63hJUNTFcn9xa5lGOJnay3spDE

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Prove that there are actually alternatives that you have consistently said there are? Then the UK can have the backstop removed.

Let’s asssume you are correct and there are no alternatives. Will then we can’t sign up and it’s no deal.

lawred2

downcow wrote: »

Look I don’t expect you to agree.
But how can Uk sign up to an indefinite length arrangement that they cannot get out of with the permission of roi (or any of 27 others). I honestly think that is rediculous and I think we have no choice but to go no deal if that is the option.
I could live with a 10 year arrangement but not indefinite. Is that fair?

Gah there we are again with the RoI soccer ball stuff. Have some respect will you please.

Is the GFA an agreement of finite length?

Agreements tend not to be as such. Otherwise what's the point?

Hurrache

downcow wrote: »

Look I don’t expect you to agree.
But how can Uk sign up to an indefinite length arrangement that they cannot get out of with the permission of roi (or any of 27 others). I honestly think that is rediculous and I think we have no choice but to go no deal if that is the option.
I could live with a 10 year arrangement but not indefinite. Is that fair?

How can they not if they're sure that it's going to be so easy getting a trade deal as part of the future relationship and that the technology is in the way so a technological solution to the border will then be easy to implement?

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

I have no problem with hard debate. But bear in mind I was reprimanded for saying “nail on head” when I agreed with someone else and was told a comment like that was not contributing to the debate. I was also reprimanded for posting a very civil video with a comment and was told I shouldn’t post videos without a comment. And of course others are doing it regularly. So it is difficult to engage in debate if I am afraid to say one wrong word while I’m being called a liar etc.

That is not what is being referred to and you know it. 4 to 5 times I have said to you that the UK Attorney General has said northern Ireland's constitutional status is entirely unaffected by the Backstop and you ignore that. Why? Because it would stop you saying the opposite. Fairly blatant stuff you are engaging in. You are doing it to others too - willfully evading.

woohoo!!!

downcow wrote: »

Midlife wrote: »

And it all comes back to this.

Fine fine, the EU are being horrible dictatorial autocrats not giving an inch.

So, please tell us...

Please...

What do they need to do to make this OK?

What is Britian's demand in negotiations?

If no-one can answer this, then i can hardly see how Tusk is being unreasonable in calling out those that pushed this through knowing it would lead their country to a massive recession.

Look I don’t expect you to agree.
But how can Uk sign up to an indefinite length arrangement that they cannot get out of with the permission of roi (or any of 27 others). I honestly think that is rediculous and I think we have no choice but to go no deal if that is the option.
I could live with a 10 year arrangement but not indefinite. Is that fair?

Consider the folly if their red lines and acknowledge that both sides in NI need to be kept onside to protect the peace process, not just one side.

downcow

Folks I am not going to engage in the lie debate stuff unlesss someone can identify a specific lie for me. Otherwise I will assume you accept I did not lie. Thanks. I’m going to move on.

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

Let’s asssume you are correct and there are no alternatives. Will then we can’t sign up and it’s no deal.

Yes you can. By honouring the deal your PM and team struck. You will have to do it eventually because you HAVE to make some arrangement to trade with the EU.

A Dub in Glasgo

downcow wrote: »

Look I don’t expect you to agree.
But how can Uk sign up to an indefinite length arrangement that they cannot get out of with the permission of roi (or any of 27 others). I honestly think that is rediculous and I think we have no choice but to go no deal if that is the option.
I could live with a 10 year arrangement but not indefinite. Is that fair?

The backstop is event limited so if you actually have a plan for protecting the integrity of the GFA during the transition period, the backstop will not be needed... it is actually quite a simple concept which Brexiteers seem to unable to grasp and just keep parotting the 'backstop must go' line

Capt'n Midnight

downcow wrote: »

I guess it must be cultural differences. To tell a group of people that they have a place reserved in hell is fairly incredible in my culture.

And you're from County Down ?

The one with the Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster and people like the Fire and Brimstone Ian Paisley ?

Telling people they were going to hell ?

All day. Every day.

Irishmale0399

downcow wrote: »

Look I don’t expect you to agree.
But how can Uk sign up to an indefinite length arrangement that they cannot get out of with the permission of roi (or any of 27 others). I honestly think that is rediculous and I think we have no choice but to go no deal if that is the option.
I could live with a 10 year arrangement but not indefinite. Is that fair?

Lets put the situation in simple terms....


Ireland and the UK (Nothern Ireland) will have a outer EU border if no agreement is reached.


If the border remains open with no WA/customs agreement in place....
1. How do the UK plan to monitor immigration through the Ireland (EU)???
2. How do the UK plan to have control of imports if they can be brought in unchecked through Ireland (EU)??
3. How should Ireland/EU control exports coming into the EU from the UK via Northern Ireland???


If none of the above questions can be answered the lads in the border regions wont only be smuggling diesel in the future.....

Anthracite

downcow wrote: »

I am scared to answer questions as this is what got me in trouble before.
I am offended about how they have used the gfa and 3000 deaths up here as a red herring to protect their economy

Ah yes. The economically depressed North of Ireland. Critical to Ireland's tech and pharma-based economy.

lol

volchitsa

downcow wrote: »

Look I don’t expect you to agree.
But how can Uk sign up to an indefinite length arrangement that they cannot get out of with the permission of roi (or any of 27 others). I honestly think that is rediculous and I think we have no choice but to go no deal if that is the option.
I could live with a 10 year arrangement but not indefinite. Is that fair?

Here's the problem : there is a border between NI and the RoI.

It has been the subject of discord ever since its creation in 1922. We've had civil conflict in which literally thousands of people died. We currently have (just about) a situation of, pretty much, peace. A lot of us who live on or near the border area are worried that bringing in border controls will give various paramilitaries the motivation, or excuse if you prefer, to kick it all again, maybe not immediately but by ratcheting up the tension by attacking border posts or customs agents etc.

So. What exactly do you think can be done to prevent this from happening, other than the backstop? And why do you think a time limited back stop would be anything other than kicking that can down the road?

Saying it's unacceptable is fine, but pointless if you don't have a workable alternative. I remember a man being strapped into his van by paramilitaries and then made to drive that van packed full of explosives into the customs post down the road from my home. It was blown up from a distance by those who were keeping his family hostage to ensure he complied.

So you'll have to excuse me for not being terribly moved by the sort of thing you can't live with - I have a whole set of other horrible things in my mind that I want to prevent first. The backstop, somehow, doesn't make it into my list of "things I can't live with".

briany

downcow wrote: »

Look I don’t expect you to agree.
But how can Uk sign up to an indefinite length arrangement that they cannot get out of with the permission of roi (or any of 27 others). I honestly think that is rediculous and I think we have no choice but to go no deal if that is the option.
I could live with a 10 year arrangement but not indefinite. Is that fair?

Well, you would think that 10 years would be enough time to implement some fantastic new technology to have an invisible, yet effective, border, so if I were an EU negotiator I'd be tempted to sign off on that.

But it would have to come with a small caveat (and it shouldn't be a big deal since 10 years is, again, so much time) - if the UK has not implemented a workable solution in that time, they face either the existing arrangements between the EU and UK becoming null & void, or extending the backstop until the superseding solution is found.

How about that?

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Yes you can. By honouring the deal your PM and team struck. You will have to do it eventually because you HAVE to make some arrangement to trade with the EU.

For you to be such a supporter of gfa. Do you not realise that the penny that dropped in NI was that the communities ts finally realised that quality of life would be better if the cooperated rather than competing (some haven’t got it yet). In time Eu will realise that quality of life is better for all of Eu and UK cooperate. You are expressing a position that in NI is known as dinasaur. Paisley type.

downcow

briany wrote: »

Well, you would think that 10 years would be enough time to implement some fantastic new technology to have an invisible, yet effective, border, so if I were an EU negotiator I'd be tempted to sign off on that.

But it would have to come with a small caveat (and it shouldn't be a big deal since 10 years is, again, so much time) - if the UK has not implemented a workable solution in that time, they face either the existing arrangements between the EU and UK becoming null & void, or extending the backstop until the superseding solution is found.

How about that?

I could live with that. Not easy but could live with it. That’s compromise
Who has theresa’s number?

Would you consider 5 years?

Hurrache

downcow wrote: »

For you to be such a supporter of gfa. Do you not realise that the penny that dropped in NI was that the communities ts finally realised that quality of life would be better if the cooperated rather than competing (some haven’t got it yet). In time Eu will realise that quality of life is better for all of Eu and UK cooperate.

Sounds like your advocating for the status quo of remaining.

Seth Brundle

downcow wrote: »

I could live with that. Not easy but could live with it. That’s compromise
Who has theresa’s number?

Would you consider 5 years?

How can you be ok with that but not with the WA which says that the backstop will be in place up and until the UK come up with a better alternative that works.

downcow

Seth Brundle wrote: »

How can you be ok with that but not with the WA which says that the backstop will be in place up and until the UK come up with a better alternative that works.

It is simple. We are not locked in for eternity with no control.
If Eu would pay for the bridge to Scotland as a sweetener we’d be sorted.

LeinsterDub

briany wrote: »

Well, you would think that 10 years would be enough time to implement some fantastic new technology to have an invisible, yet effective, border, so if I were an EU negotiator I'd be tempted to sign off on that.

But it would have to come with a small caveat (and it shouldn't be a big deal since 10 years is, again, so much time) - if the UK has not implemented a workable solution in that time, they face either the existing arrangements between the EU and UK becoming null & void, or extending the backstop until the superseding solution is found.

How about that?

That's basically describes the current deal except you've backstopped the backstop with a new backstop

Seth Brundle

downcow wrote: »

It is simple. We are not locked in for eternity with no control.

How are you locked in for eternity under the WA but not under briany's suggestion?

Capt'n Midnight

The EU have stopped funding for new projects by non-EU based charities.
The Swiss, understandably are going nuts as they see this as caused by Brexit.

If the UK leave then UK charities will be also be affected.

lawred2

downcow wrote: »

It is simple. We are not locked in for eternity with no control.
If Eu would pay for the bridge to Scotland as a sweetener we’d be sorted.

Scotland will be in the EU by then.

L1011

Seth Brundle wrote: »

How are you locked in for eternity under the WA but not under briany's suggestion?

Presumably he thinks they can't think of an appropriate replacement within 10 years, so they get "free" after that decade. Which shows an incredible level of faith in the UK Government's current incompetence extending.

Popeleo

Hi downcow,

Before you mooove on, I was just wondering what your perspective is on the future. In my view, two of the most probable outcomes are going to cause huge problems for unionists in NI in the very near future:

1. An 11th hour agreement is reached , with May's concession being to go back to the original NI-only backstop, with a border down the Irish sea, the DUP thrown under a bus. May won't care, she won't need them, Brexit has been secured, Corbyn is still an idiot and she calls a snap election on March 30th.

2. No agreement reached, a crash-out Brexit causes significant economic damage to the UK, especially the poorer regions. Funding to NI is cut. Scotland looks for and wins Indyref2 in 2021. Unionism has to think about exactly who they are loyal to, seeing as most are of Scots extraction and the UK is then basically England + two tiny add-ons.

briany

downcow wrote: »

I could live with that. Not easy but could live with it. That’s compromise
Who has theresa’s number?

Would you consider 5 years?

It's all about how much time it takes to implement this new border solution that the UK keeps proposing. When we say 10 years, it might not actually be 10 years. It would be as much of that 10 years as it takes to find the answer.

What can't be allowed to happen is that the time limit expires with nothing done re: the border, with no consequences.

downcow

Seth Brundle wrote: »

How are you locked in for eternity under the WA but not under briany's suggestion?

Because he give us options. We can basically take the no deal then if we can’t sort stuff out to suit both parties. I think he’s on to something. Everyone saves face an I am sure time would allow sensible arrangements to develop