Brexit discussion thread XII (Please read OP before posting)

ancapailldorcha

This is the twelfth incarnation of our Brexit discussion thread.

I appreciate that the end of Brexit is or may be in sight (insofar as one can be certain) but please bear the following in mind before posting:

• Insults directed at popular figures are not acceptable in this forum
• Please do not post memes, videos or comedy links here
• Please do not be uncivil to other posters
• Please use the report function to alert the mods when necessary
• Discussion of Sinn Féin's longstanding policy of abstention from Westminster is not suitable for this thread. Posts on this subject may be deleted

Previous thread is here:

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058016732

United Ireland thread:

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058014553

Scottish Independence thread:

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058023269

An Ciarraioch

Observer journalist claims Lib Dems and the SNP will offer Johnson a December 9th election, before WAB can be ratified, but hard to see what they would gain, given current polling?

https://twitter.com/michaelsavage/status/1188191178388398080

Joe_ Public

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Observer journalist claims Lib Dems and the SNP will offer Johnson a December 9th election, before WAB can be ratified, but hard to see what they would gain, given current polling?

https://twitter.com/michaelsavage/status/1188191178388398080

SNP going to win plenty of extra seats, lib dems going to do well with the remain vote south of England. I guess it suits both of them politically to have election asap.

Risk for lib dems regarding brexit: reality is in targeting, and likely winning, lots of labour votes it will boost the pro brexit parties in many constituencies. But given its obvious unwillingness to work with labour to get a gnu or 2nd ref, that might be a risk it is willing to take.

Water John

Would they be pressuring Corbyn? Does he choose to be part of stopping Brexit?

prawnsambo

Joe_ Public wrote: »

SNP going to win plenty of extra seats, lib dems going to do well with the remain vote south of England. I guess it suits both of them politically to have election asap.

Risk for lib dems regarding brexit: reality is in targeting, and likely winning, lots of labour votes it will boost the pro brexit parties in many constituencies. But given its obvious unwillingness to work with labour to get a gnu or 2nd ref, that might be a risk it is willing to take.

Labour won't support a GNU. That was stated a couple of weeks ago. Only a minority government supported by the rest of the opposition.

eire4

Joe_ Public wrote: »

SNP going to win plenty of extra seats, lib dems going to do well with the remain vote south of England. I guess it suits both of them politically to have election asap.

Risk for lib dems regarding brexit: reality is in targeting, and likely winning, lots of labour votes it will boost the pro brexit parties in many constituencies. But given its obvious unwillingness to work with labour to get a gnu or 2nd ref, that might be a risk it is willing to take.

I would agree with that. I can see the SNP cleaning up in Scotland. They currently have 35 of the 59 Scottish seats. Can easily see them getting comfortably over 40 seats and I imagine the Liberal Democrats given they only hold 19 seats right now they would I imagine make pretty significant gains maybe even doubling or more their number of seats. So plenty of motivation I think for them both to agree to a pre christmas election.

Joe_ Public

prawnsambo wrote: »

Labour won't support a GNU. That was stated a couple of weeks ago. Only a minority government supported by the rest of the opposition.

Labours position seems complex to me right now (i dont mean its position on brexit which is pretty clear). Corbyn seems to genuinely favour election route, so given purpose of gnu would be to engineer a second vote, and maybe pass the wab, its probably not something he'd be behind. Yet, if lib dems did come out and say they'd support him, then i do think there would be huge pressure on him to accept it. Unlikely to happen anyway, as are fanciful notions of bercow and others as interim leaders. Installing corbyn as interim leader is only possible route to people's vote that i can see. Pre election anyway.

Capt'n Midnight

The offer of an election on the 9th scuppers the cunning plan of having Uni students out of their registered constituencies on the 12th.

Aren't older voters more likely to vote in bad weather ?
And they vote early too so more likely to wait out bad weather.

It's marginal but lots of tweaks can swing a narrow vote.

Infini wrote: »

MEANWHILE.. in another thread the 12th incarnation is a coming!

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058025860

We about to hit yet ANOTHER new thread at this rate do we have to make a 13th to see an ends to this debacle in the Brits being at it again?

Only three more Christmases 'till Brexit :pac:

Joe_ Public

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

The offer of an election on the 9th scuppers the cunning plan of having Uni students out of their registered constituencies on the 12th.

Aren't older voters more likely to vote in bad weather ?
And they vote early too so more likely to wait out bad weather.

It's marginal but lots of tweaks can swing a narrow vote.


Only three more Christmases 'till Brexit :pac:

I posted about the university vote before, it would likely be relevant in anything up to 15-20 marginal constituencies (including Uxbridge with student pop of c.15,000 and where pm's labour rival is a recent graduate). I believe term actually ends on the 9th so that's not ideal but still better than 12th. Registering for home constituency instead wont work as too late now to qualify for a December election.

briany

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Labours position seems complex to me right now (i dont mean its position on brexit which is pretty clear). Corbyn seems to genuinely favour election route, so given purpose of gnu would be to engineer a second vote, and maybe pass the wab, its probably not something he'd be behind. Yet, if lib dems did come out and say they'd support him, then i do think there would be huge pressure on him to accept it. Unlikely to happen anyway, as are fanciful notions of bercow and others as interim leaders. Installing corbyn as interim leader is only possible route to people's vote that i can see. Pre election anyway.

Labour's position isn't that complex. They don't know what the hell to do. The milk float is about to explode and they're watching The Poseidon Adventure again.

Some kind of positive motion from Labour would be nice. Any day now....

FrancieBrady

prunudo wrote: »

You can bet a 13th wouldn't be the last either, there'll still be threads discussing Brexit in 10 years. They may approve the WA but the notion of getting Brexit done is laughable. Passing the WA is probably the easiest part, every deal and negotiation after will be tough. Just it will be the senior civil servants rather the politicians who will be dealing with it.

Once they leave the word 'Brexit' becomes redundant.

Duane Dibbley

How do you all think the DUP will fair in a GE

S.M.B.

Interesting that I got a letter from my local lib dem candidate a week or so ago meaning they are early in prepping for an upcoming election that they would have to help initiate.

FrancieBrady

Duane Dibbley wrote: »

How do you all think the DUP will fair in a GE

They will play the 'siege' or 'union' card and hold fairly steady imo. Might drop a seat.

UUP seem to be offering sod all in opposition.

weemcd

Duane Dibbley wrote: »

How do you all think the DUP will fair in a GE

In theory they should be losing votes hand over fist but anyone who has ever voted for DUP in the past knows exactly what they're signing up for. They lost their overall majority last time out and if the election was tomorrow I'd say they will be roughly in the same numbers, maybe slightly less. If the NI electorate was switched on they should have massive losses, but I don't foresee a massive shift.

Alliance will gain, but I'd see that as them taking a seat here and there off all the parties, and not eating into the DUP vote all that much.

FrancieBrady

weemcd wrote: »

In theory they should be losing votes hand over fist but anyone who has ever voted for DUP in the past knows exactly what they're signing up for. They lost their overall majority last time out and if the election was tomorrow I'd say they will be roughly in the same numbers, maybe slightly less. If the NI electorate was switched on they should have massive losses, but I don't foresee a massive shift.

Alliance will gain, but I'd see that as them taking a seat here and there off all the parties, and not eating into the DUP vote all that much.

I think it will take a few election cycles for the DUP to pay for their handling of Brexit.

UUP are too afraid of getting tarnished with the 'sell out' tag to mount effective opposition for the Unionist vote. As Brexit bites they will make gains if they are going to survive at all.
Personally think there is vote lending going on with Alliance's surge. They offer very little to committed, and concerned Unionists in fairness.

cameramonkey

North Belfast will be lost by the DUP in the future if trends continue or in the near future if SF can get more votes from the SDLP, PBP etc and if the DUP drop a few thousand.

South Belfast could be lost if Alliance had a free run, its not really a natural DUP seat.Emma Little-Pengelly is vulnerable and her hateful attitude to nationalist could drive Catholics to vote for Alliance.

East Belfast is aslo a seat to watch, Alliance may make a come backbut fall a bit short .

North Down is one the DUP have been trying to gain from Silvia Hermon they closed the gap last time but that may have been their high water mark.

trellheim

Nice clean shiny thread ! woohoo

Does anyone feel like this is may's deal timeline all over again , I got a real bang of deja vu out of it, to take the Avenger's endgame vibe. Can we break out of the time loop ?


Election I think will result in 52:48 again - no change

Referendum will lead to the same broken result and if its remain the leave side will be able to claim best out of 3 if the result isn't 80% for remain

Revoke might fix it a little but the headbangers do not look like they can be contained by any current political leadership

Hard Brexit as the lance for the political boil ? Ouch ...

Leroy42

Reports coming out of the dropping of level playing field guarantees from TM deal within the updated deal

The more one digs, the more it seems the EU did very much cave in quite significantly to Johnson.

I hope that they don't vote for this WA because it seems very much like the EU are given far too much. Far more than they would if Ireland were to leave.

What is the justification for dropping the LPF guarantee when we all know the UK intends to set up in direct competition with the EU?

Enzokk

Leroy42 wrote: »

Reports coming out of the dropping of level playing field guarantees from TM deal within the updated deal

The more one digs, the more it seems the EU did very much cave in quite significantly to Johnson.

I hope that they don't vote for this WA because it seems very much like the EU are given far too much. Far more than they would if Ireland were to leave.

What is the justification for dropping the LPF guarantee when we all know the UK intends to set up in direct competition with the EU?

Why do you say the EU caved on the LPF? It isn't one of the items that the EU cares about right now so it wasn't included in the WA from the EU side and the only reason it was included in May's deal was because she was trying to get Labour MPs to back her deal.

So I fail to see how the EU backed down on a item that really is for the trade negotiations and not the WA.

Edit: The reason why I hope they reject this deal is because it is a bad deal for the people of the UK. It will make them worse off and that will mean our businesses that trades with the UK will be worse off. But we got what we were looking for and about as far as we were going to get, no border on this island.

liamtech

Enzokk wrote: »

Why do you say the EU caved on the LPF? It isn't one of the items that the EU cares about right now so it wasn't included in the WA from the EU side and the only reason it was included in May's deal was because she was trying to get Labour MPs to back her deal.

So I fail to see how the EU backed down on a item that really is for the trade negotiations and not the WA.

Edit: The reason why I hope they reject this deal is because it is a bad deal for the people of the UK. It will make them worse off and that will mean our businesses that trades with the UK will be worse off. But we got what we were looking for and about as far as we were going to get, no border on this island.

I agree with you, but lets face it - Brexit in general is a bad deal for the people of the UK.

The problem is that saying 'we got what we were looking for and about as far as we were going to get, no border on this island' - is only half the story

Ireland did get what it wants

And so did one community in Northern Ireland

The OTHER community however, did not. And while i accept a number of facts that are sure to be highlight (DUP and unionists in general are to blame - brought this on themselves when they campaigned for Brexit) - none of this changes the fact that said community have been shafted

Once you move away from the obvious 'i told yee so' - this circle is less easy to square. This deal does place a very real trade border in the irish sea, and will be unacceptable to many unionists and loyalists - and depending on what happens there are sure to be widespread protests - this would not be unprecedented, they brought down sunning-dale remember

Anyway, a devils advocate position

Happy to discuss

CelticRambler

liamtech wrote: »

while i accept a number of facts that are sure to be highlight (DUP and unionists in general are to blame - brought this on themselves when they campaigned for Brexit) - none of this changes the fact that said community have been shafted

Once you move away from the obvious 'i told yee so' - this circle is less easy to square. This deal does place a very real trade border in the irish sea, and will be unacceptable to many unionists and loyalists - and depending on what happens there are sure to be widespread protests - this would not be unprecedented, they brought down sunning-dale remember

Well, yes ... but that is an "internal" UK problem. We (RoI/EU) didn't ask them to run a referendum offering a non-specific option of "leaving" the EU without anyone setting out what that would mean; we didn't ask them to respect "the will of the people" even though that concept was open to wild and liberal interpretation; and we didn't ask them to draw unsquarable circles around the different communities in the UK.

So faced with a government that seems determined to inflict serious damage on the people of the nation, all we can do is look out for ourselves. When all is said and done, the Unionist community has spent the best part of the last century making it absolutely clear that they do not want "Dublin" interfering in their affairs. If there's a problem with the proposed WA as it stands, they should take it up with Westminster ...

Seth Brundle

liamtech wrote: »

The OTHER community however, did not. And while i accept a number of facts that are sure to be highlight (DUP and unionists in general are to blame - brought this on themselves when they campaigned for Brexit) - none of this changes the fact that said community have been shafted

What did they want? Brexit? They were offered it but chose to turn it down.
Better trade? It's not going to happen with Brexit unless they remain strongly linked to EU!
More jobs? Not with Brexit unless they remain strongly linked to EU.
More industry? Not with Brexit unless they remain strongly linked to EU
Improved healthcare? Not with Brexit unless they remain strongly linked to EU
A sustainable future for NI? Not with Brexit unless they remain strongly linked to EU
A stronger UK? Not with Brexit at all!
The community were shafted alright - but only by the DUP!

briany

liamtech wrote: »

I agree with you, but lets face it - Brexit in general is a bad deal for the people of the UK.

The problem is that saying 'we got what we were looking for and about as far as we were going to get, no border on this island' - is only half the story

Ireland did get what it wants

And so did one community in Northern Ireland

The OTHER community however, did not. And while i accept a number of facts that are sure to be highlight (DUP and unionists in general are to blame - brought this on themselves when they campaigned for Brexit) - none of this changes the fact that said community have been shafted

Once you move away from the obvious 'i told yee so' - this circle is less easy to square. This deal does place a very real trade border in the irish sea, and will be unacceptable to many unionists and loyalists - and depending on what happens there are sure to be widespread protests - this would not be unprecedented, they brought down sunning-dale remember

Anyway, a devils advocate position

Happy to discuss

A border anywhere around NI holds the potential to hurt the Peace Process, and this is why it would be ideal from an Irish point of view that either no Brexit happens at all, or a very soft one.

However, if a cleaner Brexit must happen, then it comes down to the hard reality of which type of border will be more troublesome to police, which will be more economically damaging, and which will have the greatest political fallout. As far as I know, all of these arguments conclude that a sea border would be more practical than a land one.

And the greatest question of all regarding the proposed arrangement is whether it has majority support in the whole of NI. Forget NI being used as a political football in Westminster - if the deal has the overall support of the NI public and the non-sitting MLAs, then the DUP's arguments don't really have much of a leg to stand on.

Water John

I would be disappointed if Sylvia Hermon lost her seat. She was the only pro Unionist who had some honour and did her best for NI.

fly_agaric

liamtech wrote: »

I agree with you, but lets face it - Brexit in general is a bad deal for the people of the UK.

The problem is that saying 'we got what we were looking for and about as far as we were going to get, no border on this island' - is only half the story

Ireland did get what it wants

And so did one community in Northern Ireland

The OTHER community however, did not. And while i accept a number of facts that are sure to be highlight (DUP and unionists in general are to blame - brought this on themselves when they campaigned for Brexit) - none of this changes the fact that said community have been shafted

Once you move away from the obvious 'i told yee so' - this circle is less easy to square. This deal does place a very real trade border in the irish sea, and will be unacceptable to many unionists and loyalists - and depending on what happens there are sure to be widespread protests - this would not be unprecedented, they brought down sunning-dale remember

Anyway, a devils advocate position

Happy to discuss

This is all hypothetical, based on current agreement/something like ever going through the UK parliament. I have doubts about that.
Even if there is extension and a general election in the UK after that, it may not help in that regard IMO.

If it does go through, I'm not sure what can be done about the problems you bring up now.
The unionist political representatives (DUP) stirred the pot deliberately & campaigned for Brexit. They used their temporarily powerful position as UK political kingmakers to push for the very hardest Brexit possible/drive a deep wedge between Ireland/Northern Ireland.
Did they expect the EU would not stand up for Ireland's intersts in this process? They decided to go to war (in a political sense) to get what they want (bigger divsion between NI and the "south") and it looks like they are going to lose in the end which is painful of course. Only thing the "other side" (incl. our government) can do is not be triumphalist afterward or try and take advantage of the situation.

Letwin_Larry

Duane Dibbley wrote: »

How do you all think the DUP will fair in a GE

do you really need to ask?
NI elections are little more than sectarian headcounts.

Dyr

Leroy42 wrote: »

The more one digs, the more it seems the EU did very much cave in quite significantly to Johnson.

That's dangerous talk rounds these parts :eek:

liamtech

CelticRambler wrote: »

Well, yes ... but that is an "internal" UK problem. We (RoI/EU) didn't ask them to run a referendum offering a non-specific option of "leaving" the EU without anyone setting out what that would mean; we didn't ask them to respect "the will of the people" even though that concept was open to wild and liberal interpretation; and we didn't ask them to draw unsquarable circles around the different communities in the UK.

So faced with a government that seems determined to inflict serious damage on the people of the nation, all we can do is look out for ourselves. When all is said and done, the Unionist community has spent the best part of the last century making it absolutely clear that they do not want "Dublin" interfering in their affairs. If there's a problem with the proposed WA as it stands, they should take it up with Westminster ...

Well it is interesting CelticRambler because i completely agree with your main point - we didnt ask for this, we didnt want it, and its plain to see that the civilized world thinks Brexit is a farce - we also have the ridiculous situation whereby this could be resolved by a second ref - which would undoubtedly cancel brexit, but the powers that be wont do this, for party, and personal, political reasons.

However the main problem with your opinion is that its far to black and white

• Yes issues that exist in a Post Deal Northern Ireland are Britain's concern, and it is internal. Technically this is true in a dejure sense of the word. But Ireland is involved in this situation given the status of northern Ireland, the GFA, and long history of conflict on this island. Ireland did effectively highlight the problems of brexit to the EU (AND to the UK before the referendum) - and while our redlines have now been satisfied, the Unionists red lines have been breached
• A lot will depend on the Unionists attitude over-all to this deal. Economically it could actually work for them so if they could protest in a dignified way, and then go back to work in a unique territory being Dejure UK, DeFacto EU, it could be very very lucrative for them. A foot in both markets, could be a big win
• The problem is if they decide that regardless of the possible benefits to NI - this has violated the Union. If this is the WIDESPREAD opinion, and the Unionists, as a united block, decide they cant stand this, then very quickly Northern Ireland will deteriorate. Just as they did during Sunningdale, they could completely cripple Northern Ireland with a general strike. There may be millitant groups that will seek to take advantage of that. More likely is that new Militant groups will be founded, given that those of the past (UDA, UVF et al) are all now proscribed. And once it takes off, at that point there will be a danger of them inciting dissident republicans - then utter madness

We will genuinely be dragged into this - as soon as the nationalists are dragged so will dublin

Again just an opinion happy to discuss

liamtech

Seth Brundle wrote: »

What did they want? Brexit? They were offered it but chose to turn it down.
Better trade? It's not going to happen with Brexit unless they remain strongly linked to EU!
More jobs? Not with Brexit unless they remain strongly linked to EU.
More industry? Not with Brexit unless they remain strongly linked to EU
Improved healthcare? Not with Brexit unless they remain strongly linked to EU
A sustainable future for NI? Not with Brexit unless they remain strongly linked to EU
A stronger UK? Not with Brexit at all!
The community were shafted alright - but only by the DUP!

Again these are all impossible to disagree with. Perfectly rational points i accept every one

But you arent dealing with rationality when you deal with Unionists - If their house was on fire, and a 'shinner' was the only one with a fire hose, they would let the house burn down -

What is truely horrendous is that the British government know this and are proceeding anyway. they have pitted orange against Green/The-EU now - and the consequences are unclear at this time - if they moan but accept fair play, we all dodge a bullet

If they protest it could get even uglier than it already is - and Ireland is not gonna be able to sit back and take a 'not our problem' attitude - they wont be able to, history has shown us as much

briany wrote: »

A border anywhere around NI holds the potential to hurt the Peace Process, and this is why it would be ideal from an Irish point of view that either no Brexit happens at all, or a very soft one.

However, if a cleaner Brexit must happen, then it comes down to the hard reality of which type of border will be more troublesome to police, which will be more economically damaging, and which will have the greatest political fallout. As far as I know, all of these arguments conclude that a sea border would be more practical than a land one.

And the greatest question of all regarding the proposed arrangement is whether it has majority support in the whole of NI. Forget NI being used as a political football in Westminster - if the deal has the overall support of the NI public and the non-sitting MLAs, then the DUP's arguments don't really have much of a leg to stand on.

I agree completely - and an outcome where the DUP protest to save face and then retreat (moaning if they must) and make the special status work for NI - aside from No Brexit or a very soft one - this is the best outcome we can hope for

but - will we get it? is there any way to encourage this? i honestly dont see that their is

briany

liamtech wrote: »

Again these are all impossible to disagree with. Perfectly rational points i accept every one

But you arent dealing with rationality when you deal with Unionists - If their house was on fire, and a 'shinner' was the only one with a fire hose, they would let the house burn down -

What is truely horrendous is that the British government know this and are proceeding anyway. they have pitted orange against Green/The-EU now - and the consequences are unclear at this time - if they moan but accept fair play, we all dodge a bullet

If they protest it could get even uglier than it already is - and Ireland is not gonna be able to sit back and take a 'not our problem' attitude - they wont be able to, history has shown us as much



I agree completely - and an outcome where the DUP protest to save face and then retreat (moaning if they must) and make the special status work for NI - aside from No Brexit or a very soft one - this is the best outcome we can hope for

but - will we get it? is there any way to encourage this? i honestly dont see that their is

Of course a few Loyalist headers would kick off if there were a sea border, but these people would not be operating in a vacuum. In order for their actions to be sustained, they would need a mandate from more moderate Loyalists/Unionists who are disgruntled due to feeling the pinch from the new arrangement. If the arrangement turns out to actually be fine, then their cause peters out in short order.

Strazdas

Leroy42 wrote: »

Reports coming out of the dropping of level playing field guarantees from TM deal within the updated deal

The more one digs, the more it seems the EU did very much cave in quite significantly to Johnson.

I hope that they don't vote for this WA because it seems very much like the EU are given far too much. Far more than they would if Ireland were to leave.

What is the justification for dropping the LPF guarantee when we all know the UK intends to set up in direct competition with the EU?

I suspect the EU are taking the attitude that if the UK was to try and set itself up as a hostile competitor to the EU in future, there's not much they can do to prevent this and there is nothing they can legally do to physically stop Britain "going rogue".

But if the UK was to go down this route, there would be many negative consequences.

liamtech

briany wrote: »

Of course a few Loyalist headers would kick off if there were a sea border, but these people would not be operating in a vacuum. In order for their actions to be sustained, they would need a mandate from more moderate Loyalists/Unionists who are disgruntled due to feeling the pinch from the new arrangement. If the arrangement turns out to actually be fine, then their cause peters out in short order.

Again i agree, i wanna make that clear - the head bangers are already kicking off even now (see Jamie Bryson et al) - and yes a lot will depend on what moderate average Unionists decide

But there are precedents in NI for headbangers inciting large tracts of the Unionist community - in all honesty this is the community that put the peace process on the line so they could march down a catholic road (their traditional route)

And the DUP are certainly the type of party that tend not to back down. remember it was their actions that effectively collapsed Power sharing

• RHI comes to light - Foster refuses to back down
• Vote in assembly for her to stand aside, passes with 52% me thinks - VETO-ED by DUP
• Vote against the speaker of the house for being clearly impartial - hes DUP - vote passes against him - VETO-ED by DUP

My point is the DUP are the biggest party in northern irish unionism - barring a major shift that we cant predict they are likely to be the biggest Unionist block moving forward - if we are depending on them to be 'Pragmatic' - - not a great place to be guys

briany

liamtech wrote: »

Again i agree, i wanna make that clear - the head bangers are already kicking off even now (see Jamie Bryson et al) - and yes a lot will depend on what moderate average Unionists decide

But there are precedents in NI for headbangers inciting large tracts of the Unionist community - in all honesty this is the community that put the peace process on the line so they could march down a catholic road (their traditional route)

And the DUP are certainly the type of party that tend not to back down. remember it was their actions that effectively collapsed Power sharing

• RHI comes to light - Foster refuses to back down
• Vote in assembly for her to stand aside, passes with 52% me thinks - VETO-ED by DUP
• Vote against the speaker of the house for being clearly impartial - hes DUP - vote passes against him - VETO-ED by DUP

My point is the DUP are the biggest party in northern irish unionism - barring a major shift that we cant predict they are likely to be the biggest Unionist block moving forward - if we are depending on them to be 'Pragmatic' - - not a great place to be guys

At some point, irrationality meets hard reality. Bryson can say what he likes, I guess, but if Loyalism oversteps its mark and kicks off over what the rest of the world regarded as a reasonable and functional arrangement (given the circumstances), they run the risk of total political isolation, even from the Conservative & Unionist party. They run the risk of internal division as well where some Loyalists are condemning the actions of others ones. NI Loyalism has before shown a total lack of self-awareness in protests. Who could forget the Holy Cross dispute where urine was being flung at small, scared children trying to make their way to school? It's quite easy to envision Loyalist headbangers doing something that no politician or respectable person could defend, and at this point that community self-regulates itself. This is what I'm talking about when I say the crazies still need a mandate.

CelticRambler

liamtech wrote: »

However the main problem with your opinion is that its far to black and white

But the situation is black and white: Brexit is a universally bad idea, based on the result of a non-binding referendum, won on the back of illegal campaign practices, promoting unfounded allegations and deliberate misinformation. Three years later, despite the "best" efforts of two Tory governments propped up by the DUP, there is no clear path to Brexit.

The way to "fix" this would be to scrap the whole exercise and, if "the will of the people" is really as important to the Tories and the Brexit Party as it's been made out to be, a second referendum can be put to the people in a binding referendum, run according to best-practice rules and with a properly defined proposal put to the vote.

Unfortunately, the chance of this happening seems infinitely remote, so we on the EU side are left to make our own arrangements.

liamtech wrote: »

the Unionists red lines have been breached

Not our problem - we didn't draw them; and when campaigning, they ignored our warnings that this would be a problematic issue if the UK voted Leave.

liamtech wrote: »

very quickly Northern Ireland will deteriorate. Just as they did during Sunningdale, they could completely cripple Northern Ireland with a general strike. There may be millitant groups that will seek to take advantage of that.

Or not. Probably not.

If the Scots are saying that they would like the arrangement that's been offered to NI, then what's the problem? Why should the DUP's red lines be respected more than, for example, the Remain-voting residents of the City of London?

mayo.mick

Duane Dibbley wrote: »

How do you all think the DUP will fair in a GE

Hopefully they get annihilated, but doubtful that will happen.

FrancieBrady

72% would back Remain in a new referendum in NI according to a Sunday Times poll.

The DUP are between a rock and a hard place and it isn't getting any softer.

Strazdas

FrancieBrady wrote: »

72% would back Remain in a new referendum in NI according to a Sunday Times poll.

The DUP are between a rock and a hard place and it isn't getting any softer.

Foster said yesterday that the deal was "terrible for Northern Ireland", but she really means terrible for Unionism.

Elephant in the room is that NI's interests and the DUP's interests are very different.

ancapailldorcha

Strazdas wrote: »

Foster said yesterday that the deal was "terrible for Northern Ireland", but she really means terrible for Unionism.

Elephant in the room is that NI's interests and the DUP's interests are very different.

Not quite. The deal only covers Northern Ireland for goods. Services are excluded so the sort of people NI needs more of will be further incentivised to relocate to the Republic or elsewhere in the EU.

briany

Strazdas wrote: »

Foster said yesterday that the deal was "terrible for Northern Ireland", but she really means terrible for Unionism.

Elephant in the room is that NI's interests and the DUP's interests are very different.

And even then, it's only a poor deal for Unionism if it threatened to cause an economic downturn for the region that was worse than the rest of the UK. Make no mistake about it, Unionism needs to be able to make the argument that NI is economically better off in the UK.

Strazdas

briany wrote: »

And even then, it's only a poor deal for Unionism if it threatened to cause an economic downturn for the region that was worse than the rest of the UK. Make no mistake about it, Unionism needs to be able to make the argument that NI is economically better off in the UK.

They made a terrible error campaigning for Brexit in the first place. There was no need to do it : their sister party, the Conservatives, were pro-Remain.

An Ciarraioch

FrancieBrady wrote: »

72% would back Remain in a new referendum in NI according to a Sunday Times poll.

The DUP are between a rock and a hard place and it isn't getting any softer.

Especially with the UUP pivoting to a permanent customs union, or remain if that should prove impossible.

briany

Strazdas wrote: »

They made a terrible error campaigning for Brexit in the first place. There was no need to do it : their sister party, the Conservatives, were pro-Remain.

Yeah, there was no need to do it, but given their ideology, I can see why they did. As was already pointed out, it was a free shot at putting a barrier between NI and the Republic. Too delectable an opportunity for the DUP to pass up.

CelticRambler

briany wrote: »

As was already pointed out, it was a free shot at putting a barrier between NI and the Republic.

Only it wasn't free: they didn't read the small print, and they're paying the price for it now.

A bit like the 17.4m across the water too ...

briany

CelticRambler wrote: »

Only it wasn't free: they didn't read the small print, and they're paying the price for it now.

A bit like the 17.4m across the water too ...

If by small print you mean they didn't stop to consider all the potential outcomes, then yeah I agree.

Brexiteers don't do small print, really. They prefer capitalisation for emphasis.

jimmycrackcorm

I get the distinct impression that now the DUP have had their eyes opened to reality. However, I think that their motivation to support a GE is in the vain hope that they can go back to 2017 and wield the same influence.
This is why they harp on about being still important for parlimentary arithmetic. Surely their inability to have anything but a narrow focus on "the precious union" means this is their only aim. Their goal is to follow they mission statement which is the single word: NO.

I hugely doubt that they can get in that position again following a GE. With the current deal, it's unlikely that they can get the NI bits rescinded and they won't get a UK wide deal like May's was. This current deal is the one that is going to get the UK out. The train has already left the station despite looking forward to some breakdowns and line diversions along the route.

CelticRambler

In the meantime, focusing again on the GB side of the UK ...

... I really don't understand why Labour isn't supporting the idea of a GNU/caretaker PM. It seems evident that they need time to let the full effect of Johnson's failures to hit home, to allow his dodgy funding of WotzErName's company to be investigated, and for the full detail of the impact assessments to come to light. It also seems evident that fighting an election as a proxy referendum is a very risky move, so there's no good reason to support one until the Brexit question has been resolved, either by having a real referendum first, or by kicking it well down the road with, for example, a two-year extension and a pledge to set up an all-party commission to take Brexit off the political playing field for the immediate future.

Has anyone seen or read anything that explains why Corbyn hasn't/won't support this idea?

Sam Russell

CelticRambler wrote: »

In the meantime, focusing again on the GB side of the UK ...

... I really don't understand why Labour isn't supporting the idea of a GNU/caretaker PM. It seems evident that they need time to let the full effect of Johnson's failures to hit home, to allow his dodgy funding of WotzErName's company to be investigated, and for the full detail of the impact assessments to come to light. It also seems evident that fighting an election as a proxy referendum is a very risky move, so there's no good reason to support one until the Brexit question has been resolved, either by having a real referendum first, or by kicking it well down the road with, for example, a two-year extension and a pledge to set up an all-party commission to take Brexit off the political playing field for the immediate future.

Has anyone seen or read anything that explains why Corbyn hasn't/won't support this idea?

It is quite simple - Corbyn wants to be PM - the other opposition parties and the renegade Tories do not want him to be PM in any circumstances. For some it is personal, for more it is party political, and others it is just fundamental politics - he is too far left.

A GNU would be able to solve the whole Brexit fiasco by having a 2nd ref first, then having a GE. They could also have a full Royal Commission into every aspect of Brexit, inc the dodgy funding, the criminal behaviour of the Leave.EU campaign, the level of deliberate misinformation, etc. etc. They do not need a GE before May 2022, so why hold one in the middle of a crisis?

prawnsambo

Sam Russell wrote: »

It is quite simple - Corbyn wants to be PM - the other opposition parties and the renegade Tories do not want him to be PM in any circumstances. For some it is personal, for more it is party political, and others it is just fundamental politics - he is too far left.

A GNU would be able to solve the whole Brexit fiasco by having a 2nd ref first, then having a GE. They could also have a full Royal Commission into every aspect of Brexit, inc the dodgy funding, the criminal behaviour of the Leave.EU campaign, the level of deliberate misinformation, etc. etc. They do not need a GE before May 2022, so why hold one in the middle of a crisis?

Labour don't want a GNU either. They want a minority government supported by the other opposition parties. Which is never going to happen since the rebel Tories would never do that.

Sam Russell

prawnsambo wrote: »

Labour don't want a GNU either. They want a minority government supported by the other opposition parties. Which is never going to happen since the rebel Tories would never do that.

That is what I said. Corbyn for PM.

CelticRambler

Sam Russell wrote: »

A GNU would be able to solve the whole Brexit fiasco by having a 2nd ref first, then having a GE. They could also have a full Royal Commission into every aspect of Brexit, inc the dodgy funding, the criminal behaviour of the Leave.EU campaign, the level of deliberate misinformation, etc. etc. They do not need a GE before May 2022, so why hold one in the middle of a crisis?

Exactly, and the biggest failure of all for the Tories (and Johnson in particular) would be the failure to deliver Brexit, which would theoretically give Labour/Corbyn an advantage in a delayed GE, with bonus points for being the party that supported "getting Brexit (un)done".

And yet it seems like Corbyn is prepared to gamble his best chance to be PM in the medium- to long-term against giving Johnson a bloody nose in the short term. For someone who's waited this long for the job, it feels very short-sighted.