Brexit discussion thread II

If those five demands are accurate, it's eminently doable. The wording is deliberately sufficiently open to allow real and functional progress during phase two. At that point, with trade also on the table, Ireland will be more easily persuaded to accept a practical solution because clearly a successful trade deal is very much in our interests. If the inflamatory rhetoric on both sides can be dialled down then the kind of creative partnership which I hoped for up the thread is still possible.

The "no regulatory divergence on EU matters" (from memory) is going to cause something of a talking point.

I think if that article is anything to go by that we can say that Ireland has made it's point very effectively, without - so far - throwing the baby out with the bath water.

kowtow wrote: »

The "no regulatory divergence on EU matters" (from memory) is going to cause something of a talking point.

Code for the north remaining in the customs union. They pretend not the case.

ThisRegard wrote: »

I don't think they were saying that, they were implying that the Irish government were only considering the nationalist side when it comes to the border issue when the Good Friday agreement encompasses more than that.

Disagree. They mentioned the Irish gov not following the GFA. Despite the fact that all I see in England is Arelene and unionists claiming they represent NI.

ThisRegard wrote: »

I rewound, they said that as part of the GFQ both sides must be considered but they're not looking at it from the unionists point of view as they say the majority wanted Brexit.

Same. They're accusing the Irish of not respecting the GFA when they're in bed with the DUP. They don't care about peace. Only unionism and Brexit.

Water John wrote: »

CU in the UK mirroring the CU in the EU. The Turkish solution.

But Brexiteers can claim they are not in the CU of the EU!!!

This won't mean single market entry though If the North is to survive it will need to stay in the single market.

ThisRegard wrote: »

Yeah, but that's pretty far removed from claiming the Irish government are jeopardising the GFA.

Sorry but it's not. That's the long and short of what they're accussing the gov of. Anyway we can agree to disagree.

In the Times apparently it's on the table...

A possible border deal based on devolution of powers to Northern Ireland to ensure regulatory convergence with the Republic, and thus the EU.

Anthracite wrote: »

If it comes to that, how clever a move was it for the DUP to back Brexit?

Don't get what the DUP would like in this deal. It seperates the North further.

A possible border deal based on devolution of powers to Northern Ireland to ensure regulatory convergence with the Republic, and thus the EU.

The "devolution of powers to Northern Ireland" bit raises alarm bells since there is currently no Executive, and the DUP would be required to consent to any arrangement to restore Stormont.

Is this a sneaky way for the British to kick this issue down the line and then shrug their shoulders if/when the DUP decide not to go for it?

Water John wrote:

Ireland may not have to worry about using their veto. Brexiteer MPs may use their veto on the Tory Cabinet, over the divorce bill.

I think the saving grace of the divorce bill is that it comes with strings attached ... ie. A satisfactory trade deal. The walk away option paying nothing is still available to the hard core at least - I would have thought - until the transition period of full access starts at which point money will start changing hands anyway. So in practice it's going to become a case of looking for a good enough trade deal at an acceptable price to make it worth exiting transition. That's why Boris and co were so keen to place strict time limits on transition.

Irish gov needs to be careful here. Could be a stunt to give effective DUP control of Irish border matters.

With no executive either.

I smell a rat.