judeboy101 wrote: » i doubt the phone call Brian lenihan got from the EU pre guarantee would back that statement up.
ArmaniJeanss wrote: » I have recently spoke to some Leave voters who genuinely think this is what they voted for. The 'logic' seems to be that a major country voted for the bloc of 28 to be broken up, therefore that's what should happen. That the remainder seem content to carry on as a bloc of 27 is regarded as being tantamount to cheating and evidence of typical foreigner skullduggery. I found it a novel attitude. Purely anecdotal this, just a handful of (very well off) retirees in a village pub in Surrey. Edit : A rough quote was 'we voted for everyone to go back to just trading with each other how they wanted, but they (Europe) won't honour that vote'.
Alan_P wrote: » judeboy101 wrote: » i doubt the phone call Brian lenihan got from the EU pre guarantee would back that statement up. Lenihan neither got nor made a phone to the EU prior to the bank guarantee :- that particular grotesque stupidity was entirely conceived and implemented by Fianna Fail. The EU didn't even know about it, and were largely horrified and bemused when it emerged.
joeysoap wrote: » From QT and other programs on British tv I get the impression that many of the leavers never considered the Uk as being one of the 28 members. Alsmost like 27 and ‘us’. ‘They’ made decisions which affected us, ‘they’ made life hard for us, ‘they’ had too many rules etc etc. and enough of the electorate swallowed the spin thrown at them. The fact that the big sellers - the Sun, the Express, the Daily Mail etc - have been anti EU, gave some voters a reason to vote leave, bendy bananas, Turkey joining the Eu among others, Maybe my memory isn’t as good as it was but didn’t TM visit Turkey early doors to talk trade deals? A country that was supposedly joining the EU?
Theresa May has been mocked for claiming credit for an EU policy to protect consumers from rip-off payment card charges. Retailers, airlines and other businesses have been banned from hitting shoppers with hidden surcharges when they use credit or debit cards – sometimes as high as 20 per cent – which costs consumers around £166m each year. MEPs criticised the Government for claiming responsibility for the move, which comes as part of a broad range of new payment regulations based on an EU–wide directive that was spearheaded by left-wing politicians in the European Parliament. The Government must comply with EU directives until Britain leaves the bloc, although these changes will become part of UK law so will remain after Brexit. The Prime Minister tweeted: "From today we're banning hidden charges for paying with your credit or debit card – a move that will help millions of people avoid rip-off fees when spending their hard-earned money."
Sam Russell wrote: » Mind you, they are protected from chlorinated chicken if they stay in the single market. So not all bad.
flatty wrote: » The EU will stand foursquare behind Ireland. I have absolutely no doubt about this. None.
An Claidheamh wrote: » "Irish sources say they have been informed via European capitals that British officials have been briefing against Ireland, hoping to diminish support for Ireland’s case." Can we stop pretending they're our friends now? In any other country, this would be headline news.
flatty wrote: » The brexit wing of the tory party is friends with no one, and is as happy to screw over its own less well off compatriots as it is to screw over Ireland, or anyone else. Why would you think any different. I would suggest just bearing in mind that four times the population of the Republic voted to remain despite all of the lies and spin and rule breaking and propaganda. That's an awful lot of people who want to be open, friendly and good European neighbours.
correct horse battery staple wrote: » Guys can Ireland benefit from the madness to either side of us? I am thinking make Ireland (well maybe with exception of Dublin due to its housing issues) the place to be for researchers and scientists and engineers by relaxing immigration visas to those with postgraduate academic qualifications and families (hence are not likely to leave and would become long term taxpayers) While the US and UK are shooting themselves in the foot, maybe we can mop up the best and the brightest to come work in existing companies or start new enterprises with their own capital.
trellheim wrote: » Folks we really need to start thinking in terms of absolute worst-case - in some ways thats simple . Borders go up and we deal with it. Easy to say but painful in the extreme. What I want to discuss right now - and take a moment to think about it - with the talks the way they are - what is the plausible best outcome - what's the best deal Ireland plc could get. I still have an awful feeling a Euro PM from someone Eu27 small ( like De Rutter from NL did last time ) will come over and tell us how its going to go down. Sure what use is a veto - the internal politics for Ireland might start to play (more of) a part ( you can see a little of this in today's IT)
Strazdas wrote: » Best deal would be the UK being a full member of the EEA (Single Market) and Customs Union. But economists reckon even that would impact on the Irish economy.....nonetheless it is still the best outcome for us.
briany wrote: » I keep seeing this chlorinated chicken example. It's not so much chlorination that's the problem as that in the U.S. chlorination may be one of the only food safety procedures undertaken on a slaughtered and plucked chicken. So the warning should really be that the UK could get an influx of food that is of a generally lower standard both in terms of animal welfare and processing regulations.
The fact that we're paying for those banking debts is precisely why the EU will do what Ireland wants.
If the EU abandon Ireland in this, it is curtains for them and they know it
trellheim wrote: » why ? Greece was happily carved up. Theres no evidence I can see for that theory. My theory - referencing Greece as an example - is that the 4 freedoms must be taken ( and will be enforced by the EU) to be unbreakable ; Hungary and a few other states would be straight on the same train if the UK got an additional opt-out. BUT - with all sides knowing this - you'd think it would have been sorted by now. As the hangman in Blazing Saddles says when the boss opens the window .. " As you can see Sir, it's utter chaos down here"
briany wrote: » What if David Cameron had not held the referendum as a whole UK one, but four separate ones in each constituent country, and specified that a majority must be achieved in each in order for the UK to move forward with Brexit?
The prime minister said he wanted to renegotiate the UK's relationship with the EU and then give people the "simple choice" between staying in under those new terms, or leaving the EU. The news was welcomed by Eurosceptics who have long campaigned for a vote.
Outside I met a few young representatives of For our Future’s Sake who were planning a “friendly protest” against the party’s refusal to have a proper debate on Brexit policy. They were planning to unfurl a pro-Remain banner when Corbyn took the stage, though they feared their banner might be confiscated by Momentum heavies. When – after an introductory DJ set that included Prince’s I Wanna Be Your Lover – the leader appeared, the banner was raised, and the Remain group and their banner were quickly ushered out. This allowed the leader of the opposition to enthuse a by-now significantly larger crowd of the converted with impassioned pledges to renationalise “rail, mail and water”, build a million council homes and to “support everybody”, while fans chorused his “Ooh! Jeremy Corbyn” theme tune. Like any headliner worth his salt, he knows to stick to the hits.
briany wrote: » What if David Cameron had not held the referendum as a whole UK one, but four separate ones in each constituent country, and specified that a majority must be achieved in each in order for the UK to move forward with Brexit? I think this would have been a shrewd move because it's difficult to argue against this without exposing the idea that the UK is not a union of equals. And while this would still have stoked the flames of regionalism, it would at least been better to have this debate in the aftermath of the vote, where the voting structure gave NI and Scotland more leverage to block Brexit and demonstrate to people the possibly grave implications of Brexit for the UK's integrity.
EdgeCase wrote: » They seem constantly shocked by the fact that the EU, unlike themselves isn’t just throwing Ireland under a bus. Unlike the UK, the EU does actually grant its members huge powers of veto and treats them with a far greater degree of equality and respect. The UK approach is very much that the UK is England and the other countries aren't taken seriously at all really. That's always been the history of the UK. It's never been a union by consent, but by hostile acquisition and forced integration and that's, sadly, still being reflected in modern politics. There’s also an inability to comprehend that Ireland is a part of the EU and the Eurozone and the European Commission and other institutions' job and role is to protect the EU and the Eurozone . . .
judeboy101 wrote: » Are you really telling me they knew nothing? https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/brian-lenihan-s-family-criticises-trichet-over-phone-call-1.2198516?mode=amp
The Greek bailout was an entirely different scenario and has very little in common with the situation Ireland faces now. Greece broke EU and ECB budgetary rules, lied about it and refused to implement reforms without a gun to their head In regards to Brexit Ireland has done nothing but be the most stalwart EU supporter, has toed the line and indeed led the EU in many respects Greek interests and EU/ECB were extemely divergent, Greece wanted to keep spending other peoples money, EU/ECB wanted to ensure they paid for themselves. In stark contrast Ireland's and the EU's interests are almost perfectly aligned, they both want the UK to A) Be part of the SM/CU Fullfill all their outstanding obligations C) Not to get any special privileges The EU/ECB wanted to make an example out of Greece in order to presuade all other members that the rules must be followed in order to ensure lasting stability of the EU/Eurozone The EU want to make an example out of the UK and the folly of leaving the EU and to set a counterexample of Ireland who will demonstrate the benefits of being an EU member Why would the EU sell us out? They would only be selling out themselves.
trellheim wrote: » Yes I know it was a somewhat different comparison in terms of the situation faced - my point was more the gun-to-the-head lack of choice. My strong belief is that a compromise that is very unattractive to Ireland will be hammered out, to allow the transition agreement go into effect ( remember there is still NO transition agreement). As far as I can see this is the DExEu's strategy - to delay and delay until the horrible situation on offer is better than no deal. At that point a man will arrive (not from Brussels but from somewhere else - this is what happened last time ) and we will be told 'take the deal' .
