nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Brexit discussion thread III

ancapailldorcha

This thread is for discussing the departure of the UK from the EU. I will move some posts over shortly.

New posters, please read the forum charter before posting.

Regards,

The Politics Mods.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

J Mysterio

Its the old question of 'are you dissing Trump, or the office of US president?'.

Even people in the US who are anti-Trump will be offended by him having a visit cancelled.

Trump is a piece of shıt, but it's short-sighted to break down relations. You need to register your dissaproval in other ways.

May will be his best friend when he comes and will presumably try and act less like a humourless witch and be more gregarious and down to earth.

Enzokk

Leroy42 wrote: »

All very true Sam, but what is her option. Tell him to feck off, that he should stop or she won't be friends?

Do you think that will make Trump change? Or will it leave the UK swinging in the wind at a time that it is looking very likely to crash out of its current trading relationship with the EU.

It may well end up losing out anyway, but at least she needs to keep up the appearance that they have a relationship

As posted above what guarantee does she have that she will get a good deal? If Trump throws a strop because protesters are too loud he will burn her. She can sweet talk to him all she likes he will still do what he likes, and in any case he will not last forever so if the inevitable happens and he leaves his post (by whatever means) she has appeased a brutal would be dictator. Winston Churchill was a racist, but at least he stood by his morals against Germany when the aristocrats were hoping for a good relationship with them in the 1930s.

Just thinking about it, Theresa May has her party in a place where she can do what she wants. When push comes to shove they will vote with the government because they know if a election is called they could lose their seats. This is true of the DUP as well, they are in the driving seat now but if they force a general election because they throw a strop they will be forced to deal with Jeremy Corbyn who has no problems with a united Ireland.

The problem with threatening to vote against the government, if you keep threatening and in the end do as the party needs you lose your strength. The same goes for David Davis, the exception seems to be that he does get his way when he sulks and throws his dummy. The rebels got very little at all with their talk of voting against the government so you can clearly see who has the power in that struggle.

Sam Russell

Leroy42 wrote: »

All very true Sam, but what is her option. Tell him to feck off, that he should stop or she won't be friends?

Do you think that will make Trump change? Or will it leave the UK swinging in the wind at a time that it is looking very likely to crash out of its current trading relationship with the EU.

It may well end up losing out anyway, but at least she needs to keep up the appearance that they have a relationship

Did not some guy come back from Munich eighty years ago waving a piece of paper and declare 'Peace in our time!'

Hmm - sometimes hard decisions have to be made - history is not kind to those who make the wrong choice.

Leroy42

All very true Sam, but what is her option. Tell him to feck off, that he should stop or she won't be friends?

Do you think that will make Trump change? Or will it leave the UK swinging in the wind at a time that it is looking very likely to crash out of its current trading relationship with the EU.

It may well end up losing out anyway, but at least she needs to keep up the appearance that they have a relationship

Sam Russell

Leroy42 wrote: »

TBF to TM, what choice does she really have? She cannot burn any bridges right now, she absolutely needs Trump and the US and needs to be seen to be delivering a trade deal as a sign of the great future in Brexit Britain.

Does not apply to Trump.

He imposed tariffs on his own allies, while visiting North Korea's despot trying to agree a deal like the one with Iran that he walked away from. He is imposing heavy sanctions against China while hoping China will use its influence on NK.

I think Trump has shown his utter contempt for all US allies, Nato, diplomacy, the truth, morality, etc. etc.

Martin Turner's cartoon in today's IT sums him up quite well - pissing on the Statue of Liberty - The full text on the statue reads: 'Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door! ' Just apt to what he is doing down Mexico way.

Leroy42

Enzokk wrote: »

Also, to add to the list of spineless moves from Theresa May, she strongly disagrees with Donald Trump and his policy of child concentration camps, but will not cancel his visit later to the UK. Two actions within a few hours today that makes me shake my head at the lack of morals or integrity of politicians in the UK right now.

TBF to TM, what choice does she really have? She cannot burn any bridges right now, she absolutely needs Trump and the US and needs to be seen to be delivering a trade deal as a sign of the great future in Brexit Britain.

Enzokk

On the vote today it seems as the Tory Rebels (at least some, the person bringing forth the amendment will vote against it) have folded like I thought they would, even when they have not secured any assurances or the amendment they were seeking. The Labour party can learn from the Conservatives when it comes to standing together. They go against their principles so easily when it comes to votes, it seems that party will always be ahead of personal beliefs.

https://twitter.com/Brexit/status/1009436514105810945

Also, to add to the list of spineless moves from Theresa May, she strongly disagrees with Donald Trump and his policy of child concentration camps, but will not cancel his visit later to the UK. Two actions within a few hours today that makes me shake my head at the lack of morals or integrity of politicians in the UK right now.

Theresa May: US border policy 'disturbing' but Trump visit still on

Theresa May has described Donald Trump’s policy of separating immigrant children from their families as “deeply disturbing” and “wrong”, but defended her decision to receive the US president in Britain next month.

Leroy42

You've got to hand it to May, she is some survivor. The can kicking is really something to behold.

Sam Russell

Charles Babbage wrote: »

The Ashcroft poll shows a similar trend, huge shift in opinion to a fairly close balance. Like the poll last week this shows more Protestants in favour of a United Ireland than Catholics in favour of the UK, albeit mostly Alliance voters. The DUP would be wise to consider the trend here.

The use of religious designations for voters is suspect. Are they self declared, or assumed? The term 'Catholic', 'Nationalist', 'Republican', or for the other side - 'Protestant', 'Unionist', 'Loyalist' are used by different pundits to mean different things - quite often a graded distinction.

It is like the adverts that declare - '85% of cats that showed a preference, chose our Tiddles cat food' without saying how many cats did not show a preference. I wonder how many respondents did not declare their religion or the way they voted? Lies, damn lies, and poll results.

FrancieBrady

Peregrinus wrote: »

Well, not really. The DUP is a party committed to the union, so it’s not surprising that everyone in the DUP would vote for the union. And same goes as regards SF and a united Ireland.

If that’s groupthink, then every group of people identified by a shared idea is an example of groupthink. Did you know that 100% of “Repeal the Eighth” activists identified as pro-choice? Groupthink!

You will see plenty of sinister buzzwords employed to try and deny what is happening. Groupthink is a new one on me.

Nody

Deleted User wrote: »

That one figure is far bigger than their net contribution, which is pretty funny to be fair. Meth heads would handle this better.

To be fair the Octopus guessing winners in football could do better than this; but that's simply because May only cares about staying in power and Tory are torn apart from infighting making that possible. It's the perfect storm in a sense because if Tory was in any way united May would have been forced down a given route (or simply be removed) but due to the infighting that's not happening. Hence we're in the eye of the storm while May is forced to stay rotating around and around bouncing between the storm walls of issues around her but not really doing or going anywhere.

This is also why I stated before and I will keep stating why hard crash out by accident is the most likely outcome. This is not because it's desired in any form but simply because it's the outcome that requires no action to happen; any other outcome requires May to rally the parliament into voting for a proposal and that simply seems impossible atm between Tory infighting and Corbyn's complete abdication of being an opposition leader trying to oust May. Hence Corbyn will sit back and put out great one liners and dogma but will do nothing to stop a hard crash out (as he's a Brexiteer in reality) and May is to weak to get her party to change course leaving the default option which requires no one to do anything in practice as the most likely outcome even if it is the worst outcome for everyone.

[Deleted User]

That one figure is far bigger than their net contribution, which is pretty funny to be fair. Meth heads would handle this better.

ambro25

UK could lose £10bn a year in City-related tax revenue after Brexit

Sir Mark Boleat, who was chairman of the City of London Corporation until last year, said a seepage of jobs from the capital was already underway and that the political rows over a deal or no-deal outcome was now “irrelevant” to City chief executives.

“It is no longer contingency planning. If you are running a bank it is non-negotiable. The regulators won’t allow it,” he said.

“This is a 10-year operation. In the short term it won’t be noticeable in terms of staff. Banks won’t be putting out press releases saying they are moving some of their operations because of Brexit because they don’t want the publicity. They are just getting on with it."

“Those who suggested that some business would move were accused of scaremongering,” he will say before listing 15 major banks and financial services who have already set up on the continent or Dublin.

Independent verification, for any doubter. Or I could take photos of the new plaque outside our building (one of the already-relocating City firms is our new neighbour, as it happens).

That tax base isn’t coming back for a decade, at the most optimistic.

Accessorily, that is Boris and Theresa’s “dividend” walking straight out the door early, £ms and £ms at a time: small brooks eventually make big rivers.

murphaph

Interesting that s clear majority of decided middle class middle ground (Alliance) voters would favour union with Ireland over GB. I would have expected the reverse. Times they are a changin.

Peregrinus

blanch152 wrote: »

Interesting poll.

The figures of 97% and 98% for Sinn Fein and the DUP are staggering, groupthink on a huge scale.

Well, not really. The DUP is a party committed to the union, so it’s not surprising that everyone in the DUP would vote for the union. And same goes as regards SF and a united Ireland.

If that’s groupthink, then every group of people identified by a shared idea is an example of groupthink. Did you know that 100% of “Repeal the Eighth” activists identified as pro-choice? Groupthink!

Professor Moriarty

blanch152 wrote: »

Interesting poll.

The figures of 97% and 98% for Sinn Fein and the DUP are staggering, groupthink on a huge scale.

It shows a polarised divided sectarian society, with both sides entrenched.

Which is why the GFA needs to be preserved.

blanch152

Charles Babbage wrote: »

The Ashcroft poll shows a similar trend, huge shift in opinion to a fairly close balance. Like the poll last week this shows more Protestants in favour of a United Ireland than Catholics in favour of the UK, albeit mostly Alliance voters. The DUP would be wise to consider the trend here.

Interesting poll.

The figures of 97% and 98% for Sinn Fein and the DUP are staggering, groupthink on a huge scale.

It shows a polarised divided sectarian society, with both sides entrenched.

Leroy42

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The 12 bn is not really what it costs though. All sorts of figures can be quoted and the costs can't be computed honestly until we know the breakdowns.
I and many like me, tend to think how much partition has cost socially and economically since it was imposed on the island.

The problem for NI is, as the Brexit debate showed, is that facts aren't really important. If the story is that NI is costing Britain £12bn per year, thats £230m per week, think if what could be done for the NHS with that. In fact, take the brexit dividend, and add the NIexit dividend and bham, problem solved.

FrancieBrady

VinLieger wrote: »

Because it is a huge negative, the 12 billion required annually is proportionately a completely different prospect for the UK than it is to ROI.

Add to that all the other costs of reunification and the long term economic issues that will likely ensue and right now reunification from a financial and economic view does not make sense. It could take us all decades to recover if it is implemented badly.

The 12 bn is not really what it costs though. All sorts of figures can be quoted and the costs can't be computed honestly until we know the breakdowns.
I and many like me, tend to think how much partition has cost socially and economically since it was imposed on the island.

Charles Babbage

Peregrinus wrote: »

Yes. The way things were shaping up before Brexit, the long-term demographic trend which will lead to a Catholic majority in NI before much longer was being offset by a growing propensity of Catholics to accept, if not enthusiastically support, NI's place within the Union. That was made possible because the open border and the GFA meant there was little tension between affirming an Irish identity and accepting the status quo.

Hard Brexit, and a hard border, will hole this below the waterline. If accepting NI's place within the UK means accepting a hard border in Ireland, Catholics are required to make a choice which it is very much in Arlene Foster's interest that they should not be required to make. The DUP should be a tireless advocate for the softest of soft Brexits.

The Ashcroft poll shows a similar trend, huge shift in opinion to a fairly close balance. Like the poll last week this shows more Protestants in favour of a United Ireland than Catholics in favour of the UK, albeit mostly Alliance voters. The DUP would be wise to consider the trend here.

VinLieger

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Pattitionists this side of the border will also highlight it as a negative though.

Because it is a huge negative, the 12 billion required annually is proportionately a completely different prospect for the UK than it is to ROI.

Add to that all the other costs of reunification and the long term economic issues that will likely ensue and right now reunification from a financial and economic view does not make sense. It could take us all decades to recover if it is implemented badly.

Peregrinus

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The DUP and other Unionists have no problem using the fact that they have been an economic sinkhole requiring subsidy since partition almost as a positive for remaining in the UK and that somehow that will make them proud members of the UK.

There will be much more public expressions of this as talk of a UI increases. Pattitionists this side of the border will also highlight it as a negative though.

The fact that GB has been willing to provide ever increasing subsidies to NI during its steady economic decline is undoubtedly a plus for NI.

However, it becomes a minus if we think that NI's steady decline is in fact attributable to its continuing connection to GB. It's striking that when partition was implemented NI was much the wealthier part of Ireland but, after nearly 100 years of partition, it is much the poorer. The obvious conclusion is that there is much to be said for independence, economically speaking.

And that conclusion will be reinforced if, as the price of mantaining the union with GB, NI has to leave the EU and suffer still more harm and still more decline, and seek still greater subsidies from GB. Staying in the union in order to cotinue receiving the subsidies begins to look less attractive when being in the union is part of the reason you need the subsidies in the first place.

FrancieBrady

The DUP and other Unionists have no problem using the fact that they have been an economic sinkhole requiring subsidy since partition almost as a positive for remaining in the UK and that somehow that will make them proud members of the UK.

There will be much more public expressions of this as talk of a UI increases. Pattitionists this side of the border will also highlight it as a negative though.

Thomas_IV

Peregrinus wrote: »

SFAIK the DUP have not sought such a commitment, and certainly HMG have not given one.

Plus, it should be noted, Westminster extensively subsidises the government of NI, but most of the economic damage accruing from Brexit will affect individuals and businesses in the form of job losses, lost contracts, reduced profits, lost business, etc, etc. There will be a secondary impact on government finances in the form of lower tax take, higher claims on social services, etc. DUP might hope that UK will increase its subvention to keep the NI government solvent (although I wouldn't assume even that) but nobody can imagine that there will be cash handouts directly to private individuals and businesses to compensate them for Brexit-related costs and losses.

The Nordies will be screwed, economically speaking. The DUP knows this, but reckons it will make them identify more strongly with the UK. Or something.

Sure, that's how they think but I rather think that it'll all backfire on them in the end.

Thomas_IV

Leroy42 wrote: »

Is part of the DUP stance based on the view that the UK will cover them in the event of any economic loss? We are looking at it as a terrible idea to stay out of EU from the NI economy, but maybe after such a long time being fed off the British state the DUP simply have the view that Britain will simply cover any shortfall (should it arise).

The DUP is rather ignoring the prospect of a growing support for a Scottish IndyRef2 which - by also growing support - has the chance to get a majority for Independence and this would lead to the break up of the Union in the event of a hard Brexit. In due course after that the financial support for NI from Westminster will become a matter to be scrutinised and revisited with a result in cuts for NI.

Sure, I also think that the DUP just reckons the way you described it.

Peregrinus

Leroy42 wrote: »

Is part of the DUP stance based on the view that the UK will cover them in the event of any economic loss? We are looking at it as a terrible idea to stay out of EU from the NI economy, but maybe after such a long time being fed off the British state the DUP simply have the view that Britain will simply cover any shortfall (should it arise).

SFAIK the DUP have not sought such a commitment, and certainly HMG have not given one.

Plus, it should be noted, Westminster extensively subsidises the government of NI, but most of the economic damage accruing from Brexit will affect individuals and businesses in the form of job losses, lost contracts, reduced profits, lost business, etc, etc. There will be a secondary impact on government finances in the form of lower tax take, higher claims on social services, etc. DUP might hope that UK will increase its subvention to keep the NI government solvent (although I wouldn't assume even that) but nobody can imagine that there will be cash handouts directly to private individuals and businesses to compensate them for Brexit-related costs and losses.

The Nordies will be screwed, economically speaking. The DUP knows this, but reckons it will make them identify more strongly with the UK. Or something.

Leroy42

Is part of the DUP stance based on the view that the UK will cover them in the event of any economic loss? We are looking at it as a terrible idea to stay out of EU from the NI economy, but maybe after such a long time being fed off the British state the DUP simply have the view that Britain will simply cover any shortfall (should it arise).

Thomas_IV

Peregrinus wrote: »

Yes. The way things were shaping up before Brexit, the long-term demographic trend which will lead to a Catholic majority in NI before much longer was being offset by a growing propensity of Catholics to accept, if not enthusiastically support, NI's place within the Union. That was made possible because the open border and the GFA meant there was little tension between affirming an Irish identity and accepting the status quo.

Hard Brexit, and a hard border, will hole this below the waterline. If accepting NI's place within the UK means accepting a hard border in Ireland, Catholics are required to make a choice which it is very much in Arlene Foster's interest that they should not be required to make. The DUP should be a tireless advocate for the softest of soft Brexits.

If they were reasonable they would, but as we know them, stupid and stubborn as they are, they push for a hard Brexit for the sake of 'being British' and thus go down with the UK. They don't care about the consequences reality will soon enough punish them with, they just share the same idiocy like the English Tories who are still caught in their 'happy Brexit times ahead bubble' which is the worst illusion ever.

Still, some resistance to a hard Brexit is slowly growing in GB but the UK govt is playing on time and continue in the way they did for the past two years to achieve nothing in the end in order to justify the hard Brexit and afterwards blame the EU for it. They can rely on their ignorant followers and supporters that they will swallow that ly too.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2018/0620/971776-theresa_may_brexit/

Theresa May faces fresh Brexit Showdown

British Prime Minister Theresa May faces a showdown with her pro-EU MPs over parliament's role in the final Brexit deal, which could influence her entire negotiation strategy.

MPs will vote on amendments to the EU (Withdrawal) Bill setting out how much power MPs will have if the government fails to agree a departure deal before Brexit in March 2019.

Peregrinus

Deleted User wrote: »

It's ironic really, but the more Foster bangs the Brexit drum, the more she destabilises the Union itself. The relationships between North/South plus Ireland & Britain appeared to reach an acceptable equilibrium to most people as it developed within the greater umbrella of the EU. Brexit really is an unwelcome intrusion re all this.

Yes. The way things were shaping up before Brexit, the long-term demographic trend which will lead to a Catholic majority in NI before much longer was being offset by a growing propensity of Catholics to accept, if not enthusiastically support, NI's place within the Union. That was made possible because the open border and the GFA meant there was little tension between affirming an Irish identity and accepting the status quo.

Hard Brexit, and a hard border, will hole this below the waterline. If accepting NI's place within the UK means accepting a hard border in Ireland, Catholics are required to make a choice which it is very much in Arlene Foster's interest that they should not be required to make. The DUP should be a tireless advocate for the softest of soft Brexits.

Leonard Hofstadter

I always got that feeling when I lived there. We were all considered to be 'Irish' over there anyway regardless of which side of the border we were from.

It's kind of like how we are all supposed to want a United Ireland tomorrow but secretly the majority of us like the theory of it but in reality we're quite happy for it to be (and remain) Britain's problem, over there officially NI is 'as British as Finchley' (to use Mrs Thatcher's words) but in reality they couldn't care less, and the poll shows this.

They would be quite happy for NI to be treated separately to the rest of the UK in order to achieve the Brexit they want, but the DUP won't allow it (despite bring perfectly content to be different to the UK when it suits them e.g. equal marriage, abortion etc).