kuro68k wrote: » The British government is going to take it right to the cliff edge and hope that someone else compromises. Of course they have their excuses already lined up if no-one does, only real question is who they will blame.
Leroy42 wrote: » It is funny that anytime economics is raised in regard to the potential cost of Brexit, those supporting leave reply that what price on sovereignty and freedom to make their own laws. But even if the economic hit is taken as less that some predicted, the effect on the UK's standing and power has been immensely negative. The UK have shown themselves to be unreliable partners, unpredictable negotiators and domestically almost ungovernable. Their county is completely split, the union is coming under severe pressure. They have put back UK/Ireland relations years after all the hard and good work over the last few decades. They have opened up old stereotypes of Europeans and Europeans of them. Both main parties have been shown up to be completely unable to deal with the big questions, to put forward a thought out and reasonable way forward. They are shorn of leaders and now are in the grip of a few, noisy, hardliners on either side. So, yes, a complete and utter disaster for the UK no matter what way you look at it.
Professor Moriarty wrote: » Absolutely. The cartoon here from today's Telegraph is a disgrace.
ARNOLD J RIMMER wrote: » Not really. I have never felt that Jean-Claude Juncker shows any type of Leadership.
blanch152 wrote: » Given the history of Ireland's economic development since 1973, this is a strange regret. Google, Facebook, Intel, Big Pharma et al were only possible because of EU membership. EU membership was only possible because of acceptance of the EU fisheries policy. Being a poorer version of Iceland was where we would have ended up.
Adamcp898 wrote: » It's a political cartoon. It's meant to at least be somewhat mocking of someone or other. ''Disgrace'' is more than a little OTT and verging on hand-wringing for hand-wringings sake.
Water John wrote: » Just how untrustworthy this Govn't is, illustrated by Bercow already twice today having to challenge Leadsom on the type of vote both she and TM promised Parliament. Bercow having none of it. Amendments taken before the main vote not after it's rejected. Fisheries is a flash point esp in Scotland. I don't want to sidetrack the core Brexit discussion but we gave up major fishing grounds basically in preference to agriculture and that's coming from a farmer.
Water John wrote: » Whilst Ag and Fisheries may be small in GDP terms they are very important in key areas. Without them vast swathes of the countryside would be bereft of people and social structure.
farmchoice wrote: » a fairly harmless contribution from Jeffery Donaldson today. he said he wanted the backstop gone but highlighted that the political declaration provides a path for another way ( yet to be invented tech, unicorns etc). no blood and thunder today.
CelticRambler wrote: » Water John wrote: » Whilst Ag and Fisheries may be small in GDP terms they are very important in key areas. Without them vast swathes of the countryside would be bereft of people and social structure. Agriculture is also hugely important as part of the Irish brand overseas. While the Indo and the inhabitants of AH portray the country as a corrupt, junkie-filled shanty-town, packs of Kerrygold and boxes of Irish oats and other such products are selling the country as an eco-friendly, premium destination. As regards the Scottish fisheries, the UK will "take back control" of its waters (control that it opted not to exercise while in the EU) and sacrifice tariff-free access to its main market. I can't help but see parallels between the Brexit-will-save-us fishermen and Trump's tarirff war with China that has wreaked havoc on the soya bean farmers that voted for him.
funkey_monkey wrote: » Why do you think that? Alex Wickham (BuzzfeedUK Snr Political Correspondent) is reporting that 50% of Tory backbenchers now state they will vote against it.https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/1065634225951522816
EdgeCase wrote: » From an Irish economic development perspective, it was having the ability to attract in FDI and the spinoff industries that that created that drove growth and modernisation here. If you look at the breakdown of Irish GDP it's actually quite surprising how small a role primary agriculture plays. It's just that it creates a disproportionately high number of jobs in rural Ireland and we have a tendency to still imagine ourselves to be an agricultural economy. The UK has a similar distorted impression of how much some of those sectors contribute to its economic output.
Professor Moriarty wrote: » Maybe I'm a snowflake.
MrMusician18 wrote: » The telegraph has had an issue with JCJ since he became commission president against the wishes of the UK government at the time. They have gone to great lengths to paint him as some sort of alcoholic, chain smoking louche. As I don't work in the commission, I don't know whether it's true or not but I do know it's not something really reported on outside the hostile UK press. In any case, the telegraph is a disgraceful paper, it is worse than Fox news in it's partisanship.
funkey_monkey wrote: » Hi is there anywhere that I can get an independent breakdown of what the Withdrawal Agreement means for people in NI? I usually look towards Katy Hayward, but I can find nothing from her and I'm not sure if her scope covers it. Thanks.
An Ciarraioch wrote: » What happened to the deal with the EU to take some of the soya quota?
rogue-entity wrote: » Fishing and Agriculture may provide jobs in coastal and rural Ireland but I would wonder how many of the younger generation are all that interested in working in those sectors - hard work with less pay than what can be earned elsewhere. I don't have figures to hand but I suspect far more are employed in high-skilled/high-paying work and not just in traditional (and capped) professions. I'm not sure there's the same appetite for working in curry houses or doing hard work that doesn't pay the same as a job in fintech, for example.
Hurrache wrote: » It'll be voted against at the first vote, May will ask the EU to change the wording but the context won't differ. She'll come back saying she' got further concessions, and between that and their backs right against the wall of a no deal Brexit due to the time that elapsed, it'll go through the second time. That's my bet.
MrMusician18 wrote: » Fishing is of minor economic importance but is a totemic political issue. Where would the UK be now we're it not for Brexit? The thing to remember about alternative histories is that they are fiction.
Hurrache wrote: » I specifically said they're won't be any changes to anything other than perhaps wording or phrases
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w2.vanillicon.com/v2/23af546224513cf852af4d456d68d01c.svg)
