Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Brexit discussion thread V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

1…187188190192193

Comments

  • #9452
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,385 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    kunst nugget wrote: »
    Philip Lee, MP for Bracknell, was interviewed on RTÉ Radio 1 this morning and came across quite well. He seems completely exasperated by the posturings of the Brexiteers in relation to threatening to not pay the 39 billion and acknowledged how disastrous that would be for the UK. He also felt the need to apologise to the Irish over the 'Ireland should know its place' comments that have been attributed to the senior Tory party members. He's very much pushing for a second referendum.

    Alistair Campbell was excellent on PK this morning. Tore the Brexiteers' 'argument' apart. Was scathing about May and methodically went through her performance over the past two years demonstrating how she made crucial mistakes at every step.


  • #9453
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,385 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    Leroy42 wrote: »
    Just to correct you on a bit. There are plenty of UK politicians that acknowledge the fact that Brexit will damage Ireland.

    The fact is that there a a few, very vocal ones, that see that as a positive to getting the Brexit they desire rather than the negative we see it as.

    I haven't heard or read any with a couple of notable exceptions. Who are they and when did they acknowledge and apologise for the damage being done to Ireland? I only ever hear them talk about the UK.


  • #9454
    First Up
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,823 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    Leroy42 wrote: »
    And on the €39bn, what do those that call for it to be withheld think is going to happen?

    That the EU will simply write it off? They will forget about?

    It will be very first thing on the table in any future FTA negotiations.

    On a different point, I thought the real JRM was on display for all to see yesterday. He quite ludicrous claims about payroll members of the party voting for TM and her now having to go because of convention.

    He has been shown to be completely out of his depth, a man great at talking and tbf he is very capable debater and performer, but he had his shot, he led the tories up this hill and totally failed to deliver.

    Everything is a vast conspiracy to him. The very fact that he stated on live national TC that the members of the Tory party will always vote based on how much they are paid rather than what is best for their constituency or the country is quite remarkable.
    JRM has a distinctive style of dress. His suits and coats all look as if they were made in the 1950's. That is appropriate as it's where his understanding of the world seems to have been made too. Neither has been updated since.


  • #9455
    swampgas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,587 ✭✭✭swampgas


    Leroy42 wrote: »
    On a different point, I thought the real JRM was on display for all to see yesterday. He quite ludicrous claims about payroll members of the party voting for TM and her now having to go because of convention.

    If he's going to claim that MPs are voting a particular way because they are compromised by the prospect of personal financial gain, surely the interviewer should have turned that back on JRM himself?

    He can hardly claim to be financially disinterested in Brexit.

    (Not that doesn't have enough brass neck to do so regardless).


  • #9456
    Leroy42
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,846 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    I haven't heard or read any with a couple of notable exceptions. Who are they and when did they acknowledge and apologise for the damage being done to Ireland? I only ever hear them talk about the UK.

    Ah ok, you didn't mention the word apologise in the first post.

    JRM has consistently talked about Ireland needing to get on board with the UK to stave of the effects on Ireland.
    Dodds, Wilson and other DUPers have used it sonsistently.
    Only recently Patel claimed the UK should use the threat of starvation to break Ireland's resolve.
    There are plenty more.


  • Advertisement
  • #9457
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,385 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    Leroy42 wrote: »
    Ah ok, you didn't mention the word apologise in the first post.

    JRM has consistently talked about Ireland needing to get on board with the UK to stave of the effects on Ireland.
    Dodds, Wilson and other DUPers have used it sonsistently.
    Only recently Patel claimed the UK should use the threat of starvation to break Ireland's resolve.
    There are plenty more.

    I meant 'acknowledge' as in admit. There are lots of extremists in Britain who would be very happy to threaten and bully Ireland.


  • #9458
    funkey_monkey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,524 ✭✭✭funkey_monkey


    Heard IDS on Sky News this morning stating that TM should tell the EU that "if they want a deal then they need to step up to the plate".

    If it wasn't so serious, it would be funny.


  • #9459
    Leroy42
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,846 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    They should ask people like IDS what they would trade for the backstop (not that it is even remotely available but just to see what their plan is).

    Would they be prepared to accept FoM for €39bn? If the UK want a exit from Backstop would they be prepared to agree to continued ECJ rulings?

    They are never asked what they are looking for and prepared to give up. Would fishing right be worth the backstop? What about Gibraltar? How about giving that back to Spain in return for a FTA?


  • #9460
    Water John
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,808 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    JRM put it badly, but Soubry put it correctly, TM lost the majority of her back benchers. We can thank Grieve and Millar that Parliament now has the option of extending Art 50 and also forcing a 2nd Ref.


  • #9461
    monkeybutter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,903 ✭✭✭monkeybutter


    Jeez, the people on here need to stop losing their heads

    This is how deals are done, last minute through the night nothing actually getting thrashed out in the 2 years prior to this

    Then you get a **** compromise and no ones happy in the end

    EU : we are not for turning

    TM : I need something I can sell to Parliament

    .....

    rinse repeat

    fudge


    It's great that North is the gift that just keeps giving, the great fudge that it was in the first place, a thorn in the side that basically no one wants now

    Everyone saw the last GE as being a massive mistake. It shows what a poor leader she is that she let that happen. Give the people a mandate, the people don't have a clue what they want, look at the referendum

    Coming back and trying to pass that vote the other day makes her look like a fool

    Just wait it out, it certainly won't be that big a disaster if they don't get a deal, which they will, the EU need the UK as much as the UK needs the EU


  • Advertisement
  • #9462
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,385 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    Leroy42 wrote: »
    They should ask people like IDS what they would trade for the backstop (not that it is even remotely available but just to see what their plan is).

    Would they be prepared to accept FoM for €39bn? If the UK want a exit from Backstop would they be prepared to agree to continued ECJ rulings?

    They are never asked what they are looking for and prepared to give up. Would fishing right be worth the backstop? What about Gibraltar? How about giving that back to Spain in return for a FTA?

    Here's the thing about IDS, Jacob, Boris et al. They are all hurlers on the ditch. Not one of them has put forward a credible alternative plan. Instead, they snipe from the margins (facilitated by inordinate airtime) with emotional rhetoric that dog whistles latent English nationalism. They have nothing positive to offer Britain, instead they selfishly pursue their impossible and self-indulgent fantasy as not one of them them will ever see a poor day in or out of Europe. They are despicable.


  • #9463
    Leroy42
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,846 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    Another good point in the Guardian podcast was about the A50 extension/cancellation.

    Legally it is possible, but the EU will want to know that it is for the chance to remain, rather than simply to buy time. So it will not be enough to simply cancel A50 within the HoC, (well technically it will but not in terms of any agreement with the EU) but for what purpose?

    The HoC is nowhere near agreeing to either cancel Brexit or have a 2nd ref. And I don't see it getting there in the time left.

    So any extension will probably mean the current WA is taken off the table, as it will be choice between remain or crash out.


  • #9464
    CelticRambler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,912 ✭✭✭CelticRambler


    listermint wrote: »
    Peregrinus wrote: »
    They haven't been destroyed by freedom of movement. But to the extend that they think or can be led to think that they have, that accounts for their support for Brexit.

    The people that believe that guff never worked or wanted to on the first place.


    Benefit Street..

    My MiL has never been on benefits in her life, but she voted Leave on account of immigrants. Mind you, her daughter married an Irishman, one of her sons married a Romanian and the next married a South African ... :rolleyes:

    But you only have to look at/listen to the vox pop interviews on Sky and other broadcast media for innumerable examples of middle-aged/older white English citing "immigrants" as why leaving the EU is a good idea. In their minds, every advantage of being in the EU is outweighed by "immigrants" for no reason other than, well ... "immigrants".

    It makes no sense, but it's not unique to the English either: I've met many a Frenchman who refuses to let me label myself as an immigrant in France, even though I'm a non-national working in a job that could have gone to a pure-blooded Frog. :D


  • #9465
    Thatnastyboy
    Registered Users Posts: 1,254 ✭✭✭Thatnastyboy


    The British have been straight up tricked into this, they got the racists out to vote as they were sick of "the darkies" coming and taking their jobs, little did they seem to know that most of the folk they have issues with come from outside the EU...

    My welsh friend, who actually works in an EU funded national park - voted leave, As he figured less immigration would let him have a chance to get a better job, now his job is about to be axed, ironic, and I'd love to rub it in, but he's a good guy who was fooled by populism and soundbytes,


    In reality - They've all been completely duped by the man who's Dad literally wrote the book on disaster capitalism.

    (Thanks to the good folk in this thread for educating me on the Rees Mogg, although it's abhorrent behaviour - it's somewhat nice to see that there is a form of logic and reasoning for their viewpoint, otherwise it was just anarchy for the sake of it)


  • #9466
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    monkeybutter wrote: »
    Just wait it out, it certainly won't be that big a disaster if they don't get a deal, which they will, the EU need the UK as much as the UK needs the EU


    They already got a deal, and since it certainly will be a colossal disaster if they leave without signing it, they are either going to sign it or they are not going to leave.


  • #9467
    10000maniacs
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,092 ✭✭✭10000maniacs


    Leroy42 wrote: »
    Ah ok, you didn't mention the word apologise in the first post.

    JRM has consistently talked about Ireland needing to get on board with the UK to stave of the effects on Ireland.
    Dodds, Wilson and other DUPers have used it sonsistently.
    Only recently Patel claimed the UK should use the threat of starvation to break Ireland's resolve.
    There are plenty more.

    I love the way Moggs tone switched from passive aggressive (normal JRM) to aggressive with a Sky journalist when he realized May had survived.


  • #9468
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71,190 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    10000maniacs wrote: »
    I love the way Moggs tone switched from passive aggressive to aggressive with a Sky journalist when he realized May had survived.

    I find it hard to believe he would have been surprised that she survived. I think his game is to keep chipping away at her until she collapses and he is certainly achieving in that respect. She has had to concede that she is stepping down which makes her a lame duck really.


  • #9469
    First Up
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,823 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    monkeybutter wrote: »
    Jeez, the people on here need to stop losing their heads

    This is how deals are done, last minute through the night nothing actually getting thrashed out in the 2 years prior to this

    Then you get a **** compromise and no ones happy in the end

    EU : we are not for turning

    TM : I need something I can sell to Parliament

    .....

    rinse repeat

    fudge


    It's great that North is the gift that just keeps giving, the great fudge that it was in the first place, a thorn in the side that basically no one wants now

    Everyone saw the last GE as being a massive mistake. It shows what a poor leader she is that she let that happen. Give the people a mandate, the people don't have a clue what they want, look at the referendum

    Coming back and trying to pass that vote the other day makes her look like a fool

    Just wait it out, it certainly won't be that big a disaster if they don't get a deal, which they will, the EU need the UK as much as the UK needs the EU

    Eh, the deal HAS been done. The fact that the HoC doesn't like it is the UK's problem, not the EU's.

    If any midnight oil, more horse trading or compromise is needed it will be in Westminster, not Brussels. Nobody in the EU needs lose any sleep.

    And the EU does NOT need the UK as much as the UK needs it. In fact most of the EU has already moved on and planned for the future. That includes the German auto industry, which the more delusional Brexiteers still expect to save their bacon.


  • #9470
    10000maniacs
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,092 ✭✭✭10000maniacs


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    I find it hard to believe he would have been surprised that she survived. I think his game is to keep chipping away at her until she collapses and he is certainly achieving in that respect. She has had to concede that she is stepping down which makes her a lame duck really.
    I think he wanted it to be closer.


  • #9471
    Alun
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,496 ✭✭✭✭Alun


    CelticRambler wrote: »
    It makes no sense, but it's not unique to the English either: I've met many a Frenchman who refuses to let me label myself as an immigrant in France, even though I'm a non-national working in a job that could have gone to a pure-blooded Frog. :D
    I used to get that all the time in the Netherlands when I pulled people up on racist comments. Apparently I was "different" somehow.


  • Advertisement
  • #9472
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 40,226 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    CelticRambler wrote: »
    My MiL has never been on benefits in her life, but she voted Leave on account of immigrants. Mind you, her daughter married an Irishman, one of her sons married a Romanian and the next married a South African ... :rolleyes:

    But you only have to look at/listen to the vox pop interviews on Sky and other broadcast media for innumerable examples of middle-aged/older white English citing "immigrants" as why leaving the EU is a good idea. In their minds, every advantage of being in the EU is outweighed by "immigrants" for no reason other than, well ... "immigrants".

    It makes no sense, but it's not unique to the English either: I've met many a Frenchman who refuses to let me label myself as an immigrant in France, even though I'm a non-national working in a job that could have gone to a pure-blooded Frog. :D

    It does and it doesn't.

    People here have been drip-fed a narrative for decades based on the unscrupulous Schrodinger's immigrant who is simultaneously here to steal both your jobs and your benefits. It was hubris on David Cameron's part to think that he could win a remain vote against this backdrop.

    The evidence for EU migrants directly contradicts this narrative but it's in the interests of oligarchs, press barons, fund managers, etc to convince people to be afraid because fear virtually disables one's critical thinking faculties. Then there's the fact that there was almost no competing narrative for many people before the internet. They got everything from the papers they bought for the sports section, the TV guide or because a family member bought it and was done with it.

    The vote to leave was inversely proportional with how many immigrants lived in a specific ward. London voted to stay being one of the most diverse cities in the world. Conversely, rural areas in the Southeast voted leave despite having much lower levels of immigration. Youngsters who had the advantage of having a much better pool of information to draw on decided not to vote for various reasons while those who were convinced that the EU was an attempt at a Merkel-led Fourth Reich and that they were tricked into voting for it based on it being a mere trading bloc did turn out.

    I remember a friend driving me to Dover for a way out. We passed through several small towns and Vote Leave posters outstripped Britain Stronger In Europe ones by a considerable margin. A friend of my aunt's voted to leave based on there being "too many n*****s" in London. Anecdotes of course but the narrative of the rapacious foreigner has set in deep. I'm not saying that its insurmountable but I think it's important to realise just how entrenched this view is if the divisions in British society are ever to heal despite the vested interests very much trying to deepen them.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • #9473
    Leroy42
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,846 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    The German parliament certainly doesn't appear to be in the mood for renegotiation

    https://twitter.com/jennyhillBBC/status/1073166886249091075


  • #9474
    Akrasia
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,725 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    She's a lame duck with immunity from being challenged by her own party for 12 months.
    It's a farce

    I think Ian Dunt described her as 'a lame duck encased in concrete'

    As we stand today we have May in power with the 'confidence' of her party but with her primary piece of policy being opposed by the entire opposition and a significant chunk of her own party.

    She can't get anything done and she is running out of time to do it.

    Its only a matter of time now before Labour issue a motion of no confidence in the government and try to have a general election, but I don't think the EU should allow an extension to Article 50 if Labour campaign on the platform of renegotiating the deal that the EU already consider to be negotiated.
    So they'll have a choice to either campaign on offering a 2nd referendum, or campaign on withdrawing Article 50


  • #9475
    Inquitus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,762 ✭✭✭✭Inquitus


    Akrasia wrote: »
    She's a lame duck with immunity from being challenged by her own party for 12 months.
    It's a farce

    I think Ian Dunt described her as 'a lame duck encased in concrete'

    The thing is from an Irish perspective she's better than all the Tory alternatives as it stands, if she goes we likely get a Brexiteer, or even Brexit Extremist.


  • #9476
    EdgeCase
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,471 ✭✭✭EdgeCase


    Looking at the analysis this morning, there's still a huge problem with May's security of tenure. There's likely to be a parliamentary motion of no confidence when (and I don't think it's if) she comes back with assurances from the EU that won't be accepted by the ERG and DUP.

    The best the EU will offer to her is some kind of words of comfort type text.

    I think you're looking at a general election in January.


  • #9477
    Leroy42
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,846 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    Inquitus wrote: »
    The thing is from an Irish perspective she's better than all the Tory alternatives as it stands, if she goes we likely get a Brexiteer, or even Brexit Extremist.

    I don't buy that. What difference would a 'true' brexiteer have made?

    They are hurtling towards No deal, at the very least TM has delayed that from being the only route. The likes of Johnson etc would probably have triggered no deal at this stage.

    TM has been woeful in many respects, but in terms of the actual deal that she managed to get from the EU I think she did pretty well. Apart from those decrying the backstop, I have yet to hear any cogent argument about what is wrong with the current deal (as opposed to not liking parts of it) and what changes they would realistically make.

    Try harder is not really a policy.


  • #9478
    murphaph
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,038 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    Leroy42 wrote: »
    The German parliament certainly doesn't appear to be in the mood for renegotiation

    https://twitter.com/jennyhillBBC/status/1073166886249091075
    This country understands the issues of a land border dividing two parts of the same country/island. The backstop is backed up wholeheartedly by Germany. Heiko Maas reiterated this commitment yesterday on German radio.


  • #9479
    Infini
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,573 ✭✭✭Infini


    There's also one other thing to consider as well: She's said she wont contest the next general election. If Labour submit's a No Confidence Motion those 117 could vote against their own party in order to force her out by an election even if it's risking their seats as well.


  • #9480
    First Up
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,823 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    Leroy42 wrote: »
    Inquitus wrote: »
    The thing is from an Irish perspective she's better than all the Tory alternatives as it stands, if she goes we likely get a Brexiteer, or even Brexit Extremist.

    I don't buy that. What difference would a 'true' brexiteer have made?

    They are hurtling towards No deal, at the very least TM has delayed that from being the only route. The likes of Johnson etc would probably have triggered no deal at this stage.

    TM has been woeful in many respects, but in terms of the actual deal that she managed to get from the EU I think she did pretty well. Apart from those decrying the backstop, I have yet to hear any cogent argument about what is wrong with the current deal (as opposed to not liking parts of it) and what changes they would realistically make.

    Try harder is not really a policy.
    I suppose there is a chance that the Brexiteers might eventually accept reality from one of their own but there's a few more chapters of the pantomime to go before that happens.

    May will probably throw in the towel at some point anyway.


  • Advertisement
  • #9481
    seamus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Related, the UK Supreme Court today ruled that part of a Scottish parliament bill was effectively unenforceable because it attempts to supersede Westminster.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-46522969

    Basically the Scottish parliament passed a pre-emptive bill effectively transcribing EU law into Scottish law. The Withdrawal Act passed by Westminster after this, conflicts (partially) with it. The UK SC ruled today that Scottish law cannot supersede or disable the laws made by Westminster, so that part of the Scottish Act is not valid.

    It seems to be downplayed by the UK media, but Nicola Sturgeon has actually welcomed this ruling as "vindicating" the bill passed by Scotland. I'm guessing what she means is that, "This ruling proves that Scotland was right to pass this bill, because we knew Westminster would screw us over".

    These are the little things that will drive the push for Scottish independence. Nothing to get the Gaelic blood boiling like being told what you can't do. I'd say we're looking at a second indyref in 2019, with or without Westminster's assent.


  • #9482
    Laois_Man
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,758 ✭✭✭Laois_Man


    seamus wrote: »
    I'm no fan of May, but to claim that the merits of the Brexit deal depend on who is presenting it, is to ignore the fact that there are some for whom no deal will ever be good enough.

    Except I didn't make any such claim. I said a decent PM who had kept a 20+ point opinion poll lead on the day the election was called, and not let it whittle down to a 3 point lead by election day, would have seen such a lead translate to a majority of approx. 110 in parliament (the reason she called the snap election in the first place), and which is why it would have been far easier to get something thru the house of commons. Not because Teresa May was the one presenting it.


  • #9483
    intellectual dosser
    Registered Users Posts: 1,837 ✭✭✭intellectual dosser


    Akrasia wrote: »
    Its only a matter of time now before Labour issue a motion of no confidence in the government and try to have a general election, but I don't think the EU should allow an extension to Article 50 if Labour campaign on the platform of renegotiating the deal that the EU already consider to be negotiated.
    So they'll have a choice to either campaign on offering a 2nd referendum, or campaign on withdrawing Article 50

    This is where I get confused - what are Labour waiting for?

    If they wait until the new year, or even closer to March 29th then the electorate will tar them with the same brush as the Tories for wasting time and being completely impotent.


  • #9484
    Laois_Man
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,758 ✭✭✭Laois_Man


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    Farage & co. aren't going to riot, they will write grumpy letters to the Times and pretend to stop buying Champagne in protest.

    The funny thing about Farage is, behind it all - he wants to remain - or at least remain half in as per the current WA. He has made a career out of protesting against this stuff. He is already openly drawing up plans to form a new party to contest the European elections this coming May in the event that the UK are still in. If they get a hard Brexit, what would he do with himself for the rest of his life (besides go into hiding if things get really really bad)?


  • #9485
    hill16bhoy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,029 ✭✭✭hill16bhoy


    Gavin Esler made a good point on the Sean O'Rourke Show on RTE Radio 1 this morning.

    If people think a second referendum will be "divisive", how divisive would it be that a deal that few want is pushed through by a zombie Prime Minister in charge of a total shambles of a government?

    How divisive would a no deal Brexit be?

    How divisive would economic chaos and massive job losses be?

    How divisive was the referendum in the first place?

    Remember, the Brexiteers are the people who pushed to introduce division in the first place.

    Their "solutions" are the most divisive of all.

    But there is no solution which will not be massively divisive.

    I wouldn't normally give any praise to Margaret Thatcher, but she does deserve praise for opposing the introduction of the concept of a referendum in British politics in 1975, because she foresaw that a referendum such as this one could lead to chaos.

    That genie is out of the bottle now, however. The least worst solution there is now, is to hold a second referendum which overturns the result of the first.


  • #9486
    Laois_Man
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,758 ✭✭✭Laois_Man


    Infini wrote: »
    There's also one other thing to consider as well: She's said she wont contest the next general election. If Labour submit's a No Confidence Motion those 117 could vote against their own party in order to force her out by an election even if it's risking their seats as well.

    No, what she actually said was she won't contest the next scheduled General Election which is in 2022

    She's being sly and underhanded again - she knows there isn't a snowballs hope in hell of this Government lasting til 2022!


  • Advertisement
  • #9487
    flatty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,225 ✭✭✭flatty


    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    She also apologised to the Irish people for Tory behaviour over the past two years and its effect on Ireland. One of very few British politicians to acknowledge the fact that Brexit will damage Ireland.

    Well she knows one paddy at least.


  • #9488
    hill16bhoy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,029 ✭✭✭hill16bhoy


    EdgeCase wrote: »
    Looking at the analysis this morning, there's still a huge problem with May's security of tenure. There's likely to be a parliamentary motion of no confidence when (and I don't think it's if) she comes back with assurances from the EU that won't be accepted by the ERG and DUP.

    The best the EU will offer to her is some kind of words of comfort type text.

    I think you're looking at a general election in January.
    But with a Corbyn government, it's basically a case of pass the parcel, given that Corbyn's stated strategy is the same unicorns in the sky stuff that May is currently carrying out by looking for a renegotiation of the deal.

    Unless Corbyn can be persuaded by the vast bulk of opinion within his party that a second referendum is needed, what changes?

    And what happens if an election produces a similar result to 2017, because it could easily do so?


  • #9489
    Inquitus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,762 ✭✭✭✭Inquitus


    hill16bhoy wrote: »
    Gavin Esler made a good point on the Sean O'Rourke Show on RTE Radio 1 this morning.

    If people think a second referendum will be "divisive", how divisive would it be that a deal that few want is pushed through by a zombie Prime Minister in charge of a total shambles of a government?

    How divisive would a no deal Brexit be?

    How divisive would economic chaos and massive job losses be?

    How divisive was the referendum in the first place?

    Remember, the Brexiteers are the people who pushed to introduce division in the first place.

    Their "solutions" are the most divisive of all.

    But there is no solution which will not be massively divisive.

    I wouldn't normally give any praise to Margaret Thatcher, but she does deserve praise for opposing the introduction of the concept of a referendum in British politics in 1975, because she foresaw that a referendum such as this one could lead to chaos.

    That genie is out of the bottle now, however. The least worst solution there is now, is to hold a second referendum which overturns the result of the first.

    You make a good point, all of the available options are divisive, which is why a 2nd referendum should not be ruled out on that basis. I think its the best way forward, but it could be a crap shoot.


  • #9490
    Charles Babbage
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,040 ✭✭✭Charles Babbage


    seamus wrote: »
    Related, the UK Supreme Court today ruled that part of a Scottish parliament bill was effectively unenforceable because it attempts to supersede Westminster.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-46522969

    Basically the Scottish parliament passed a pre-emptive bill effectively transcribing EU law into Scottish law. The Withdrawal Act passed by Westminster after this, conflicts (partially) with it. The UK SC ruled today that Scottish law cannot supersede or disable the laws made by Westminster, so that part of the Scottish Act is not valid.

    It seems to be downplayed by the UK media, but Nicola Sturgeon has actually welcomed this ruling as "vindicating" the bill passed by Scotland. I'm guessing what she means is that, "This ruling proves that Scotland was right to pass this bill, because we knew Westminster would screw us over".

    These are the little things that will drive the push for Scottish independence. Nothing to get the Gaelic blood boiling like being told what you can't do. I'd say we're looking at a second indyref in 2019, with or without Westminster's assent.


    The most recent poll in Scotland shows 47% if Brexit is cancelled, 53% for independence if Brexit goes ahead with deal and 57% if there is no deal. I'd say that London will further aggravate Scotland in the next 6 months.


  • #9491
    flatty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,225 ✭✭✭flatty


    Infini wrote: »
    There's also one other thing to consider as well: She's said she wont contest the next general election. If Labour submit's a No Confidence Motion those 117 could vote against their own party in order to force her out by an election even if it's risking their seats as well.

    She actually said she didn't intend to, not won't. Michael D used not standing for a second term as a major plank in his election campaign, and still noone raised an eyebrow when surprise surprise he changed his mind.


  • Advertisement
  • #9492
    hill16bhoy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,029 ✭✭✭hill16bhoy


    Inquitus wrote: »
    You make a good point, all of the available options are divisive, which is why a 2nd referendum should not be ruled out on that basis. I think its the best way forward, but it could be a crap shoot.
    It would be massively divisive.

    And people shouldn't kid themselves - all the disinformation and hateful rhetoric that was there before would be there again.

    But at least the question would be more defined than before.

    And crucially, it offers a way out of the mess. There would be an almighty mess to clean up at the end of it, but it still offers a legitimate way out of that mess.

    Nothing else does.


  • #9493
    hill16bhoy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,029 ✭✭✭hill16bhoy


    flatty wrote: »
    She actually said she didn't intend to, not won't. Michael D used not standing for a second term as a major plank in his election campaign, and still noone raised an eyebrow when surprise surprise he changed his mind.

    Yeah but Michael D. wasn't leading a party and was contesting a position which has no power.

    Realistically, there's no way May could possibly last beyond 2021 at the very latest.


  • #9494
    Tell me how
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,493 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    hill16bhoy wrote: »
    It would be massively divisive.

    And people shouldn't kid themselves - all the disinformation and hateful rhetoric that was there before would be there again.

    But at least the question would be more defined than before.

    And crucially, it offers a way out of the mess. There would be an almighty mess to clean up at the end of it, but it still offers a legitimate way out of that mess.

    Nothing else does.

    There is a lot more evidence which would refute the claims originally made such as "The day after Brexit we hold all the cards", "Negotiating trade deals will be the easiest thing in the world", "£350M per week can go to the NHS", "We will be talking directly with Berlin, not Brussels" and so on.

    There is a deal on the table, there can be no pipe dreams of what might be under the rainbow.


  • #9495
    johnnyskeleton
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 14,539 Mod ✭✭✭✭johnnyskeleton


    Mod note:

    New thread open for business:

    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=108871795#post108871795

    This thread will remain open for the next 24 hours or so to continue with the last few disccussions. To start the new thread, it would be great if people can give a summary of their views to date to get the ball rolling over there!


  • #9496
    Enzokk
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,815 ✭✭✭Enzokk


    Water John wrote: »
    Parliament, except 60 Brexiteers won't countenance a Crash out Brexit. Parliament will extend Art 50.
    Water John wrote: »
    JRM put it badly, but Soubry put it correctly, TM lost the majority of her back benchers. We can thank Grieve and Millar that Parliament now has the option of extending Art 50 and also forcing a 2nd Ref.

    Article 50 can only be extended with with the consent of the EU so even if they wanted to it is not clear if this will happen. Parliament can vote for anything but with regards to article 50 there has to be agreement with the EU for most things, other than cancelling it.

    seamus wrote: »
    Related, the UK Supreme Court today ruled that part of a Scottish parliament bill was effectively unenforceable because it attempts to supersede Westminster.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-46522969

    Basically the Scottish parliament passed a pre-emptive bill effectively transcribing EU law into Scottish law. The Withdrawal Act passed by Westminster after this, conflicts (partially) with it. The UK SC ruled today that Scottish law cannot supersede or disable the laws made by Westminster, so that part of the Scottish Act is not valid.

    It seems to be downplayed by the UK media, but Nicola Sturgeon has actually welcomed this ruling as "vindicating" the bill passed by Scotland. I'm guessing what she means is that, "This ruling proves that Scotland was right to pass this bill, because we knew Westminster would screw us over".

    These are the little things that will drive the push for Scottish independence. Nothing to get the Gaelic blood boiling like being told what you can't do. I'd say we're looking at a second indyref in 2019, with or without Westminster's assent.


    The SNP is playing this very well it seems. They have learned from their earlier mistake in 2017 of pushing too much for another independence referendum. They seem to know the path the UK is on will mean the people in Scotland will push for it as much as they want it.


  • #9497
    briany
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,479 ✭✭✭✭briany


    Laois_Man wrote: »
    If they get a hard Brexit, what would he do with himself for the rest of his life (besides go into hiding if things get really really bad)?

    Well, he can do many things. He can learn Indian cooking, how to dance the tango, write a memoir, sail around the Cape of Good Hope, finally watch The Wire, eat a chicken kiev *in* Kiev, learn the cello, gain and lose 200 pounds, manage a Sunday league football team, set the time on the VCR, set the time on the microwave, talk long luxurious morning walks, feed the ducks, go to concerts, go to movies, play Brain Training on the Nintendo DS, learn to fly a 747, keep some coturnix quail, darn socks, online shopping, an Open University course, give blood, charity work, be a shopping centre Santa, woodworking, computer programming, and brewing beer.

    Anything that keeps him busy and off TV, really.


  • #9498
    Wheres Me Jumper?
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,288 ✭✭✭Wheres Me Jumper?


    i personally think the whole border issue has been overblown.

    does anyone REALLY care if you had to show your passport or some other form of ID on those biannual trips to NI to buy your cheap booze?


  • #9499
    Thatnastyboy
    Registered Users Posts: 1,254 ✭✭✭Thatnastyboy


    Wheres Me Jumper? wrote: »
    i personally think the whole border issue has been overblown.

    does anyone REALLY care if you had to show your passport or some other form of ID on those biannual trips to NI to buy your cheap booze?



    The folk who's homes & businesses straddle the border might have something to say about it being 'overblown', and I wager they do REALLY care.


  • #9500
    Ted_YNWA
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71,802 ✭✭✭✭Ted_YNWA


    Enzokk wrote:
    Article 50 can only be extended with with the consent of the EU so even if they wanted to it is not clear if this will happen. Parliament can vote for anything but with regards to article 50 there has to be agreement with the EU for most things, other than cancelling it.

    The first thing the EU will ask is "Why, what do you want the time for." if extension is ask. TM would need to provide a clear plan for what the time will be used for, not vague waffle.

    Faffing around like the past 2+ years is the most likely result.


  • #9501
    DOCARCH
    Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 18,306 Mod ✭✭✭✭DOCARCH


    Wheres Me Jumper? wrote: »
    i personally think the whole border issue has been overblown.

    does anyone REALLY care if you had to show your passport or some other form of ID on those biannual trips to NI to buy your cheap booze?

    Naive to think that the only people who cross the border are on cheap booze trips!

    Aside from business, and people who live/work either side of the border, there are families whose kids go to school the other side of the border.

    Passport checks on the way to school/work may be a little inconvenient.


  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement