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 VI

johnnyskeleton

Hi folks, as Theresa May has won the vote of no confidence and we are heading into Brexit day early next year, I thought for the new thread people might give their summary of their views on Brexit to date before we get into the more day to day discussions.

So what do you think about what has happened so far? Who has come off well, who has come off badly?

Where do you think Brexit is going? What is going to be the likely impact on Ireland, Northern Ireland, the rest of the U.K. and the E.U. respectively?

Both this thread and the Mark V thread will remain open simultaneously for the next day or so and Mark V will be closed as it gets closer to the server busting 10,000 mark. Hopefully we can set down a solid foundation now for a top quality thread to come!

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

RobMc59

Just my opinion but the rhetoric seems to be becoming increasingly extreme by the hour-sniping at each other doesn't help the situation.

demfad

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Yes, but May's deal is dead in the water. What matters between now and April is what most MPs want, not what May wants.

May's deal is not dead yet in my opinion. If the disfunction continues the end state may be the one of least resistance (requires least work)

1. No Deal
2. Revoke
3. May's Deal

FreudianSlippers

May's deal is the only deal.

Tell me how

demfad wrote: »

May's deal is not dead yet in my opinion. If the disfunction continues the end state may be the one of least resistance (requires least work)

1. No Deal
2. Revoke
3. May's Deal

Watching Question Time last night as well as a lot of UK media over the last few days, I fear unless Corbyn gets his finger out, they will exit with a No deal before May's deal is accepted.

If this was happening anytime up to 2 hundred years ago, the outcome would be civil war. I think the division and emotion involved is that deep.

Silent Running

demfad wrote: »

May's deal is not dead yet in my opinion. If the disfunction continues the end state may be the one of least resistance (requires least work)

1. No Deal
2. Revoke
3. May's Deal

Well, the one that requires least work is a crash out no deal. It requires absolutely nothing to be done. Just wait out the clock.

Adamcp898

Infini wrote: »

It could also be argued the whole Brexit fiasco as well as how Stormont has been collapsed and not running all this time is also a breach of the GFA and its been primarily on the British side. If anything if a reunification movement were to emerge in the months following Brexit we would be well within our rights to demand such a poll because of the dual factors of it being part of the GFA AND because it would remove the only land border between the UK and EU if successful.

The only problem will be the shytstirrers from the DUP who helped cause the mess but they should be handled by quite simply taking the kid gloves off and holding them to account with hard facts.

No. The problem (not the only, just the major one) with what you've just outlined is that it would be an extremely antagonistic way to try and force a United Ireland and could lead to huge amount of unrest and violence.

Seth Brundle

So the main opposition in the UK is as divided as the government. Apparently if Corbyn pushes for a second referendum, Labour could lose twelve from his frontbench because of fear of voter reprisals (linky).
So what now?
The government have no leadership and the members cannot unite on a single stance.
Hopefully I'm wrong but I can't see May having a plan B ready for Monday.
The opposition aren't united and facing in one direction.
Is the UK just going to stumble it's way to March 29th?

Dyr

Adamcp898 wrote: »

No. The problem (not the only, just the major one) with what you've just outlined is that it would be an extremely antagonistic way to try and force a United Ireland and could lead to huge amount of unrest and violence.

The problem with Northern Ireland is we've always been willing to let a minority have their way for fear of them wrecking the place otherwise.

That nettle has to be grasped at some stage

Adamcp898

Bambi wrote: »

The problem with Northern Ireland is we've always been willing to let a minority have their way for fear of them wrecking the place otherwise.

That nettle has to be grasped at some stage

Which is currently a republican one, no?

The North at the moment is polarised and dysfunctional enough as it is given the lack of a sitting assembly and any dialogue between the two largest parties. To suggest forcing a United Ireland on top of that would just be plain stupid.

First Up

Seth Brundle wrote:

). So what now? The government have no leadership and the members cannot unite on a single stance. Hopefully I'm wrong but I can't see May having a plan B ready for Monday. The opposition aren't united and facing in one direction. Is the UK just going to stumble it's way to March 29th?

Looks that way. Best hope is they beg for mercy and more time but its hard to see UK politics coming up with a solution without a complete breakdown and reconstruction of the party system and probably at least a couple of leadership changes and elections.

5-10 years of hard Brexit and then we'll see if they can come to their senses. The commercial word has already taken this to be the reality and has moved on.

MrMusician18

Seth Brundle wrote: »

So the main opposition in the UK is as divided as the government. Apparently if Corbyn pushes for a second referendum, Labour could lose twelve from his frontbench because of fear of voter reprisals (linky).
So what now?
The government have no leadership and the members cannot unite on a single stance.
Hopefully I'm wrong but I can't see May having a plan B ready for Monday.
The opposition aren't united and facing in one direction.
Is the UK just going to stumble it's way to March 29th?

I think it's for reasons such as this that the opprobrium directed towards Corbyn on the second ref is perhaps a little unfair.

Christy42

RobMc59 wrote: »

Just my opinion but the rhetoric seems to be becoming increasingly extreme by the hour-sniping at each other doesn't help the situation.

To be fair the Germans sent a letter saying that they liked the Brits and were sorry they are going but respect their decision.

The BBC referred to it as "pleading".

What are you meant to do with that. If you are nice they call you weak. If you are not nice they call you a bully.

Will we see a reciprocal letter from the Brits? Somehow I doubt it.

VinLieger

MrMusician18 wrote: »

I think it's for reasons such as this that the opprobrium directed towards Corbyn on the second ref is perhaps a little unfair.

Not when a majority of the Labour party members voted for it at the party conference and he continues to ignore it.

Dyr

Adamcp898 wrote: »

Which is currently a republican one, no?

The North at the moment is polarised and dysfunctional enough as it is given the lack of a sitting assembly and any dialogue between the two largest parties. To suggest forcing a United Ireland on top of that would just be plain stupid.

Nope, it's the minority that led to the creation of NI in the first place, we've seen various Irish politicians telling us that a 51% majority for a UI in a border poll is not enough. It's always coming back to keeping a subset of unionism from going Balubas a la Sunningdale.

Leroy42

But tbf, if the front bench of his party is threatening to resign if he calls for a 2ndRef then it isn't just about Corbyn. Clearly there are many others in the party that want to leave as well.

All those Labour supporters calling for movement should instead be looking at other areas to support, like the LibDems

FreudianSlippers

I doubt that the DUP would go for it, but if N.I. became an independent nation and was allowed to remain in the EU, they could also remain in the commonwealth and have a trade deal with Great Britain - problem solved?

(I mean obviously not, but just spit-balling)

Dyr

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I doubt that the DUP would go for it, but if N.I. became an independent nation and was allowed to remain in the EU, they could also remain in the commonwealth and have a trade deal with Great Britain - problem solved?

(I mean obviously not, but just spit-balling)

The DUP? Do you actually think Nationalists are going to go for the Orange Free State: Redux?

road_high

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I doubt that the DUP would go for it, but if N.I. became an independent nation and was allowed to remain in the EU, they could also remain in the commonwealth and have a trade deal with Great Britain - problem solved?

(I mean obviously not, but just spit-balling)

It would be funny watching them try survive in the real world without a London handout. Think Albania 1997..Will never happen though!

Adamcp898

Bambi wrote: »

Nope, it's the minority that led to the creation of NI in the first place, we've seen various Irish politicians telling us that a 51% majority for a UI in a border poll is not enough. It's always coming back to keeping a subset of unionism from going Balubas a la Sunningdale.

But yet you're willing to advocate the same line of reasoning now?

Anyway I'm not getting into a debate about the pros/cons of a UI. This is a discussion about Brexit, not wishful thinking :pac:

Panrich

This is very funny

https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1086264773149380608

wiggle16

Panrich wrote: »

This is very funny

https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1086264773149380608

It's actually maddening how shameless he is. In a f#cking JCB warehouse. Just so the reference to industry isn't lost on his dimmer supporters. Or if it is, they have all those big machines to gawp at.

I withdraw my previous comment about feeling sorry for the English for being duped. If they buy this performance then they deserve every minute of him.

jmayo

EdgeCase wrote: »

Just to clarify something from further up the thread. The IDA has been around since 1949. It's almost impossible to describe any post war Irish economic policy or activity without referencing it in some way.

It's probably the oldest organisation if it's type in existence and has been a template for many other countries' counterpart agencies.

...
Actually some of the Brexiteers should take a look at 1930s Ireland for an idea of where a policy of economic isolationism and politically driven ideologies of absolute self-sufficiency gets you.

It really wasn't until the T.K. Whitaker era that modern Ireland started to emerge. It took decades to get to where we are now, but that's where it started.

So to say that Ireland had great trade links before the IDA era is just not fact at all.....

Ehh since this was in response to me, I never said we had great trade links before IDA.
Being from a family plagued by multi generational emigration I know this all too well.

I said "we knew about the outside world long before the IDA started pimping us to the world."
That implies knowledge about places, not the fact we might have traded with them.
Unless you count emigrants sending funds home to their families as trade.

And we did have knowledge of the outside world in no small part thanks to that economic isolationism of that inward looking plonker Dev.
He would no doubt have been a big fan of Brexit.

Did anyone catch the weekly whinge fest that is Question Time ?
There are still a hell of a lot of Brits, particularly English, who really still think they are in the glory years.

jmayo

wiggle16 wrote: »

It's actually maddening how shameless he is. In a f#cking JCB warehouse. Just so the reference to industry isn't lost on his dimmer supporters. Or if it is, they have all those big machines to gawp at.

I withdraw my previous comment about feeling sorry for the English for being duped. If they buy this performance then they deserve every minute of him.

Ah come on be fair.

JCB is what is left of what was once a great indigenous British vehicle manufacturing industry.

The rest from their glory years, when they were even sometimes world leading design, have either disappeared entirely or have been bought up by foreigners.
And the shock and horror of it sometimes the foreigners hail from former colonies.

Next week he will be speaking from Morgan's plant.

Dyr

Adamcp898 wrote: »

But yet you're willing to advocate the same line of reasoning now?

Anyway I'm not getting into a debate about the pros/cons of a UI. This is a discussion about Brexit, not wishful thinking :pac:

Nope, Any change to the status of NI has to be with the consent of the NI electorate

I'm okay with that, you seem not be

Infini

Adamcp898 wrote: »

No. The problem (not the only, just the major one) with what you've just outlined is that it would be an extremely antagonistic way to try and force a United Ireland and could lead to huge amount of unrest and violence.

There could be civil unrest and violence anyways if a Hard Brexit occurs. Remember one thing: When you take away things from people weather its their legal rights, their funding, their economic prospects and so forth people in general tend to react poorly. Northern Ireland is going to get hammered in a no deal Brexit scenario and the DUP are one of the KEY primary culprits in all this. Their own party has refused to bring about restoration of Stormount for example, I know we could turn around and blame Sinn Fein as well but the DUP is in a position of power in Westminster and it suits them perfectly fine to keep it shut while at the same time spout on they represent all of NI when in fact they only represent their own interest which is ironically the opposite of NI who voted 56% to remain. It's pure opportunism on their part.

The problem is at some point people need to stop putting up with this carry on and start confronting them and their blatant lies. They talk about their union but their actions and their inability to grasp simple logic means they put their own self interests at risk. A United Ireland was decades away before Brexit and their actions by supporting Brexit a policy utterly self destructive to their own interests now means this could be a reality WITHIN a decade. It's that kind of illogical stupidity that shows you what kind of people you dealing with in that party. Lets also not forget about all those people who voted to remain as well as those unionist's buisnesses and farmers and such who are being thrown under the bus over this, a United Ireland isnt the perfect solution but right now it gives them an out from a British Government that is about to go down as the most incompetent and reckless in modern history.

Bambi wrote: »

Nope, Any change to the status of NI has to be with the consent of the NI electorate

I'm okay with that, you seem not be

To be honest the people of Northern Ireland didn't consent to actually leave the EU in fairness that was primarily England. Let's not forget a Hard Brexit scenario has polled a strong likelyhood of Public Support shifting SIGNIFICANTLY towards a United Ireland under a hard brexit scenario. This is the whole thing about a hard brexit: Scotland could push to secede as well over this and they would be hard pressed to deny NI that oppertunity as well.

J Mysterio

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I doubt that the DUP would go for it, but if N.I. became an independent nation and was allowed to remain in the EU, they could also remain in the commonwealth and have a trade deal with Great Britain - problem solved?

(I mean obviously not, but just spit-balling)

The DUP were offered NI in the EU single market while remaining part of UK and having full access to UK also. The last thing they want is Independence.

This whole thing is about their not wanting to be seperate from the UK in amy way (other than all the backward ways that suit them).

demfad

J Mysterio wrote: »

Newton Emerson coming up in Newstalk to tell us why 'the backstop backfired on Ireland'.

Here is a link to the Withdrawal agreement.

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/draft_withdrawal_agreement_0.pdf

ARTICLE 1

Objectives and relationship to subsequent agreement

1. This Protocol is without prejudice to the provisions of the 1998 Agreement regarding the constitutional status of Northern Ireland and the principle of consent, which provides that any change in that status can only be made with the consent of a majority of its people.

2. This Protocol respects the essential State functions and territorial integrity of the United Kingdom.

3. This Protocol sets out arrangements necessary to address the unique circumstances on the island of Ireland, maintain the necessary conditions for continued North-South cooperation, avoid a hard border and protect the 1998 Agreement in all its dimensions.

4. The objective of the Withdrawal Agreement is not to establish a permanent relationship between the Union and the United Kingdom. The provisions of this Protocol are therefore intended to apply only temporarily, taking into account the commitments of the Parties set out in Article 2(1). The provisions of this Protocol shall apply unless and until they are superseded, in whole or in part, by a subsequent agreement

As we can see from point 3: North South Cooperation AND a hard border is avoided AND the GFA are protected.

Emerson's argument is that the UK could impose a hard Brexit and not be in technical legal breach of the GFA and that the Irish are "mistaken" for believing this to be so. But the EU/UK/Irish don't suggest this: they define the backstop and it is defined in terms of THREE areas of protection only ONE of which is specifically described as being the GFA.

Note point 4. " Article 2(1). The provisions of this Protocol shall apply unless and until they are superseded, in whole or in part, by a subsequent agreement"

And this from point 3: "protect the 1998 Agreement in all its dimensions".

This means that the GFA is protected in all it's dimensions.
Not just in regard to the EU-UK future relationship but in regard to ANYTHING.
The GFA wont be harmed now, in the near future or at any point at all in the future until and if this part of the Protocol is replaced.
This is a de facto permanent protection of the GFA against Brexit or ANY OTHER danger in the future. Newton doesn't get this.

(This is why David Allen Greene of the FT said that the GFA now repalces the Magna Carta in importance for the UK.)

Havockk

J Mysterio wrote: »

The DUP were offered NI in the EU single market while remaining part of UK and having full access to UK also. The last thing they want is Independence.

This whole thing is about their not wanting to be seperate from the UK in amy way (other than all the backward ways that suit them).

I kind of disagree here. The DUP have always had the strand of 'Ulster Nationalism'. They could be swung for an independent state I believe however, as mentioned earlier I doubt many nationalists would ever go for that.

Adamcp898

Bambi wrote: »

Nope, Any change to the status of NI has to be with the consent of the NI electorate

I'm okay with that, you seem not be

This is what you said:

Bambi wrote: »

The problem with Northern Ireland is we've always been willing to let a minority have their way for fear of them wrecking the place otherwise.

That nettle has to be grasped at some stage

Then this:

Bambi wrote: »

Nope, it's the minority that led to the creation of NI in the first place, we've seen various Irish politicians telling us that a 51% majority for a UI in a border poll is not enough. It's always coming back to keeping a subset of unionism from going Balubas a la Sunningdale.

You're advocating the merging of NI with the RoI against the current unionist majority. Hardly anything as noble as respecting the "consent of the NI electorate".

And I haven't expressed any opinion other than that it's generally a bad idea to force anything on anyone, something which I thought would be fairly obvious, so I'm not sure what I'm meant to be "not okay" with either.

Emphasis mine.

Adamcp898

Infini wrote: »

There could be civil unrest and violence anyways if a Hard Brexit occurs. Remember one thing: When you take away things from people weather its their legal rights, their funding, their economic prospects and so forth people in general tend to react poorly. Northern Ireland is going to get hammered in a no deal Brexit scenario and the DUP are one of the KEY primary culprits in all this. Their own party has refused to bring about restoration of Stormount for example, I know we could turn around and blame Sinn Fein as well but the DUP is in a position of power in Westminster and it suits them perfectly fine to keep it shut while at the same time spout on they represent all of NI when in fact they only represent their own interest which is ironically the opposite of NI who voted 56% to remain. It's pure opportunism on their part.

The problem is at some point people need to stop putting up with this carry on and start confronting them and their blatant lies. They talk about their union but their actions and their inability to grasp simple logic means they put their own self interests at risk. A United Ireland was decades away before Brexit and their actions by supporting Brexit a policy utterly self destructive to their own interests now means this could be a reality WITHIN a decade. It's that kind of illogical stupidity that shows you what kind of people you dealing with in that party. Lets also not forget about all those people who voted to remain as well as those unionist's buisnesses and farmers and such who are being thrown under the bus over this, a United Ireland isnt the perfect solution but right now it gives them an out from a British Government that is about to go down as the most incompetent and reckless in modern history.

I think you're making the assumption though that enough people want to be a member of the EU more than they want to be a member of the United Kingdom.

An assumption that I'd be very wary of given how quickly we've watched the North become polarised again in the past two years after years and years of slowly moving towards a middle ground.