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

Dyr

downcow wrote: »

I would also worry about the UK going forward if this is overturned. we will be divided for decades and some nasty people will get support who would normally

Ah don't worry, the DUP won't run on the mainland

TBH I have a feeling a second referendum would in no way be a forgone conclusion for the remain side.

downcow

CelticRambler wrote: »

Does it help? No!

On the flip side, you have unfettered access to every part of the Republic of Ireland, you can play for any local or national Irish sports team, you can market yourself or your business or your exports as "Irish" and no-one will accuse you of false advertising.

You just don't get it that i am not Irish and would never ever describe myself as such. I am British and Norther Irish. I also fully recognise that some of my neighbours are Irish and Northern Irish or maybe all three or maybe none. You need to get out of the mindset that everyone in NI is Irish

Sam Russell

downcow wrote: »

GB is not a country anf there is no international border between NI and GB. I havent checked but i am pretty sure the two nations on the islands recognised by the UN are ROI and UK of GB & NI. and some of you are reading far to much into a name - the nation of the UK was formed by bringing together GB & NI and that is recognised in the name - I really like it that way and would hate to see that bit of history erased

and your second point is the arrogant bit that you need to let go of and i have no doubt you will at the 11th hour - you will need to work with us and not cut off your nose to spite your face (and i don't mean you personally - i mean your nation)

It is unfortunate that the GFA failed to identify the terms used in it.

1. The GFA is also known as the 'Belfast Agreement' by some.

2. The term for NI is also known as 'the Six Counties' or 'Ulster'.

3. The UK of GB and NI is referred to as 'Britain' by some and as 'England' by others.

Much confusion would be avoided if they had defined all terms in the agreement and that all parties would only use those definitions in any matters dealing with the GFA, particularly the two Governments.

It would also be helpful if the UK Gov had implemented regional assemblies in England equivalent to those in the rest of the UK.

prawnsambo

downcow wrote: »

To be really honest. here is my thoughts - uncensored
There is history which I think no of us can avoid. Some may pretend they are above it but I think it infects us deep in our thinking. and i could be wrong but my guess is that thats not just a northern problem but across the island - so much difficult history and we are all products of it.
So i don't want to rejoin ireland any more that many of you want roi to rejoin the 'kingdom'. So i suppose that is me admitting it is not all economic for me.

I think we all understand the feelings on both sides of the divide. This is what the GFA sought to address. And largely succeeded in doing. And like all such agreements, people on both sides were disgruntled by certain aspects of it, but in the main saw it as the best way forward. I think we can agree on that. So yes, economic arguments are maybe not as important, but they aren't far off either. Because economic recession has a habit of bringing other things to the surface.

downcow wrote: »

That said, I believe that the UK and EU and indeed UK & ROI are interdependant and stronger working together. I believe we are leaving the EU but I also believe that all parties mention firmly understand we will be better of working together and being supportive of each other.
I understand the EU need to play hard ball so as no one else considers leaving
I understand ROI need to play hard ball and use the border issue to their advantage to keep economic connections with UK
I understand NI needs to keep good solid economic connections with ROI (and more eg friends, culture, etc)
I understand UK needs to play hard ball and not just roll over to EU & ROI

I've pointed out above why the pov that this is an EU/ROI 'ploy' is untrue. People in NI brought it up during the referendum. Business people amongst others. It is an issue that should concern everyone involved, not just Ireland and the EU.

downcow wrote: »

That said I believe common sense will prevail at or after the 11th hour. The backstop will be watered down (or fudged) and we will all move on and build improving relationships in the years ahead. I don'r expect either poverty or the jackpot for UK or EU for that matter. I do also think ROI are in the shakiest position but trust that EU & UK will play ball and make it work in the end.

Probably setting myself up for a hammering but sure so be it

I have a profound difficulty in understanding why people feel the backstop is a bad idea. Foremost amongst those protesting it are the same people who have insisted that it won't be needed. And this is the crux of the matter. It won't be needed if those pushing for brexit are honest in their statements that they will agree something with the EU post brexit that will render a backstop unnecessary. To me, it's a non-issue and the backstop is an insurance policy that (providing the UK match their words with deeds) will never be called upon.

And that's the crux of it. The more screaming about the backstop, the less trust that it won't be needed.

LuckyLloyd

downcow wrote: »

There is serious whataboutery going on here.
I am simply stating what i understand as facts.
ie
1)to all intense and purpose the troubles are over and the current generation will not lend its support to another murderous sectarian campaign

You don't know what the current generation might do in a situation where there is a Hard Border reimposed and the UK / NI is thrown into a deep recession. Their will be a feeling of imposition and that will create the kind of motivations that existed before the GFA.

2) The UK voted out (regions swung both ways)

They voted "out", but "out" was not defined. The issue the UK have faced during this process is the various devils that exist in the details of "out". And many of those details have potentially destabilizing effects in NI even if they are considered preferential from an English perspective.

3) the vote was close both overall and in the regions and therefore we need to work hard to respect both

A Hard Brexit position hardly represents a close vote. The DUP positioning throughout the process hardly is representative of a close vote.

4) another referendum would be ridiculous. As ridiculous as it would have been for the anti GFA people to call for a new referendum eg at the time we were all watching murderers being released two years in which my have swung it the other way in the North

Utter nonsense. It is also an opinion, not a fact. On the former point, Brexit now has a negotiated definition in the form of the agreed WA. And numerous points have surfaced and been worked through over the course of the negotiations that could substantively back up the legitimacy of a second vote.

As to the latter point, that was signposted in the GFA. It was agreed then that releases would occur. The DUP campaigned against ratification for such reasons. The rest of the country voted by a massive margin in full knowledge of the agreed deal and its implications. The situation is the antithesis of Brexit in that regard.

5) i believe most people, brexiteers included, would accept some sensible additional checks at the Irish Sea - but we need to see some compromise of sharing some checking maybe at NI border and even some at ROI France border. Current ROI position reeks of arrogace and is winding people up

This is another opinion, not a fact. The ROI has not voted to leave the EU. It is not tied to the UK in any way. Why on earth would there be checks on its border with Single Market partners on the continent? There is zero arrogance in that position. Upholding British commitments defined by an International agreement in the context of Brexit is an entirely self created problem for the UK to solve. Ireland did nothing to threaten the status quo of agreements it has signed up to. Nor did the EU.

6)NI cannot be in a situation where they are separated from UK with EU making the rules and no democratic representation.

That again is an opinion, not a fact. The deal as negotiated is a brilliant one for peace, business and prosperity in NI: providing it with the best of both worlds in terms of EU / UK membership. Hence the legion of business / agriculture voices in NI who came out to support it. The DUP position is out of touch with the people of NI. They want this deal, they would vote for this deal. They do not want a hard border and the actions of the DUP which trend towards that are out of touch with the people of NI.

Just as they were out of touch on the GFA.

Is any of that inaccurate or unreasonable?

Yes, as pointed out above. And through all of this, the DUP protestations of how NI must be treated the exact same as the UK rings hollow when gay people in NI cannot marry and pregnant women in NI cannot seek the same range of medical services available to women in Wales, Scotland and England.

Your position is bankrupt if I'm being honest, which is in keeping with the long tradition of DUP politics.

downcow

spacecoyote wrote: »

Did we not, in essence, have this situation in Ireland with Lisbon?

It was rejected originally, partly down to some lies & scaremongering that was put out through the media.

We went back, got clarifications, the relevant guarantees, and the full picture & put it back to the people, and as a result the second referendum passed.

To me, its almost a perfect parallel, except the Irish don't get so caught up in similar, Rule Britannia style reactions, as they do in the UK. Why get so entrenched & dig your heels in, when, in essence, you know you've made the wrong decision.

If you put something to the people & they vote on it, and then can provide evidence that the reason they voted was based on lies & scaremongering, is it not a fair & just idea to put the choice to the people again?

Are you sure people will vote remain - im not so sure. people may not take kindly about being told you are stupid go back and get the correct answer.
I would also worry about the UK going forward if this is overturned. we will be divided for decades and some nasty people will get support who would normally

CelticRambler

downcow wrote: »

If UK goes out on a fairly hard Brexit then I think we are benifitted in going also because we are so closely connected in every way and finacially supported by them. Any fear of leaving the EU can be multiplied many times when we consider leaving UK, economically, culturally,etc
does that help?

Does it help? No!

NI is not connected to GB in every way. For a start, there's 13 miles of sea between NI and Scotland. You've also got your own version of pounds sterling that you'll struggle to pass off as legal tender in London. And there are precious few places in Northern Ireland that a happily married lesbian could get an abortion.

On the flip side, you have unfettered access to every part of the Republic of Ireland, you can play for any local or national Irish sports team, you can market yourself or your business or your exports as "Irish" and no-one will accuse you of false advertising.

As for that financial dependency on Westminster handouts, if (or when) NI is dragged out of the EU as part of a hard, chaotic, no-deal Brexit, there's going to be a lot less cash in the Westminster coffers, and many more English regions ahead of NI in the queue.

So what, exactly, are the advantages to NI of forging deeper ties with a post-Brexit England in preference to maintaining the status quo?

spacecoyote

downcow wrote: »

4) another referendum would be ridiculous. As ridiculous as it would have been for the anti GFA people to call for a new referendum eg at the time we were all watching murderers being released two years in which my have swung it the other way in the North

Did we not, in essence, have this situation in Ireland with Lisbon?

It was rejected originally, partly down to some lies & scaremongering that was put out through the media.

We went back, got clarifications, the relevant guarantees, and the full picture & put it back to the people, and as a result the second referendum passed.

To me, its almost a perfect parallel, except the Irish don't get so caught up in similar, Rule Britannia style reactions, as they do in the UK. Why get so entrenched & dig your heels in, when, in essence, you know you've made the wrong decision.

If you put something to the people & they vote on it, and then can provide evidence that the reason they voted was based on lies & scaremongering, is it not a fair & just idea to put the choice to the people again?

downcow

CelticRambler wrote: »

You're still confusing the regions (of England) with the constituent countries of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland - something that is, unfortunately, widespread amongst the loudest Tory, UKIP and English nationalist voices.

Maybe if NI unionists could accept that their country is not part of Great Britain, they'd be more successful in keeping their own government functionning effectively, and defending their country's interests.

On the otherhand, there is no reason why the Republic should put itself at a considerable economic disadvantage by imposing checks on Ireland-France imports/exports simply because a subsection of the Tory party disagrees with the rest of the party.

GB is not a country anf there is no international border between NI and GB. I havent checked but i am pretty sure the two nations on the islands recognised by the UN are ROI and UK of GB & NI. and some of you are reading far to much into a name - the nation of the UK was formed by bringing together GB & NI and that is recognised in the name - I really like it that way and would hate to see that bit of history erased

and your second point is the arrogant bit that you need to let go of and i have no doubt you will at the 11th hour - you will need to work with us and not cut off your nose to spite your face (and i don't mean you personally - i mean your nation)

prawnsambo

First Up wrote: »

I can however assure you that the EU is not using that or anything else to "keep" the UK in the EU. All it is doing is ensuring that responsibility for the consequences of the UK's departure fall where they should.

This (the border issue) was brought up before, during and after the referendum by British politicians on both sides of the debate and whom I quoted on the previous page.

I even quoted Nigel Farage replying to a group of NI businessmen who posed the question to him in a meeting he held with them during the campaign. So the issue of the border was front and centre in the debate in NI during the campaign and was a constant every time a westminster politician went to NI while on the campaign trail.

So the contention that this is an invention by the EU/Ireland is demonstrably untrue. It was always an issue and was identified by people north of the border as an issue when the whole sorry mess started off.

downcow

prawnsambo wrote: »

Do you accept that a hard brexit will hit the UK economy hard? And that currently those effects are already being felt due to the loss of value of sterling and the flow of capital out of London.

Such a hit to the UK economy would inevitably reduce the amount of money available to prop up NI.

To be really honest. here is my thoughts - uncensored
There is history which I think no of us can avoid. Some may pretend they are above it but I think it infects us deep in our thinking. and i could be wrong but my guess is that thats not just a northern problem but across the island - so much difficult history and we are all products of it.
So i don't want to rejoin ireland any more that many of you want roi to rejoin the 'kingdom'. So i suppose that is me admitting it is not all economic for me.

That said, I believe that the UK and EU and indeed UK & ROI are interdependant and stronger working together. I believe we are leaving the EU but I also believe that all parties mention firmly understand we will be better of working together and being supportive of each other.
I understand the EU need to play hard ball so as no one else considers leaving
I understand ROI need to play hard ball and use the border issue to their advantage to keep economic connections with UK
I understand NI needs to keep good solid economic connections with ROI (and more eg friends, culture, etc)
I understand UK needs to pl,ay hard ball and not just roll over to EU & ROI

That said I believe common sense will prevail at or after the 11th hour. The backstop will be watered down (or fudged) and we will all move on and build improving relationships in the years ahead. I don'r expect either poverty or the jackpot for UK or EU for that matter. I do also think ROI are in the shakiest position but trust that EU & UK will play ball and make it work in the end.

Probably setting myself up for a hammering but sure so be it

CelticRambler

downcow wrote: »

I am simply stating what i understand as facts.

2) The UK voted out (regions swung both ways)
3) the vote was close both overall and in the regions and therefore we need to work hard to respect both

You're still confusing the regions (of England) with the constituent countries of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland - something that is, unfortunately, widespread amongst the loudest Tory, UKIP and English nationalist voices.

Maybe if NI unionists could accept that their country is not part of Great Britain, they'd be more successful in keeping their own government functionning effectively, and defending their country's interests.

downcow wrote: »

5) i believe most people, brexiteers included, would accept some sensible additional checks at the Irish Sea - but we need to see some compromise of sharing some checking maybe at NI border and even some at ROI France border. Current ROI position reeks of arrogace and is winding people up

The "current ROI position" is based on written rules - rules that were written down years ago, and were available for everyone in the Leave campaign to see, read and understand. There's no arrogance or winding-up involved.

On the otherhand, there is no reason why the Republic should put itself at a considerable economic disadvantage by imposing checks on Ireland-France imports/exports simply because a subsection of the Tory party disagrees with the rest of the party.

downcow wrote: »

6)NI cannot be in a situation where they are separated from UK with EU making the rules and no democratic representation.
Is any of that inaccurate or unreasonable?

Not unreasonable, no. But when the EU came up with exactly that kind of proposal, it was trashed by ... Northern Irish unionists. Have you written to your local MP to tell them that they're not acting in accordance with your wishes?

First Up

downcow wrote:

This is ironic. You can look back and you will find i have not riased the troubles. my issue is that the gfa and a threrat of conflict is being used very disingenuously by ROI and EU to keep UK in EU.

I am not in a position to comment with any authority on the risk of "troubles" although I know that this is a concern to some people who know more about it than me.

I can however assure you that the EU is not using that or anything else to "keep" the UK in the EU. All it is doing is ensuring that responsibility for the consequences of the UK's departure fall where they should.

The EU has been working on its part since June 2016. The UK does not seem to have started its part.

prawnsambo

downcow wrote: »

I have stated from early on that is was nuetral and didn't vote. So i don't think the benifits of in or out are dramatically different. Some pros and cons. I am OK with either option if we do it as UK as a whole.
If UK goes out on a fairly hard Brexit then I think we are benifitted in going also because we are so closely connected in every way and finacially supported by them. Any fear of leaving the EU can be multiplied many times when we consider leaving UK, economically, culturally,etc
does that help?

Do you accept that a hard brexit will hit the UK economy hard? And that currently those effects are already being felt due to the loss of value of sterling and the flow of capital out of London.

Such a hit to the UK economy would inevitably reduce the amount of money available to prop up NI.

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

I have stated from early on that is was nuetral and didn't vote. So i don't think the benifits of in or out are dramatically different. Some pros and cons. I am OK with either option if we do it as UK as a whole.
If UK goes out on a fairly hard Brexit then I think we are benifitted in going also because we are so closely connected in every way and finacially supported by them. Any fear of leaving the EU can be multiplied many times when we consider leaving UK, economically, culturally,etc
does that help?

Considering you started with a self serving lie, (which allows you to sidestep when it suits you) No, that didn't help at all.
Nebulous and airy fairy benefits it still is, coming from Unionist Brexiteer family.
Perhaps you might begin dealing/countering factually with the concerns raised by the agricultural sector of your own community and proceed to the concerns of your own business community?

MrMusician18

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

His boss is singing from a different hymn sheet though and, given his boss is President of the European Council (Donald Tusk), I'll take the Polish views from the horse's mouth.

His boss isn't Donald Tusk, it's Mateusz Morawiecki

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The benefits are all airy fairy nebulous things. I would be interested to hear a unionist, spell out in factual terms, what they would be for northern Ireland specifically.

I have stated from early on that is was nuetral and didn't vote. So i don't think the benifits of in or out are dramatically different. Some pros and cons. I am OK with either option if we do it as UK as a whole.
If UK goes out on a fairly hard Brexit then I think we are benifitted in going also because we are so closely connected in every way and finacially supported by them. Any fear of leaving the EU can be multiplied many times when we consider leaving UK, economically, culturally,etc
does that help?

Enzokk

downcow wrote: »

Yes lots of mis information floatinf about on this.
There has never be an amnesty. there was an early release scheme. Sorry let me correct myself - obviously there was an amnesty for 200 key IRA members but that was a sectret deal done with Tony Blair in dark rooms https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/tony-blair/11342495/Tony-Blair-On-The-Run-letters-to-IRA-members-vital-for-Northern-Ireland-peace.html this only applied to republicans and the public and indeed the GB police when an IRA member was tried for the Hyde Park bombings and he produced his secret letter in court and the judge had to let him go.
I can understand your disbelief at how it could be done secretly and only given to one side

Thanks for the link, although I am not sure if those letters are amnesty letters as you are describing them. They are letters, according to the link you have provided, that confirm that at the moment they were not wanted but that if new evidence was found that they would be prosecuted.

Former Prime Minister Mr Blair began the peace process scheme in 2000.

It saw 95 of the so-called letters of comfort issued by the Government to suspects linked by intelligence to almost 300 murders.

They told people they were not wanted at that time, but did not rule out future prosecutions if new evidence became available.

downcow wrote: »

Are you suggesting the IRA didnt target civilians and simply because they were protestant. I doubt someone has fed you a very romantic view of a dirty sectarian campaign

You are quick to say that others are rewriting history but you should be careful that you aren't doing the same. Both sides targeted civilians and both sides were killing innocent people. There is nothing that will be gained by only pointing at the other side and playing the victim.

Leroy42

downcow wrote: »

This is ironic. You can look back and you will find i have not riased the troubles. my issue is that the gfa and a threrat of conflict is being used very disingenuously by ROI and EU to keep UK in EU.
You may not agree with me but do not misrepresent what i am saying. I supported the GFA and still do but detest the cherry picking and misrepresentation of what is in it.
And i am the one saying that we are not threatened with violence in the North we are comfortable and confident that our culture is starting to find room to exist on this island

Grand, glad we can move on so.

So what are the benefits that you see from Brexit to NI?

downcow

Leroy42 wrote: »

Downcow, why are you trying to revisit the GFA and the troubles? What purpose does it have in relation to Brexit?

You didn't like it, we get it. But the majority in NI accepted it. It, despite having some serious issues, has brought stability, peace, cooperation and a normality to NI. It is a model of how to solve what appears to be an intractable problem for the rest of the world.

So, back to Brexit. What benefits are coming to NI from Brexit?

This is ironic. You can look back and you will find i have not riased the troubles. my issue is that the gfa and a threrat of conflict is being used very disingenuously by ROI and EU to keep UK in EU.
You may not agree with me but do not misrepresent what i am saying. I supported the GFA and still do but detest the cherry picking and misrepresentation of what is in it.
And i am the one saying that we are not threatened with violence in the North we are comfortable and confident that our culture is starting to find room to exist on this island

ancapailldorcha

Mod: Take the Republican-Unionist violence stuff elsewhere please. It's well off topic.

FrancieBrady

Leroy42 wrote: »

So, back to Brexit. What benefits are coming to NI from Brexit?

The benefits are all airy fairy nebulous things. I would be interested to hear a unionist, spell out in factual terms, what they would be for northern Ireland specifically.

Leroy42

Downcow, why are you trying to revisit the GFA and the troubles? What purpose does it have in relation to Brexit?

You didn't like it, we get it. But the majority in NI accepted it. It, despite having some serious issues, has brought stability, peace, cooperation and a normality to NI. It is a model of how to solve what appears to be an intractable problem for the rest of the world.

So, back to Brexit. What benefits are coming to NI from Brexit?

demfad

Peregrinus wrote: »

7. So important question becomes, what is May’s Plan C? If she secures the assent of the DUP but not of the ERG, the deal will be voted down again, and at that point May has to decide whether she will hew towards crash-out Brexit, or opt for revoking Art 50 or trying for a second referendum. From here point of view these are all appalling options; but she will just has to choose which is the least appalling.

The vast majority of the Commons would vote for her deal over a crash out exit.
Believing this it is not in her interest to offer alternatives to these two options.
She has been in the Conservative party since her teens. She will not split the party by any softening.
I believe the Commons understand this. Extending A50 will not be enough.
The Commons needs to take the default off the table and give a real choice between the Negotiated deal or no Brexit.
This could mean a final defeat for May's deal with an amendment for an A50 extension for a referendum.
It could also mean that May will get the numbers as there will be only one Brexit available.

Leroy42

downcow wrote: »

It was extremely difficulty for most unionists. We had suffered a 30 year sectarian campaign against us and just when the terrorists were running out of energy and support we were asked to let them save face by giving them an honourable way out. Enough of us done it to get it through. Not pleasant finding out that grinning Tony Blair had done them a deal behind everyones back. Replicate that to your gansters in Dublin and how you would feel if you had reduced their sentences etc in return for them stopping killing you because they didn't like your identity/religion existing on this Island and then finding out you priminsiter had done them other deals and lied to you about it

And brexit deals with all that how?

What benefits to NI do you see from Brexit?

FreudianSlippers

downcow wrote: »

5) i believe most people, brexiteers included, would accept some sensible additional checks at the Irish Sea - but we need to see some compromise of sharing some checking maybe at NI border and even some at ROI France border. Current ROI position reeks of arrogace and is winding people up

Huh?

Firstly, the DUP are against that idea.
Secondly, there can't be checks between Ireland and France.

prawnsambo

downcow wrote: »

I agree with you but it would have been very wrong to have rerun the GFA referendum before it was implimented. I agree same for EU. ther day after its implimented people can and no doubt will begin a campaign for a referendum and they are entitled to it

If it's any consolation, I don't believe there will be another referendum. (a) because it will take a long time to prepare and that time isn't available any more and (b) because it will not solve the problem the first one was supposed to fix; namely the split in the Tory party.

Enzokk

downcow wrote: »

6)NI cannot be in a situation where they are separated from UK with EU making the rules and no democratic representation.
Is any of that inaccurate or unreasonable?

I am sure that if the UK were to propose that NI stayed within the confines of the single market and customs union permanently due to the GFA but as a condition to it they needed representation to ensure their voice is heard that it would certainly be listened to by the EU. Has this ever been offered as a choice from the UK side?

It would certainly make sense that if you are in the CU and SM that you have to have some representation. Also, it would be in the interest of Irish MEPs to have the interests of NI when new rules and regulations are debated in the EU Parliament. We are, after all, one economy in many aspects so even if NI would not have direct representation of MEPs due to Brexit I have no doubt that MEPs in Ireland would have the interests of the whole island in their minds when it comes to their representation at the EU.

The same cannot be said historically of Westminster when it comes to looking after Ireland or even Northern Ireland. That is however a discussion for another topic altogether.

10000maniacs

downcow wrote: »

The thing we are angry about is that many of us took a big step and voted for gfa for peace and now we see roi supported by Europe using it for their own agenda
.

How was that a big step? You talk about the GFA like you were you were doing the world a favour by voting yes and you regret it now. You are not owed the removal of the backstop because you voted yes in the GFA.
Maybe you should have read the terms of the GFA before voting for it.
And maybe you should have read the terms of the GFA before voting for Brexit.

"The United Kingdom will maintain full alignment with those rules of the Internal Market and the Customs Union which, now or in the future, support North-South cooperation, the all-island economy and the protection of the 1998 Agreement"

VinLieger

downcow wrote: »

'upperhand' The lady doth protest too much, me thinks lol

Yeah cus the UK's has been winning bigly all over the negotiations for the last 2 years and hasn't been made look like fools again and again..... and again