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

FrancieBrady

Firblog wrote: »

Then the MPs must think that the deal is an absolute stinking pile of crap in its entirety if the backstop wasn't the main reason it was defeated so heavily.

Yes many of them had multi objections + those who want to hard Brexit

Firblog

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

If the WA had been defeated by <50 votes, there might have been some truth in the argument that it was solely the backstop that caused this, but the fact that the margin was over 230 highlights that it was the divisions within Westminster over the next approach that was responsible.

Then the MPs must think that the deal is an absolute stinking pile of crap in its entirety if the backstop wasn't the main reason it was defeated so heavily.

EdgeCase

prawnsambo wrote: »

I'm hazy on the details tbh, but our system of live, earth and neutral isn't the same as on the continent. An electrician explained it to me who had worked on Disneyland Paris and whatever the way they wire there, the chance of getting a fatal electric shock is much less than with our system. Hence the need for three pins, the third being the earth.

But I'd really need to research that again because it was a long time ago.

Just to quash a myth

(and I don't want to derail this thread into a side issue about electrical wiring.)

There's absolutely no difference whatsoever, other than the plug. There's a lot of mythology, particularly on British forums about differences and superiority complexes.

Believe it or not, a lot of online comments about this tend to see the 3 pin UK plug as a symbol of British cultural identity (mind boggling, I know.)

All of the EU uses 230V 50Hz

Any appliance sold in any EU country works in any other EU country. They're all approved to exactly the same specifications and standards. It's a single market with a single set of fundamental technical standards.

Most of Europe used a plug and socket system called CEE 7 which became a de facto standard. It's the two round pins, a recessed socket and earth is connected either by scraping contacts or a pin that sticks out of the socket.

Where an appliance doesn't need an earth, a smaller plug without earth contacts is used allowing for neater plugs.

Only things like kettles and washing machines, with actual earth wiring use the bigger plug with the earth contacts.

Ireland used this system officially until the 1960s and it's still fully defined in Irish standards even if it's not used by default.

A few countries use semi-compatible national systems (same two round pins but different earth pin) - Italy, Denmark and Switzerland. So things like mobile phone chargers and small non earthed appliances plugs will fit the sockets but bigger plugs don't.

Then there's BS1363 used in the UK, Ireland, Cyprus and Malta which uses 3 rectangular pins.
It's an unusual system in so far as it requires a dummy earth pin to open the socket. There's no earth necessary on most "class 2" double insulated appliances. But due to the socket design, it's impossible to produce a smaller 2 pin plug as would be the norm in the rest of Europe, Japan, North America and Australia and NZ.
..

Hope that clears things up.

In a Brexit scenario, we have no problem with appliances other than the plugs which isn't a massive deal.

Worst case scenario, we end up with adapters and having to cut off and fit plugs and then phase in a modern version of earthed, shuttered, polarised continental sockets, like the French system.

The modern versions of continental sockets have similar safety features to ours. Finger protection (recessed socket) and shutters. The French version is also polarisrd (plug only goes in one way).

You'd be looking at something like a gradual phase out of the existing sockets as people rewire or update decor. A minor annoyance compared to most of the impacts of Brexit.

Firblog

Hurrache wrote: »

"Mate", sigh.

Do you know your backstop history?

Would the beginning be that back in the 20's & early 30's there were no customs controls between North and South of Ireland?

J Mysterio

Firblog wrote: »

The hard facts now are that the deal - as it is - is dead. The backstop killed it. To have any chance of passing a vote in the UK Parliament the backstop will have to go. For that to happen there will have to be a way of implementing customs inspections that both sides agree are, comprehensive, robust, and don't involve 'physical border infrastructure' - anyone care to explain what that means? Have our Govt actually explained what they mean by it?

If it wasnt the backstop, the brexiteers would be moaning about something else. Its unfortunate for us that they have now latched onto this element of the deal but the EU cannot now accept the backstop being removed they have committed to it in the strongesg terms. It stays or no deal.

Capt'n Midnight

theguzman wrote: »

Majority rules and the people spoke so accept the decision, build a bridge and get over it. It is the will of the people and time will prove it to be the correct decision as the Franco/German EU axis will unravel and the Visegrad countries to the East will also act as a bulwark against the Imperial ambitions of Merkel and Macron.

And then the people spoke again and took away May's majority. (BTW France and Germany just got closer - check the news, Brexit is a unifying force in Europe )

Also demographics, many of those insulated from the downside of Brexit by triple lock pensions have simply died while more pro-EU voters have come of age.

Ignore changes in the will of the people at your peril.

Brexit happened because of a power struggle in the Tory party.

May didnt't win the contest, she took the dead king’s crown from a thorn bush after every other contestant had been knifed in the back or tripped up and fell on their own sword.

There was a similar one in Merkel's party. Like May she will step down. But unlike May there is a clear successor with clear policies and a roadmap.

An Ciarraioch

Firblog wrote: »

No mate, did you hear even one MP say what a good thing the backstop was? Did you hear anyone using it as a plus point when trying to sell the deal? Didn't think so, it was the poisoned pill most MPs refused to swallow.

If the WA had been defeated by <50 votes, there might have been some truth in the argument that it was solely the backstop that caused this, but the fact that the margin was over 230 highlights that it was the divisions within Westminster over the next approach that was responsible.

FrancieBrady

Firblog wrote: »

How about a referendum? No Deal Brexit, or May Deal Brexit?

That way the result of the first referendum is respected, the MPs are off the hook, and the electorate are to blame if all goes to crap in a hard Brexit.

Another referendum is an internal matter for the UK. The options will still be the same, take the deal or Remain. If Grieve's amendment succeeds No Deal won't be on the paper.

Lemming

downcow wrote: »

You see we have very different starting points on how we view this you and me. You give far to much power to the English. I am British and n Irish fact! irrelevant of what an Englishman calls me. They don’t decide who is British. If I call him English it doesn’t mean he’s not British. Why do you care so much what English people call you. Be who you are whatever they think.

Nothing to do with me giving too much power to the English; Just a statement of cold, hard truth.

The issue at stake isn't whether or not they get to decide who is or isn't British; and on that I agree completely with you. But what is fundamentally at stake is whether they register you as British to consider you at all when making overriding political decisions that are contrary to what the population of N.Ireland want. Brexit is being fuelled by a waking rise in English nationalism that has long been dormant. Politically that means the rest of the union is being ignored to varying degrees of near totality in a pursuit of 'self' by England. Which brings up the crux of what it is to be British. For the smaller parts of the union, there would seem to be an ingrained awareness of being part of a bigger whole not least by virtue of government sitting in another constituent country of the union. But for a lot of English folk, that awareness isn't there because they're the biggest part of the union; the governments sits there, they don't really learn much about the history of the rest of the union, and they are the 'whole' with a few extra bits hanging off the edge that they sometimes travel to for whatever reason. That awareness is not helped by the fact that Westminster is extremely London-centric.

For all the loyalty shown (in being an identity-defining trait of Northern Unionists) the English scarcely even recognise you to consider sparing a seconds thought for you as British. They recognise the Scots & the Welsh when it suits, but not you; you're just another Paddy. At most, you'll get a question of whether you're from the "Southern bit" or the "Northern bit" and then possibly a question about whether the "Northern bit" is part of the union or not, or a variation on that question. That's how much they register your loyalty or existence. This lack of awareness was amply visible during & after the referendum campaign. During the campaign the few instances where the border and/or the GFA were raised, those concerns were dismissed by Brexiteers as simple and unimportant because - as we all know - they knew or cared little about N.Ireland, its deeply troubled history, or the complexity of the border issue and couldn't be bothered to know. Until it became a sticking point in negotiations at which point the "Paddies should know their place" comments started.

So to come back to your question about why whatever the English should think matters; one of the very few truisms that has been revealed - starkly - courtesy of Brexit is that the dominant political power in the [British] union is England. If the rest of the union voted 100% to remain, and England voted 100% to leave, the rest of the union still couldn't defeat England in a numerical vote count. This is what I am alluding to when I talk about a pursuit of 'self' by England. Where that ties into Northern Ireland is quite simple: the harder the Brexit, the worse things are going to get domestically. In that case, sooner rather than later, people are going to latch onto the sizeable subvention that is sent to N.Ireland every year to keep the lights on. If & when that happens, there will be more and more pressure directed onto the amount directed to Northern Ireland. That means, at the very least, spending cuts for services and given how large an employer that the public sector is in Northern Ireland, those cuts will be felt harshly.

Being aware of what England's attitude (or general indifferent lack of awareness perhaps) is towards N.Ireland is important because it does and will continue to affect you in some way shape or form. As the expression goes; "all politics is local". Whether or not you wish to take to heart what they think is up to you, but don't be oblivious to what they DO think

Firblog

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Somebody can correct me if I am wrong here but if the Grieve Amendment succeds and No Deal is off the table then May's deal very much comes back into play. The choice will be Brexit via May's deal or retreat and Remain.

How about a referendum? No Deal Brexit, or May Deal Brexit?

That way the result of the first referendum is respected, the MPs are off the hook, and the electorate are to blame if all goes to crap in a hard Brexit.

Firblog

Hurrache wrote: »

What has killed it is the ineptitude of both sides of the UK house of parliament.

No mate, did you hear even one MP say what a good thing the backstop was? Did you hear anyone using it as a plus point when trying to sell the deal? Didn't think so, it was the poisoned pill most MPs refused to swallow.

FrancieBrady

Firblog wrote: »

The hard facts now are that the deal - as it is - is dead.

Somebody can correct me if I am wrong here but if the Grieve Amendment succeds and No Deal is off the table then May's deal very much comes back into play. The choice will be Brexit via May's deal or retreat and Remain.

Hurrache

Firblog wrote: »

The hard facts now are that the deal - as it is - is dead. The backstop killed it. To have any chance of passing a vote in the UK Parliament the backstop will have to go.

The backstop is the excuse but it's not what killed it. Parliament had a chance to kill the backstop in an amendment last week(ignoring the fact it would have fundamentally changed the WA) and only a handful voted for it.

What has killed it is the ineptitude of both sides of the UK house of parliament.

Hurrache

theguzman wrote: »

Majority rules and the people spoke so accept the decision, build a bridge and get over it. It is the will of the people and time will prove it to be the correct decision as the Franco/German EU axis will unravel and the Visegrad countries to the East will also act as a bulwark against the Imperial ambitions of Merkel and Macron.

I see a new script has been issued anyway.

FrancieBrady

theguzman wrote: »

The EU have let Ireland down by failing to make enough concessions to the UK to avoid a hard border. They wanted free trade without the EU telling them what to do and telling them who can live in the UK and who can't. The Eu should be about trade like the days of the Coal and Steel Pact not turning into a Franco/German Empire.

I think you will find that the vast majority of Irish people think the backstop was a perfectly fair and adequate concession to the UK.
If they crash out they will crash out because a small political party in northern Ireland had an abstract objection to it. The DUP are the knife in the backs of us all, the rest of the UK included.

Firblog

The hard facts now are that the deal - as it is - is dead. The backstop killed it. To have any chance of passing a vote in the UK Parliament the backstop will have to go. For that to happen there will have to be a way of implementing customs inspections that both sides agree are, comprehensive, robust, and don't involve 'physical border infrastructure' - anyone care to explain what that means? Have our Govt actually explained what they mean by it?

Charles Babbage

downcow wrote: »

Are you purposely not answering the question I was asking. And of course I know there are differences in UK regions and biosecurity checks etc at Irish Sea. My point is why this is ok for remainers but it is abhorrent to have any checks at international border?

It isn't an international border as per the GFA which recognises that the Irish nation is found on both sides of the border

And how can you not know that there are currently checks at the roi/ NI border?

Where, exactly?

Anthracite

theguzman wrote: »

Majority rules and the people spoke so accept the decision, build a bridge and get over it.

Is there any chance we might hear something other than this facile platitude at some point in the future? Or is it easier just to put you on ignore right now?

theguzman

FrancieBrady wrote: »

We never 'wanted' it. And we knew what had to be done to avoid it. Negotiate a deal that had an alternative. And the UK agreed to that deal at PM level.

If the UK go ahead and crash out then 2 years negotiating that deal have been wasted and we have what we all didn't want (allegedly).

There are no EU knives in our backs.

The EU have let Ireland down by failing to make enough concessions to the UK to avoid a hard border. They wanted free trade without the EU telling them what to do and telling them who can live in the UK and who can't. The Eu should be about trade like the days of the Coal and Steel Pact not turning into a Franco/German Empire.

FrancieBrady

theguzman wrote: »

Does anyone see the Irony of how the EU are about to stab Ireland in the back and force us to implement a hard border here, despite the Irish Government or the majority of the Irish people North and South not wanting it. Leo Varadkar has been the EU's most ardent supporter and now Poland and the Eastern States with Conservative Patriotic Governments are aligning towards the UK in support of Brexit. The EU has never cared one bit for Ireland despite what people think, they are not our allies and we have nothing in common with them. This Government will obey EU orders from Brussels and re-instate the Border when ordered to do so. The only way there can be no border in the event of a Hard Brexit is for Ireland to also leave the EU.

We never 'wanted' it. And we knew what had to be done to avoid it. Negotiate a deal that had an alternative. And the UK agreed to that deal at PM level.

If the UK go ahead and crash out then 2 years negotiating that deal have been wasted and we have what we all didn't want (allegedly).

There are no EU knives in our backs.

theguzman

Does anyone see the Irony of how the EU are about to stab Ireland in the back and force us to implement a hard border here, despite the Irish Government or the majority of the Irish people North and South not wanting it. Leo Varadkar has been the EU's most ardent supporter and now Poland and the Eastern States with Conservative Patriotic Governments are aligning towards the UK in support of Brexit. The EU has never cared one bit for Ireland despite what people think, they are not our allies and we have nothing in common with them. This Government will obey EU orders from Brussels and re-instate the Border when ordered to do so. The only way there can be no border in the event of a Hard Brexit is for Ireland to also leave the EU.

Atlantic Dawn

Hurrache wrote: »

On top of the news today that Sony is moving business out of the UK and into Holland, P&O have announced they're reflagging all their UK fleet to Cyprus ahead of Brexit.

And Daniel Kawczynski keeps digging his hole deeper.
https://twitter.com/DKShrewsbury/status/1087691731095699456?s=19

The P&O decision to select Cyprus is rather more that it's a cheap ass country for shipping legislation and allows them to hire staff on lower terms and conditions than UK staff. Irish Ferries have had their ships registered almost entirely in Cyprus for the last 20 years plus.

Nody

unit 1 wrote: »

Can anyone explain to me how a hard border would work.
In the event of a hard brexit surely there is an onus on the uk and the eu both having border controls, two borders one manned by ourselves but an eu border, and another by the uk, a uk border for controls as I imagine trading under wto rules would also have consequneces for them.

In theory they can be WTO compliant and say we don't do ANY customs control anywhere. But Brexiteers don't want to talk about that in general because they realize how silly such an idea would be. The second idea only coming up recently was basically ignore it and let all EU trade flow but that ignores the fact China could import a container to Ireland and route it via NI without the Irish customs agents giving a damn.

Or as someone put it; UK is leaving one trade group stating they don't want to follow the rules only to join a second trade group trade group stating they are not going to follow their rules either. The idea being it will be a few years before the cases grind through but the penalties will still be applied only a few years later...

CelticRambler

Enzokk wrote: »

... if there is a no deal Brexit the chaos will be at Dover and the English Channel. The focus will not be on our border initially and there would surely be a hope that if the chaos continues that the UK will quickly come to their senses and get a deal done to ensure unfettered access to the EU single market.

As I've been listening to the various stories concerning the Channel challenge (ground has been broken this week on new large-animal import inspection facilities at the Channel Tunnel terminal, by the French; the English don't have space for anything similar on their side), I think that that is going to consume such a huge proportion of the UK's limited resources that the "Irish border" problem will require a common-sense solution simply because there won't be any other way to deal with it.

And that common-sense solution will be for Westminster to speak nicely to Dublin and ask if maybe they could lend a hand if Westminster agrees to move the check-points to the Belfast ports. I can see Leo willingly agreeing to a proposal to have Irish/EU inspectors working in NI on behalf of the UK government during a chaotic Brexit "unless and until" the UK's regulations start to diverge from the EU's, and that's not going to happen while Westminster is consumed with fighting fires on its southern front (metaphorical and/or real, depending on how long the no-deal chaos lasts).

UsedToWait

Sir Ivan Rogers, whose speech at Liverpool University was posted on here, has delivered another broadside at the Brexit bullsh1itters, this time at UCL.
Haven't watched it yet(starts @ around 10 minutes on that link), but Peter Foster of the Telegraph has a thread on it here..

Peter Foster wrote:

Starts by warning that both Brexit 'reversers' and hard-break Brexiteers are killing the common ground for compromise. The result that May's 'my way or the highway' plan has not narrowed the gap, but widened it. /2

Then has a crack at the "bizarre" absolutism of brexiteers who once dreamt of an escape to Norway, but now lament it as BRINO /3

And then absolutely lashes the "canard" of a WTO-only brexit, as the basis for a new global trade strategy. I particularly like the second on these two paras /4

Then, near weeping at this point, ponders the mendacity of the snakeoil salesmen who say that the UK flouncing out of the EU on WTO rules is the route to putting the EU in the backfoot for a trade negotiation . /5

.. and so, depressingly, on...

unit 1

Can anyone explain to me how a hard border would work.
In the event of a hard brexit surely there is an onus on the uk and the eu both having border controls, two borders one manned by ourselves but an eu border, and another by the uk, a uk border for controls as I imagine trading under wto rules would also have consequneces for them.

Akrasia

Strazdas wrote: »

Keep in mind the hard border mightn't last long. For it to come into being would mean the British had crashed their own economy....this in turn would probably force them to return to the negotiating table and abandon their red lines.

A UK crash out is a singularity. Its never happened before and all predictions for what come next are pure speculation.

CelticRambler

prawnsambo wrote: »

... you can't really use two pin plugs on 240V AC. Far too dangerous.

Ah, go 'way out of that! :pac:

prawnsambo wrote: »

I'm hazy on the details tbh, but our system of live, earth and neutral isn't the same as on the continent.

Yeah, it is: live is live (any colour but blue or green/yellow), neutral is neutral (blue) and earth is earth (green/yellow). Everything's wired to a consumer unit fitted with trip switches, where it picks up a mono or triphase supply.

Sam Russell wrote: »

France relies on double insulation to protect users, while we use ELCBs (earth leakage circuit breakers).

We don't rely on double insulation alone! Everything metallic has to be earth-bonded, and every circuit protected by its own MCB and a master RCD. Most new electrical devices are fitted with a moulded three-pin plug (live, earth and neutral

) except for the same things that come with a two-core wire connected to a three-pin plug in Ireland. The only significant difference is that a ring circuit is prohibited, and there's a limit to the number of outlets you can have on any particular spur.

The quality of French fittings is pretty crap (like most French stuff :rolleyes: ) but I think the regs are probably to a higher standard than in the UK/Irl.

Enzokk

funkey_monkey wrote: »

I've been out all day and am just catching up on this.
Is it fair to say that Europe has blinked first on this issue? Reading r/UKpolitics on Reddit it appears that some are saying that as UK won't put up a hard border then it is Ireland who is breaking the GFA.
However, to me, it is a result of the UK actions that Ireland have to put up the hard border.

Also how does this align with the BREXIT promise to take back control of its borders and control immigration? How will the UK do that?

I am wondering whether we are playing out the scenario where if there is a no deal Brexit the chaos will be at Dover and the English Channel. The focus will not be on our border initially and there would surely be a hope that if the chaos continues that the UK will quickly come to their senses and get a deal done to ensure unfettered access to the EU single market. That would at least give us a little breathing room before we start construction of custom posts and Varadkar will also have been relatively true to his word in that he had no plans for a border all this time.

Edit: What Strazdas said.

Strazdas

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

If it came down to a choice between a hard border or Ireland being dislodged from the EU single market (by Britain's actions in leaving) because we want to protect the GFA what are we going to do?

It would be absolutely catastrophic for Ireland to be dislodged from the single market. Think of what would happen to all the FDI here for the European market. It's far worse for us than barriers between us and the UK.

I'm afraid in our self interest a hard border may be inevitable. Only other option is be poorer with no border, outside the single market - and basically because the British say so.

Keep in mind the hard border mightn't last long. For it to come into being would mean the British had crashed their own economy....this in turn would probably force them to return to the negotiating table and abandon their red lines.