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

Leroy42 wrote: »

But you don't see any pros to leave. That is the big issue. Want cons do you see for Remaining?

We know what will be lost, even in simple economic terms from leave for NI. An easy one is subsidies to farmers currently coming for the EU. Gone. There has also been a lot of investment from the EU in terms of peace dividend. That will be gone. Replaced by what? You think the London is going to increase subsidies to NI to make it up?

It really is an odd position you have. You think there are no benefits, understand the potential negatives but are happy to go along with the majority vote against the wishes of your own country on the basis of a feeling?

Why are his admissions of loyalty to what he views as his country and sticking with that through thick or thin being questioned?

lawred2

downcow wrote: »

Hard question to answer because I don’t believe there is a chance of a hard border. Help me with something! Do you believe there will be a hard border in the Irish Sea with the backstop? This is crucial because so many people talk about the Irish Sea option as some soft fluffy thing that won’t annoy anyone but if it happens at Newry it will be a Berlin Wall. I honestly don’t understand this at it’s the bit if feel suspicious about. If the two are the same then you just have to accept that a majority in Northern Ireland would rather have it at Newry that larne and that both economic and cultural. I am really interested in you answer to this.

That statement is based on what research?

I'm not sure that that's an 'acceptable' statement at all to be honest

downcow

Leroy42 wrote: »

But you don't see any pros to leave. That is the big issue. Want cons do you see for Remaining?

We know what will be lost, even in simple economic terms from leave for NI. An easy one is subsidies to farmers currently coming for the EU. Gone. There has also been a lot of investment from the EU in terms of peace dividend. That will be gone. Replaced by what? You think the London is going to increase subsidies to NI to make it up?

But as you acknowledged, each country within the union is able to operate separate laws that suit them in particular, but for some reason the DUP have decided that that shouldn't be the case here. Once the vote to leave was passed, there was no reason why the DUP couldn't have pushed for the softest of Brexits, thereby having little to no effect. Why have they pursued the current strategy, against the wishes of the majority in NI?

It really is an odd position you have. You think there are no benefits, understand the potential negatives but are happy to go along with the majority vote against the wishes of your own country on the basis of a feeling?

I don’t agree with the two negatives you outline
I trust the UK to maintain any support farmers are getting (as long as they don’t give the whole £350million to the health service lol). Do you really believe that the farmers subsidies are coming from some mystery money factory in the eu - they are coming from uk tax payers
The peace fund is basically over anyway and did you think that money was coming from the same Eu factory.
Is that you all out of negatives cause I don’t mind those ones

Nody

Hurrache wrote: »

On the subject of Gibraltar, Spain is pushing for it's decolonisation in the event of no deal

For Spanish government (both main parties) it's a great "Oh look over there" thing to have Gibraltar to point to to be fair. If they got it back it would be pretty much useless to them beyond "hey monkies!" but much as Brexit it's not about facts but feelings.

downcow

robinph wrote: »

A border in the middle of the sea is harder to throw things at in protest.

Build a physical wall down the middle of a road and it will be attacked, blown up, shot at, stuff smuggled around it etc.

So the reasoning is about giving in to threat? If we were about to do that then there would have been a UI in 1970

Leroy42

RobMc59 wrote: »

Why are his admissions of loyalty to what he views as his country and sticking with that through thick or thin being questioned?

SHould they not be? Is blind loyalty to a cause he accepts he doesn't really care either way about (Brexit I mean not NI or the UK) something to be simply accepted.

He is a raft of contradictions. For example, he wants Ni to be treated the same as UK, except where it isn't.

It is perfectly acceptable to be loyal, nationalistic and fully believe in your country and your part in it. But I would also want my country to not be actively trying to make things more difficult for an entire section simply to get some unknown benefits that may take 50 years to happen

Leroy42

downcow wrote: »

I don’t agree with the two negatives you outline
I trust the UK to maintain any support farmers are getting (as long as they don’t give the whole £350million to the health service lol). Do you really believe that the farmers subsidies are coming from some mystery money factory in the eu - they are coming from uk tax payers
The peace fund is basically over anyway and did you think that money was coming from the same Eu factory.
Is that you all out of negatives cause I don’t mind those ones

Fair enough, you just trust that everything will simply be ok.

And if they aren't sure you'll be fine and those that lose out will just have to accept it I guess.

downcow

lawred2 wrote: »

That statement is based on what research?

I'm not sure that that's an 'acceptable' statement at all to be honest

It is based on this continual reference to ‘hard’ border and how it will alienate northern nationalists. My statement is based on dozens of polls which show there are more people in NI who feel British rather than Irish So if it is such a severe border so as to diminish nationality then the rest follows. Very few people here want a border at all but I just believe the intransigence of Eu and roi are forcing a border. Although that may be moving today. The cracks are appearing so hopefully very soft border wherever

Nody

downcow wrote: »

So the reasoning is about giving in to threat? If we were about to do that then there would have been a UI in 1970

No the reasoning that you glossed over is there will be customs checks no matter what the deal is; it's a simple fact of life.

Now if they are in the Irish sea there is not only a limited number of crossings available but also existing controls in place which means processes, infrastructure etc. Hence this has the benefit of not only being easier to expand on but easier to control and run and businesses are going through said controls already today. Overall this is the cheapest and safest option.

If the controls are placed in Ireland at the IE/UK land border instead not only does new infrastructure needs to be put up but it needs to cover over 300 locations compared to a handful, it will require further land (parking area, buildings etc.) to be taken by the state (i.e. forced buy out) and it is likely to become a target for sectarian violence from both sides while costing significantly more.

Hence with the two options on the table why pick the option that will not only cost significantly more (I'd guesstimate in the 10x region) but also cause further uproar (forced buyouts of land, visible border etc.) as well as implementing further disruption to local trade that is currently not there today? There is no positive side to having the border on land instead of in the sea beyond DUPs refusal to accept that they are in any way different than the mainland (even though they already have separate legal rules and already are going through said controls today albeit at 10% rather than 100%).

ancapailldorcha

RobMc59 wrote: »

Why are his admissions of loyalty to what he views as his country and sticking with that through thick or thin being questioned?

That's not what's being questioned. Downcow has been asked for examples of benefits to Northern Ireland from Brexit and hasn't given an answer yet.

Loyalty doesn't mean withholding all criticism. It's about wanting what's best for your country. Anyone who views Northern Ireland as their country should oppose Brexit. Unless of course, their loyalty is to the British right and Brexit itself.

FreudianSlippers

The DUP have already ruled out an Irish Sea border... why are we still talking about this?

Professor Moriarty

downcow wrote: »

It is based on this continual reference to ‘hard’ border and how it will alienate northern nationalists. My statement is based on dozens of polls which show there are more people in NI who feel British rather than Irish So if it is such a severe border so as to diminish nationality then the rest follows. Very few people here want a border at all but I just believe the intransigence of Eu and roi are forcing a border. Although that may be moving today. The cracks are appearing so hopefully very soft border wherever

Watch those polls switch 180 degrees if a hard border is put up. Did you know that 65% of people in NI would rather abandon Brexit completely than have a hard border?

ancapailldorcha

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

The DUP have already ruled out an Irish Sea border... why are we still talking about this?

Ideally, the UK would just cancel Brexit.

Failing that, if May succeeds in obtaining a Parliamentary majority for her deal then the DUP can go back to being the malevolent storm in a teacup it's always been.

FreudianSlippers

downcow wrote: »

Very few people here want a border at all but I just believe the intransigence of Eu and roi are forcing a border.

It has absolutely nothing to do with the EU and Ireland (why you continue to post about the soccer team is ultimately very confusing) - the UK will need a border in the event of a no-deal Brexit to comply with WTO trading rules. Trying to sell this as something the EU is forcing on Ireland/NI is ridiculous.

FreudianSlippers

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Ideally, the UK would just cancel Brexit.

Failing that, if May succeeds in obtaining a Parliamentary majority for her deal then the DUP can go back to being the malevolent storm in a teacup it's always been.

The problem is that if the Tories even suggested this, the DUP would pull support and there'd be a GE before HoC could vote on this I believe?

VinLieger

downcow wrote: »

Do you really believe that the farmers subsidies are coming from some mystery money factory in the eu - they are coming from uk tax payers

You really don't understand how free trade works and is intrinsically linked into everything do you?

Yes the UK is a net Contributor to the EU HOWEVER they can afford to give so much thanks to all the free trade they can avail of on their goods and services being sold to other EU member states that is then recouped in taxes that the government can use to fund the EU payments etc etc etc.

When they leave without a FTA and businesses shut because they cannot afford the tarriffs for selling to their previous customers and people lose their jobs for that and various other reasons, the tax take then goes down therefore X money that farmers would have gotten from the EU via UK member payments doesnt suddenly just come straight out of the UK budget because simply put that money won't exist anymore.

An Ciarraioch

The BBC adds Brussels to its shortlist for a post-Brexit EU base, alongside Dublin and Amsterdam:

https://www.lalibre.be/culture/medias-tele/la-bbc-songe-a-s-installer-a-bruxelles-5c4844fc7b50a60724f18610

Dytalus

downcow wrote: »

I don’t agree with the two negatives you outline
I trust the UK to maintain any support farmers are getting (as long as they don’t give the whole £350million to the health service lol). Do you really believe that the farmers subsidies are coming from some mystery money factory in the eu - they are coming from uk tax payers
The peace fund is basically over anyway and did you think that money was coming from the same Eu factory.
Is that you all out of negatives cause I don’t mind those ones

The EU has, from it's EAFRD (European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development) provided just shy of €170 million so far during the 2014-2020 funding cycle for Northern Ireland. This funding is dedicated to development of farming regions, rather than direct subsidies to farmers.

Meanwhile, through the common agricultural policy funding, Northern Ireland was given roughly €220 million for 2014-2020 in pillar 2 funding, and over €2 billion in Pillar 1.

That's a lot of money the UK is going to have to start paying their farmers in Northern Ireland to make up for lost EU Funding on top of the already £10 billion a year they spend propping up NI anyway. To say this is not a problem (or, as you phrased it "I don’t agree with the two negatives you outline") is being a little bit too hopeful.

True, the UK contributes considerably more than that per year to the EU budget, but that all gets pooled into other funds, like the various EU Structural and Investment Funds..which prioritise the poorer regions of Europe in terms of giving funding - a lot of which are in the UK. Are those regions going to be getting money alongside NI farmers? How much? Will the UK be able to afford it, or will it all get pooled into London like so much of their money does?

Since the EUSF are geared towards propping up poorer regions, the underdeveloped parts of the UK have been supported - effectively - by the wealthier regions in Germany and France which get proportionately less due to their greater development. Do you think the British government will properly balance the funding and subsidies which previously came out of EUSF funding, or will they (as HMG has a history of doing) prioritise Britain over NI?

You're pinning a lot on the good will of HMG towards NI, when they've shown time and time again that NI is considered more a thorn in their side than an worthwhile member of the Union.

jm08

Nody wrote: »

For Spanish government (both main parties) it's a great "Oh look over there" thing to have Gibraltar to point to to be fair. If they got it back it would be pretty much useless to them beyond "hey monkies!" but much as Brexit it's not about facts but feelings.

As far as I know there is a huge issue with smuggling through Gibraltar, particularly cigarettes (which means a huge loss of revenue to the Spanish state). Andorra poses a similar problem.

On Sunday, the government of Gibraltar admitted that London and Brussels are putting the final touches on a specific protocol for the British Overseas Territory in the UK/EU Withdrawal Agreement, and that there will be “a set of practical measures spelled out in separate arrangements with Spain covering tax cooperation, police and customs cooperation, the environment, citizens’ rights and tobacco.”

Here is a fuller article listing all the issues that Spain has with Gibraltar.

https://www.euronews.com/2018/11/23/from-unemployment-to-tobacco-trafficking-why-gibraltar-is-a-brexit-red-line-for-spain

Seth Brundle

downcow wrote: »

My statement is based on dozens of polls which show there are more people in NI who feel British rather than Irish So if it is such a severe border so as to diminish nationality then the rest follows.

You're assuming that those living in NI that identify as British, want to leave the EU and should the UK head for a hard Brexit, want a hard border.
The result of the referendum would suggest otherwise.

downcow wrote: »

Very few people here want a border at all but I just believe the intransigence of Eu and roi are forcing a border. Although that may be moving today. The cracks are appearing so hopefully very soft border wherever

In what way has there been intransigence from the EU and RoI?
Where are there cracks appearing? The EU have not changed their line at all. It is the UK who don't know what they want and can't agree amongst themselves.

RobMc59

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

The problem is that if the Tories even suggested this, the DUP would pull support and there'd be a GE before HoC could vote on this I believe?

Hopefully,the decision of whether to cancel brexit or not will be taken out of May's hands and will be given back to the people to decide-the shenanigans in Westminster,especially by the tories is sickening-you know they are getting desperate listening to the threats and warnings coming from them-Corbyn has his faults but his"the door maybe open but no one is listening "is true.

Call me Al

Dytalus wrote: »

The EU has, from it's EAFRD (European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development) provided just shy of €170 million so far during the 2014-2020 funding cycle for Northern Ireland. This funding is dedicated to development of farming regions, rather than direct subsidies to farmers.

Meanwhile, through the common agricultural policy funding, Northern Ireland was given roughly €220 million for 2014-2020 in pillar 2 funding, and over €2 billion in Pillar 1.

That's a lot of money the UK is going to have to start paying their farmers in Northern Ireland to make up for lost EU Funding on top of the already £10 billion a year they spend propping up NI anyway. To say this is not a problem (or, as you phrased it "I don’t agree with the two negatives you outline") is being a little bit too hopeful.

True, the UK contributes considerably more than that per year to the EU budget, but that all gets pooled into other funds, like the various EU Structural and Investment Funds..which prioritise the poorer regions of Europe in terms of giving funding - a lot of which are in the UK. Are those regions going to be getting money alongside NI farmers? How much? Will the UK be able to afford it, or will it all get pooled into London like so much of their money does?

Since the EUSF are geared towards propping up poorer regions, the underdeveloped parts of the UK have been supported - effectively - by the wealthier regions in Germany and France which get proportionately less due to their greater development. Do you think the British government will properly balance the funding and subsidies which previously came out of EUSF funding, or will they (as HMG has a history of doing) prioritise Britain over NI?

You're pinning a lot on the good will of HMG towards NI, when they've shown time and time again that NI is considered more a thorn in their side than an worthwhile member of the Union.

Thanks for those hard facts dytalus.

It make the £1billion Arlene gets to shell out in the 6 counties look a bit like 30 pieces of silver.

Dytalus

Call me Al wrote: »

Thanks for those hard facts dytalus.

It make the £1billion Arlene gets to shell out in the 6 counties look a bit like 30 pieces of silver.

No problem. I work in an area related to EU Structural Funds so I already had an idea of the figures, just had to dig out publically available docs to show them. It does make the £1 billion payout seem...rather irrelevant in the grand scheme. It's an extra 10% on the existing annual subsidy though, so not to be sniffed at from a Northern Irish perspective.

Interestingly, while looking up links to back up the figures, I found out the UK pays more to NI as it does to the EU every year. £10.8 billion to Northern Ireland, versus £13 billion to the EU (while they would pay £18b, they get a £5b rebate/discount). Combined with the total EU funding the UK gets (£4b) the net EU contribution is in the region of £9 billion/year.

In terms of a share of incoming EU Structural Funds, Wales comes out way more per head than the rest of the UK. NI is second, and still gets more than the UK average in terms of funding per head.

The more I look into this, the more I realise just how dangerous the situation is for Northern Ireland economically and monetarily. I don't want our neighbours to the north to get whacked especially hard in Brexit, but it seriously looks like they're going to get the worst of it out of the members of the Union.

Makes me angry, if I'm honest.

RobMc59

jm08 wrote: »

As far as I know there is a huge issue with smuggling through Gibraltar, particularly cigarettes (which means a huge loss of revenue to the Spanish state). Andorra poses a similar problem.

Here is a fuller article listing all the issues that Spain has with Gibraltar.

https://www.euronews.com/2018/11/23/from-unemployment-to-tobacco-trafficking-why-gibraltar-is-a-brexit-red-line-for-spain

As a matter of interest,are you aware that the Canary Islands are Spanish colonies,-Which rather diminishes their "outrage"in regards to Gibraltar perhaps?

tuxy

RobMc59 wrote: »

As a matter of interest,are you aware that the Canary Islands are Spanish colonies,-Which rather diminishes their "outrage"in regards to Gibraltar perhaps?

Do the Islands want independence or does any other country have a claim on them?

I think the Spanish enclaves in Morocco are a better example.

Call me Al

There's a representative from the Ulster Farmer's Union Ivor Ferguson on Radio1 now saying that a no deal or hard Brexit will be a disaster for NI.
Their main concern revolves around the huge tariffs. A tariff of £40 per lamb going to ROI will leave 50% of their farmers our of business he says.

VinLieger

Call me Al wrote: »

There's a representative from the Ulster Farmer's Union Ivor Ferguson on Radio1 now saying that a no deal or hard Brexit will be a disaster for NI.
Their main concern revolves around the huge tariffs. A tariff of £40 per lamb going to ROI will leave 50% of their farmers our of business he says.

Im shocked downcow once agaIn has shown they havent a clue what they are talking about

RobMc59

tuxy wrote: »

Do the Islands want independence or does any other country have a claim on them?

I think the Spanish enclaves in Morocco are a better example.

Good point about the Canaries- I think the enclaves in Morocco are no longer under Spanish rule.

An Ciarraioch

RobMc59 wrote: »

As a matter of interest,are you aware that the Canary Islands are Spanish colonies,-Which rather diminishes their "outrage"in regards to Gibraltar perhaps?

A, the entire native population of the Canaries is Spanish, and B, it is an autonomous community, like the Basque Country and Catalonia.

eire4

RobMc59 wrote: »

Good point about the Canaries- I think the enclaves in Morocco are no longer under Spanish rule.

No Ceuta and Melilla are stil under Spanish rule.