Brexit Discussion Thread VI

downcow wrote: »

I was never away anywhere but thanks for your concern.
This might shock you but I have spent most of my life working in peace building. I suppose it’s my interest to learn from other opinions that brings me on here.
Your question is a good one. It is a connondrim for both unionists and nationalists to know what to do.
From where i am looking they should help us get rid of the backstop. They should encourage the Eu to have more confidence in its self and be prepared to negotiate a future for Eu and UK without the need for things like the backstop. They are a big block 10 times plus bigger than the UK so shouldn’t need a backstop to negotiate a good deal.
The other thing I would suggest nationalists would do, thankfully I have just witnessed them in some numbers doing this evening ie joining me in showing there disgust for anyone use the conflict and troops on the border as s cheap bargaining chip. Fair play the the nationalist of Newry who were on the news tonight.

Do you not know that the backstop is an insurance that the promises which Brexiteers made that issues relating to a border in Ireland can be solved with technology and other means and so it is for the Brexiteers within the UK to come up with these solutions. If they do, as they said they would, the backstop will never be required.

Every time they ask for the backstop to be removed, they are admitting that they lied about solutions to circumvent it's need.

The more they lie, the more proof that this was a false premise ahead of the referendum and so places on doubt the validity of the result.

You know I've kind of given up on anything but a hard Brexit. I was flying from Dublin back home to Austria in 2016 and a stag party from the UK were cheering the vote result in Dublin airport on their way to Spain. And I thought this madness can't go on, eventually common sense would prevail.

Three years after the vote was announced its gotten worse. Nobody seems to have opened a civics book or even gone on to Wikipedia and enter 'EU'. Apparently the EU are intransigent, yet they quickly put out what they needed. They opened up their discussions as much as is possible, and they clearly explained their issues, problems and offers.

The UK has spent three years fighting a minority in the tories that has no idea about what they want or desire but 'NO'. No one knows what they want, and neither do they, bar unicorns.

I'm pretty pro EU, but I'm critical of a lot of how it works. As is a large proportion of the country I now live in. However, you can be critical of a governmental institution while also realising that its the best available and working to fix that within. This is not a hard concept and the cornerstone of democracy.

This entire process is frustrating and upsetting. It's not the EU or Ireland against the UK, its the UK fighting themselves and causing untold repercussions on their society.

Bit cynical wrote: »

I disagree that it would solve nothing but we've got to be realistic about what can be achieved. A free trade deal where there are no tariffs on goods means an easier patrolled border. A border where there is no trade deal whatsoever requires intensive border infrastructure and monitoring.

In fairness if the UK ends up crashing out a Hard Border would be an unfortunate reality because the UK not the EU by basically negating every trade arrangement it has at once turns it into the EU's external border. As mentioned earlier the whole border thing was less of someone not putting it up but rather not heing the person who gets the flak for putting it up first (which is solely the UK's fault here). What happens after that is up in the air simply because of the UK's refusal to tell everyone else what it ACTUALLY WANTS. I'd expect it to be less fortifications and such though most likely it'll be temporary stuff for a few months because a hard border is only something that can come in the long term of things.

Bit cynical wrote: »

We already have the CTA and reciprocal working arrangements between the two jurisdictions, so a trade deal even along the lines of Canada would solve many problems.

This is less desirable, however, than what was envisaged under the backstop, but it looks like the backstop is dead forever. It has only served to delay and complicate proceedings to Ireland's disadvantage.

I'd say the backstop is only delayed rather than dead because either it will end up being part of any future agreement OR the UK will be forced by circumstances to agree to a proper FTA or customs union after a few months of Brexit chaos eviscerating its economy. I don't know how the CTA is going to work out in the long term its basically something that will be exposed in the medium term and circumstances could bring its end if things get ugly or something unforeseen happens in the chaos.

Bit cynical wrote: »

I know people have said that the UK will surely realise the error of their ways within six months and come crawling back in humiliation to the EU, but remember that not too long ago we were pretty sure that they would accept any deal that was given to them. We now think they will come crawling back because that is the only hope we are left with.

It's less about confidence about them accepting any deal as such but rather pragmatism in this case. The UK simply cant fly off and relocate to the far east or Australia its part of Europe. it WILL have to do a deal at some point but this could be on worse terms than it even has in the WA because they'll have inflicted damage on everyone for their stupid and needless behavior over the last 2 years. The devil is in the detail and while we have predictions and attempts to get a good idea of the damage we dont have an actual instance of such reckess stupidity to go on so we ultimately dont know HOW bad the damage will ultimately be only its gonna be an utter train wreck of a disaster.

ilovesmybrick wrote: »

I'm pretty pro EU, but I'm critical of a lot of how it works. As is a large proportion of the country I now live in. However, you can be critical of a governmental institution while also realising that its the best available and working to fix that within. This is not a hard concept and the cornerstone of democracy.

Same myself. There's thing's that I wont like or be critical about the EU but the whole point is to hammer away at them till they cop on and fix something if there's a problem not pull a "screw you guys I'm going home" routine because one cant get their own way. The whole reason the EU came about was because of the need to pool resources to protect all involved its less costly and offers more protection. The problem with the UK is they cant see that and its going to bite them in the áss when its too late.

downcow wrote:

The backstop can lock us in forever to a situation where we have entirely different arrangements to the rest of the UK (and please don’t again bring up the current devolved matters which are chosen by the people -some crazy discriminatory stuff I know). It leaves us under the control of the Eu while rest of UK leaves. I is completely undemocratic. And it is not needed.

Okay, maybe I'm only speaking for myself as someone that remembers the end of the troubles and the checkpoints, and is from the Republic, but this is not a ploy to force the North to rejoin the South as you have been making out or insinuating the past while. This is the result of a poorly considered decision by Cameron.

You already have many different arrangements than the UK. That has been a fact for a very long time. The South has done incredibly well from membership of the EU, as has the North.

Northern Ireland has no devolved government at the moment. You're only representatives are the hardline DUP members in Westminster, and for around two years now what has the UK done to right this democratic deficit? You say you're left under the control of the EU if there's a divergence. What control do you have now?

Infini wrote:

Same myself. There's thing's that I wont like or be critical about the EU but the whole point is to hammer away at them till they cop on and fix something if there's a problem not pull a "screw you guys I'm going home" routine because one cant get their own way. The whole reason the EU came about was because of the need to pool resources to protect all involved its less costly and offers more protection. The problem with the UK is they cant see that and its going to bite them in the áss when its too late.

In fact the simple thing is that's how the EU works. We don't like some things, others do and we reach compromise. Is it ideal on a personal or national level? Not always. Does it work? Mostly, but imperfectly. But we can fix the imperfections.

ilovesmybrick wrote: »

Okay, maybe I'm only speaking for myself as someone that remembers the end of the troubles and the checkpoints, and is from the Republic, but this is not a ploy to force the North to rejoin the South as you have been making out or insinuating the past while. This is the result of a poorly considered decision by Cameron.

You already have many different arrangements than the UK. That has been a fact for a very long time. The South has done incredibly well from membership of the EU, as has the North.

Northern Ireland has no devolved government at the moment. You're only representatives are the hardline DUP members in Westminster, and for around two years now what has the UK done to right this democratic deficit? You say you're left under the control of the EU if there's a divergence. What control do you have now?

We can elect mps. Ok sf don’t represent anyone but their voters could vote for a party that do.
I don’t know how you define ‘hardline’ I don’t vote dup but I have to accept they are the biggest party in NI. Would you refer to sf as hardline? I’m interested.

judeboy101 wrote: »

Actually the EU did cave. As an EU citizen I cannot fly to switzerland in the morning and get a job. Firstly if the region I get the job in has higher than average unemployment, the job must go to a swiss first. Secondly I must prove that I have integrated into swiss society. That's not from, that's quotas by stealth.

Got a link for any of that? AFAIK there is FoM for EU citizens in CH.

Infini wrote: »

Based on what? The whole "backstop" is meant to be a case of "In case of Emergency" and temporary. It's basically meant to be superseded in the long run with a trade agreement. The whole point is this is not a physical border between the UK and NI its a trade one and mainly to keep sub standard products out and allow NI to be used as a backdoor.

There's no details on this position that affect you negatively. It hardly leaves you under the control of the EU either. Hell it doesn't even stop you exporting to Britain. The whole hysteria on this is more of "oh noes it seperates us..... somehow" but is utterly lacking on where this practically affects you. On the other hand were seeing how being removed from the EU IS going to practically affect you aka Trade slowed to a narrow flow because of lack of permits and people being cut off which is FAR more acute and will hurt severely.

If the backstop is so benign they why don’t you do us a favour and have all the checks you want at the Irish see moved to the French ireland ferries. I would love to know how you can keep telling me to just knuckle down and accept it while you don’t want anything to compromise free movement between you and France. Try to step back and look at what you are saying

downcow wrote: »

If the backstop is so benign they why don’t you do us a favour and have all the checks you want at the Irish see moved to the French ireland ferries. I would love to know how you can keep telling me to just knuckle down and accept it while you don’t want anything to compromise free movement between you and France. Try to step back and look at what you are saying

What are you on about, we are not leaving the EU...YOU ARE. You need to compromise to get a deal.

Jesus. :eek:

downcow wrote: »

The backstop can lock us in forever to a situation where we have entirely different arrangements to the rest of the UK (and please don’t again bring up the current devolved matters which are chosen by the people -some crazy discriminatory stuff I know). It leaves us under the control of the Eu while rest of UK leaves. I is completely undemocratic. And it is not needed.

Then let the people of NI vote on the backstop. Most would accept it I believe. It's actually a sweet deal for NI.

downcow wrote: »

If the backstop is so benign they why don’t you do us a favour and have all the checks you want at the Irish see moved to the French ireland ferries. I would love to know how you can keep telling me to just knuckle down and accept it while you don’t want anything to compromise free movement between you and France. Try to step back and look at what you are saying

Under the backstop, only GB goods would be checked, and in GB ports - there would be no checks required in Northern Ireland.

downcow wrote: »

We can elect mps. Ok sf don’t represent anyone but their voters could vote for a party that do.
I don’t know how you define ‘hardline’ I don’t vote dup but I have to accept they are the biggest party in NI. Would you refer to sf as hardline? I’m interested.

The shinners are more rabble rousers in perception here but let's face it they're not compounding the problems. The DUP in the past though has made somewhat borderline malicious statements like "blood red lines". Inflammatory and needless and doesn't help at all. They also had involvement in that mysterious donation with Brexit which they refuse to disclose the donor which reeks of cronyism.

Even if you don't vote for the DUP you shouldn't let them away with low standards either. Look at the whole national broadband thing and how a minister resigned because of some rather dodgy meetings. He might or might not have done something wrong but he had the integrity to resign when found out. When Arlene got in trouble with the Cash for Ash she was asked to resign temporarily pending an investigation. She not only refused to but helped bring down the executive over it. They lack integrity and ignore responsibility.

downcow wrote: »

If the backstop is so benign they why don’t you do us a favour and have all the checks you want at the Irish see moved to the French ireland ferries. I would love to know how you can keep telling me to just knuckle down and accept it while you don’t want anything to compromise free movement between you and France. Try to step back and look at what you are saying

Your the one who want's NI to leave the EU. Ireland is a part of the EU and the single market hence the backstop. It's the UK who wants to leave. If they weren't leaving the single market and customs union the backstop would be irrelevant. There's nothing on our side to compromise here. You also evaded my question on how it's supposed to negatively affect NI exactly.

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Ruth Dudley Edwards called An Taoiseach Leo Varadkar a "useful idiot"

Well she is the biggest one of all

downcow wrote: »

If the backstop is so benign they why don’t you do us a favour and have all the checks you want at the Irish see moved to the French ireland ferries. I would love to know how you can keep telling me to just knuckle down and accept it while you don’t want anything to compromise free movement between you and France. Try to step back and look at what you are saying

Step back and educate yourself about WTF is going on rather than demonstrate your ignorance

downcow wrote: »

If the backstop is so benign they why don’t you do us a favour and have all the checks you want at the Irish see moved to the French ireland ferries. I would love to know how you can keep telling me to just knuckle down and accept it while you don’t want anything to compromise free movement between you and France. Try to step back and look at what you are saying

Why don'y you? Checks between Ireland and France would be a breach of EU rules. Checks between Ireland and NI would breach GFA. Checks between NI and UK mainland hurt feelings.