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; } } }

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

First Up

rusty the athlete wrote:

But this has been a 'feature' of the approach all along such as May going around Europe trying to solicit individual member countries when it was repeated time and time that the EU27 are united and not willing to be approached unilaterally. And then the whole cherry picking/having cake and eating it exercise, again being told time and time again that the favorable bits of the EU can't be picked off and the less 'desirable' elements of being a full member ignored. And now everything will be rosy when the backstop is pulled despite being told repeatedly by all and sundry that its a non starter. Its the most peculiar negotiating stance that I have ever come across, like saying I'm agree to move into your house tomorrow after being told over and over that its already occupied and simply not for sale.

May and her dysfunctional cabinet are hostage to the multiple whims of the HoC. Party cohesion has gone out the window.

Its not the first time (nor last) the EU has had to deal with a country or government in chaos. There is only one way to do it; be clear, firm and consistent.

judeboy101

road_high wrote: »

More helpful Indo headlines this morning- “Varadkar in panic as Brexit border plan exposed”. We all know in the event of a crash out there’ll be a hard border- this is why the EU have been so keen and allowed so many concession to the UK. But a line has to be drawn so where. If they don’t agree then so be it

If Jesus was being crucified in the morning, the Sindo would be running ads for half price nails.

Silent Running

downcow wrote: »

Folks this is really interesting for me. Lots of you responded and to a person didn’t even attempt to answer the question. Simply stated that we should not have voted to leave and should go against the referendum.
It’s maybe why we can teach little agreement here. It’s not really about negotiations,agreement, backstop etc which I thought it was. It’s just people are pi**ed off that we are leaving

Do you really expect people not to be pissed off that the UK is in the process of harming everyone around them? This selfish act won't win any friends among their neighbours. No thought has been given to anyone but England, and I do mean England. They don't care a jot about Scotland, Wales and, least of all, Northern Ireland.

downcow

First Up wrote: »

You seem to be labouring under the illusion that there is something more to be "'negotiated". There isn't.

Help me with this. I am genuinely confused. You keep saying there will be no more negotiating.
If we leave with no deal because we can’t accept the backstop being potentially permanent, are you seriously saying there will be no further negotiations?
Can you simply not stomache the reality that there will be an ever growing plethora of mutually beneficial agreements develop?
This is the ludicrous belief that many are stating here almost as a threat to the UK.

First Up

downcow wrote:

Folks this is really interesting for me. Lots of you responded and to a person didnâ€™t even attempt to answer the question. Simply stated that we should not have voted to leave and should go against the referendum. Itâ€™s maybe why we can teach little agreement here. Itâ€™s not really about negotiations,agreement, backstop etc which I thought it was. Itâ€™s just people are pi**ed off that we are leaving

I have several times asked you to clarify what you want to be negotiated and you have ignored the question.

So don't come the misunderstood victim here.

road_high

judeboy101 wrote: »

If Jesus was being crucified in the morning, the Sindo would be running ads for half price nails.

Especially if they thought he was Irish!

Professor Moriarty

downcow wrote: »

Folks this is really interesting for me. Lots of you responded and to a person didn’t even attempt to answer the question. Simply stated that we should not have voted to leave and should go against the referendum.
It’s maybe why we can teach little agreement here. It’s not really about negotiations,agreement, backstop etc which I thought it was. It’s just people are pi**ed off that we are leaving

Eh, yeah people are pissed off. Our economy will be severely damaged. Our security is under great threat. An institution that is very important to Ireland is being damaged. None of which is of our own making. And this is news to you. Says it all really.

First Up

downcow wrote:

Help me with this. I am genuinely confused. You keep saying there will be no more negotiating. If we leave with no deal because we canâ€™t accept the backstop being potentially permanent, are you seriously saying there will be no further negotiations? Can you simply not stomache the reality that there will be an ever growing plethora of mutually beneficial agreements develop? This is the ludicrous belief that many are stating here almost as a threat to the UK.

There will be no further negotiations. The UK can develop as large a plethora of agreements as it likes but they won't be with the EU.

downcow

First Up wrote: »

I have several times asked you to clarify what you want to be negotiated and you have ignored the question.

So don't come the misunderstood victim here.

I expect everything to be negotiated after we leave. Can’t think of anything that wont be up fo negotiating so the list would be very long.

Calina

downcow wrote: »

Help me with this. I am genuinely confused. You keep saying there will be no more negotiating.
If we leave with no deal because we can’t accept the backstop being potentially permanent, are you seriously saying there will be no further negotiations?
Can you simply not stomache the reality that there will be an ever growing plethora of mutually beneficial agreements develop?
This is the ludicrous belief that many are stating here almost as a threat to the UK.

No. We are not. We are saying the UK still won't get the cake it thinks the world owes. It will not magically be in a stronger position. The EU will probably have to step in on humanitarian grounds when the social divisions in the UK start to cause serious problems.

The mutually beneficial one was membership. Everything else is lesser. Why do you not understand that?

First Up

downcow wrote:

I expect everything to be negotiated after we leave. Canâ€™t think of anything that wont be up fo negotiating so the list would be very long.

I think we have identified the problem.

downcow

First Up wrote: »

There will be no further negotiations. The UK can develop as large a plethora of agreements as it likes but they won't be with the EU.

Does anyone else on here really believe this statement? It seems incredible to me. Next thing we’ll be pointing our missiles at each other Korea style

downcow

First Up wrote: »

I think we have identified the problem.

Yes I think so. Many on here think that 27 nations are going to never speak to UK again after brexit. We will have to agree to differ on that one.

Professor Moriarty

downcow wrote: »

Does anyone else on here really believe this statement? It seems incredible to me. Next thing we’ll be pointing our missiles at each other Korea style

So you suggest war if Britain doesn't get what it wants in negotions.

Calina

downcow wrote: »

Does anyone else on here really believe this statement? It seems incredible to me. Next thing we’ll be pointing our missiles at each other Korea style

Strictly speaking, I think it is an over simplification. What he means is the UK will not get a second shot at a withdrawal agreement.

Every subsequent attempt to get a trade agreement will be through the prism of the failure to do a clean agreed withdrawal, and trade agreements will either be very hard to reach and take time, ir the UK will be folding immediately.

Membership was better.

downcow

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

So you suggest war if Britain doesn't get what it wants in negotions.

Oh come on now! That’s a bit disegenuous.

listermint

downcow wrote: »

Does anyone else on here really believe this statement? It seems incredible to me. Next thing we’ll be pointing our missiles at each other Korea style

The EU will put the UK at the back of the line rightfully in its place on the list of countries trying to get a negotiated deal with it.

The UK deserves no special treatment despite you believing it does. And it certainly won't get any negotiation until it sorts it obligations on the 39 billion that isn't a ransom it's a debt

You have a ludicrous skewed viewpoint where a country that has businesses currently exciting en masse has an ace up its sleeve in terms of trade.

The EU quite rightly has continued concentrating itself on deals that have been in the works for 5 and 10 years and will continue to do so. Why ? Because people want to do business with them.

Anthracite

Silent Running wrote: »

Do you really expect people not to be pissed off that the UK is in the process of harming everyone around them? This selfish act won't win any friends among their neighbours. No thought has been given to anyone but England, and I do mean England. They don't care a jot about Scotland, Wales and, least of all, Northern Ireland.

I don't think there can be any serious argument about this.

In a sense, I don't blame them. But I do blame them for being outraged when other nations defend their own interests.

Professor Moriarty

downcow wrote: »

Oh come on now! That’s a bit disegenuous.

So what did you mean by "next we'll be pointing missiles at each other"?

First Up

downcow wrote:

Does anyone else on here really believe this statement? It seems incredible to me. Next thing weâ€™ll be pointing our missiles at each other Korea style

If you find that incredible I respectfully suggest you educate yourself on how international treaties, trade and organisations operate.

Borderhopper

downcow wrote: »

Apologies. You sound sincere. I feel I have been bombarded by continual anti NI stuff from people wearing blinkers, so I have read too much into your welcome back. And no I wasn’t away just warned

Here is my thought to your question.
Everyone is talking about ‘the deal’ but I think most of the dealing is still to be done. If we head into negotiations with the backstop agreed we will get a serious caning from the Eu for being naughty and leaving. We will have given away all negotiating power.
I heard some on radio today describe it as like going into a showroom to negotiate the purchase of a new car and locking the door and giving the key to the salesman and telling him you can’t leave until you’ve bought the car.
This is the fear of the backstop.
And as a few posters are pointing out the government cannot be trusted so to get the deal they want they will be happy to sacrifice NI to permanent separation.
So you ask what deal I want.
It’s simple. If there is no backstop then Eu and UK go into negotiations needing each other and they will get a good deal for both. And NI can’t be sacrificed

Well to be honest no deal has been done. The withdrawal agreement is basically an insurance policy. The U.K. had no viable proposals, which is why the backstop was accepted by their negotiators. The way I see it, to have the backstop come into operation is undesirable to the EU. To have a region able to trade without restriction but also using what is likely to be a greatly devalued currency would give Northern Ireland a massive advantage. The reason the U.K was never too interested in developing Northern Ireland economically is that MPs would have to explain to their constituents why they supported special economic policies that would disadvantage their own reason.

I think the time of going back and getting a better insurance policy is past. What, specifically, do you think, or any other poster here, would think is a realistic alternative? The WA is in its current form precisely because of the British government's red lines. I can't find it, but Barnier had a good flow chart of the various red lines. Will they drop some to ensure that the border remains as open as possible?

Zubeneschamali

downcow wrote: »

I expect everything to be negotiated after we leave. Can’t think of anything that wont be up fo negotiating so the list would be very long.

Entry price to negotiations: 40 billion

Item 1: citizens rights
Item 2: no hard border In Ireland
Items 3 and up: whatever the UK wants to talk about

Enzokk

downcow wrote: »

One step at a time. Could I genuinely check this out so as I am not make wrong assumptions

Can most of us agree that it is the potential permanency of the backstop that is currently the main blockage?

Can we also agree that it is in everyone’s interests across Eu/UK/ire for a sensible agreement to be reached?

The backstop is a problem for the ERG and the DUP. May's deal didn't get Labour support because they are in opposition. They have no problem with the backstop and want a permanent customs union with the EU.

So for a Tory Brexit the problem is the backstop, but even if you water down the backstop you will still have remain Tories who has problems with other parts of her deal.

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

To whit, the story is fully fleshed out by Slugger O'Toole (sparing me from having to link to the Sun):

https://sluggerotoole.com/2019/01/25/the-dup-seem-poised-to-bail-out-theresa-may-will-the-eu-be-impressed/

So the plan is to reject the deal that is on offer and to go back and ask for a new one? To use the car dealer analogy, you go and ask about a new car and the dealer offer you the deal they are currently running. You go home to think about it and go back the next day and say you will not accept it and he has to offer you a better one. The problem is the deal is the best one on offer, will you get a better deal?

downcow wrote: »

Folks this is really interesting for me. Lots of you responded and to a person didn’t even attempt to answer the question. Simply stated that we should not have voted to leave and should go against the referendum.
It’s maybe why we can teach little agreement here. It’s not really about negotiations,agreement, backstop etc which I thought it was. It’s just people are pi**ed off that we are leaving

I am angry about Brexit. We have just come out of the recession and things are still only slowly improving outside of Dublin, and even then salaries has still not risen to fight inflation so people are still worse off. And then you have the UK throwing a grenade into the mix? If you aren't angry then it is a problem.

downcow wrote: »

Does anyone else on here really believe this statement? It seems incredible to me. Next thing we’ll be pointing our missiles at each other Korea style

The EU has already stated there will not be further negotiations. The deal on offer is the best the UK will get. You see how hard it is to get one government to agree to a deal, but 27?

Leroy42

The question is not whether the UK and EU will have future negotiations, but on what basis?

The one clear thing from Brexit is that the UK is utterly divided and is unwilling to face reality

So they negotiate, but on the basis that nothing agreed during is agreed until a divided HoC can agree to it. Currently that looks unlikely.

With the added problem the the UK refused to meet their financial obligations. It's not a good starting point.

FrancieBrady

Enzokk wrote: »

The backstop is a problem for the ERG and the DUP. May's deal didn't get Labour support because they are in opposition. They have no problem with the backstop and want a permanent customs union with the EU.

The backstop is in no sense a physical or material problem, it is a notional or abstract problem.
What you are seeing are two groups (ERG and DUP) who are riddled with arrogance, imperialism and good old fashioned suprematism, opposing it, mainly.

Put simply, the DUP cannot bring themselves to say the nationalists or Dublin's stance is right and cannot allow them to have a win, by insuring our future.
That's the bottom line here imo.
We have seen exactly the same behaviours around the Anglo Irish Agreement, GFA, Flegs and Marches, not to mention the Irish Language Act and Equality rights.

murphaph

judeboy101 wrote: »

TC brings up scenario of a UK f&m outbreak where phytosanitary has been moved away from border, let's say meath factory. Infected animal imported and checked in Meath. Headlines read f&m confirmed in Ireland. No one will read the byline (infection imported from UK).

Which is why it's fantasy IMO. If the UK exits without a deal, we will impose a hard border to protect not just the single market but the Irish agri-food sector's reputation. The UK has had far too many animal health scares. 2 F&M epidemics in living memory and of course BSE.

This is all the fault of the UK.

CelticRambler

downcow wrote: »

I expect everything to be negotiated after we leave. Can’t think of anything that wont be up fo negotiating so the list would be very long.

OK, let's hear what you'd put on that list as the first three things that the UK can offer that'd be of particular interest to the EU.

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The backstop is in no sense a physical or material problem, it is a notional or abstract problem.
What you are seeing are two groups (ERG and DUP) who are riddled with arrogance, imperialism and good old fashioned suprematism, opposing it, mainly.

Put simply, the DUP cannot bring themselves to say the nationalists or Dublin's stance is right and cannot allow them to have a win, by insuring our future.
That's the bottom line here imo.
We have seen exactly the same behaviours around the Anglo Irish Agreement, GFA, Flegs and Marches, not to mention the Irish Language Act and Equality rights.

I certainly agree with you analysis of the dup and erg. Your weakness is you cannot see similar qualities across most of the political parties and certainly the remainers who feel they know more that the public.
I have tried not to respond to you raising “Anglo Irish Agreement, GFA, Flegs and Marches, not to mention the Irish Language Act”. But you have now done it several times.
Everyone of these had diverse opinions, indeed opposing positions depending on where you are looking from - valid reasons on all sides. I can clearly appreciate and respect nationalists position on these but unfortunately it seems you can only see where you are looking from with no ability to put yourself in the others shoes.
I am afraid you are applying the same limitations to your consideration of brexit

And you bottom line is delusional if you think people up here are infatuated with the south.

FrancieBrady

murphaph wrote: »

Which is why it's fantasy IMO. If the UK exits without a deal, we will impose a hard border to protect not just the single market but the Irish agri-food sector's reputation. The UK has had far too many animal health scares. 2 F&M epidemics in living memory and of course BSE.

This is all the fault of the UK.

Absolutely. There was no way we were ever going to be able to avoid a hard border if the UK went rogue and crashed out.
It will be a case of leave them to it and try and minimise the damage to us and the rest of our partner countries.

McMurphy

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

You need to step back and reread your post from an outsider perspective.

Ireland doesn't want anything to compromise free movement between France and Ireland, therefore we won't seek to leave the EU.

Seriously, can you not see how ludicrous that post is?