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

BlitzKrieg

downcow wrote: »

How about this as a wee example
"a £130 million travelling circus that once a month sees the European Parliament decamp from Belgium to France.

Over the course of the weekend, some 2,500 plastic trunks will be loaded on to five lorries and driven almost 300 miles from Brussels to Strasbourg.

On Monday, about 1,000 politicians, officials and translators will then make the same journey on two specially chartered trains hired at taxpayers’ expense.

A few thousand more will go to Strasbourg by other means, as the European Parliament switches from Brussels, its permanent base, to its “official” home in northern France." :mad:

you can read it all here http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/faq/19/why-does-parliament-move-between-brussels-and-strasbourg

Oddly most leaders of the european union, members of parliament, the commission and council would 100% agree with you that this should be done away with.

But ironically for people banging on about how europe has far too much control and that the sovereignty of individual nations are under risk, it's actually because of the sovereignty of an individual nation that they cannot stop this process.

To stop this monthly move they require the unanimous approval of all member states

and one country obviously doesn't want it to stop. France. Most of the spending involved in the move goes to the french economy.

It could be resolved if something was offered to France in exchange but it's so low down on the priorities list for all the other EU members. So no one really has the will to negotiate.

FrancieBrady

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Of course it was partisan, he was only invited by the government because it was known that his speech would favour one party in the Referendum, the Remainers, whose campaign was supported by the government and the majority of MPs.

Ben Rhodes, who accompanied Obama to his meeting with Cameron, has placed on record that Obama was requested to make his "back of the queue remark" and happily accepted

Was Obama partisan, no-one can seriously deny it.

So we are to be upset by a government who support Remain asking somebody to underwrite that position?

Did Leavers invite both opinions to address their meetings? I must have missed that non- partisanship gesture. :rolleyes:

Itssoeasy

I was impressed with Helen McEntee this morning in her interview on the bbc. As has been said she could have easily fallen for the bait of getting angry but she let the presenter do it, and there noticeable pauses after the questions.

downcow

Enzokk wrote: »

Yes you did, twice that I could find:

That is why I asked which way you would have voted. If you were neutral you would not have voted. That would have been in contradiction of your post stating you are a democrat though. Hence my comment to own that you are a leaver and to stop telling us that you were neutral on the issue as it is apparent that you are not neutral. There is nothing wrong with that, just don't pretend that you are not fighting a corner when you most assuredly are.

You are concerned about 6% of parliament's budget, 1% of the EU administration budget and 0.1% of the entire EU budget? That is a reason to possibly cause misery for people in the UK?

I think you'll find the example you have given are where i said i was neutral ie back in 2016. I have been clear about this and that i am not quite so neutral now. I am not sure why you are finding it so difficult to accept that views change - its healthy you know not to lock yourself in a positing and close your eyes.

and as for the example i gave of how eu doesn't run very efficient. i guess you think thats a fine way to run an operation

johnnyskeleton

Mod note:

Folks, I know that tensions are running high as Brexit is in its final stages, but there has been a serious deterioration of the quality of posts on this thread over the last few weeks. The mods have had given out 12 cards and some bans over the last 3 days and it's not acceptable.

Be civil to other posters. Don't needle them, misrepresent their posts, soapbox about pet topics, deliberately evade the topic at hand etc.

Professor Moriarty

Itssoeasy wrote: »

I was impressed with Helen McEntee this morning in her interview on the bbc. As has been said she could have easily fallen for the bait of getting angry but she let the presenter do it, and there noticeable pauses after the questions.

Humphrys' question about Irexit was definitely arrogant but I can't decide if it was also a form of trolling or if it was also wilful ignorance.

McMurphy

Anyone a link to the McEntee interview?

EdgeCase

I've been quite taken aback by comments on that topic in Britain over the years. A lot of people don't seem to have any idea of the circumstances of our leaving the UK back in the 1910s and assume that it was just some kind of amicable divorce.

I actually had one guy talking to me in a pub who seemed to be under the impression that our leaving the UK was something to do with the EU !?!?!

But in general, they seem to think that Ireland is somehow 'family' and should be on ultra warm terms with them.

There's a similar complete lack of awareness about the colonial era around the world and an assumption that various places that actually had wars of independence against them are going to be rushing to re-join some kind of Empire 2.0.

I don't think it's (in most cases) an attitude that comes from any kind of nasty place, rather just absolute ignorance of history. There's a tendency to see the imperial period in this very oddly positive way as if it were some kind of act of friendship and benevolence. It's really quite odd.

Also a lot of people in England genuinely don't seem to understand that Ireland is not in the UK.
I remember having a discussion with someone in a health centre there about how I didn't have a national insurance number because I was Irish. She argued : But you're British if you're from Ireland, how do you not have one...
It actually took a significant amount of explaining before she accepted that it was actually a different country.

None of that, however, can excuse that level of ignorance from someone presenting a flagship current affairs programme on BBC Radio 4. It's not a chat in a pub.

The BBC for decades was above politics and a benchmark of quality current affairs broadcasting. It's depressing to see it losing is standards.

Tell me how

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Anyone a link to the McEntee interview?

See below

Tell me how wrote: »

Infini

downcow wrote: »

I honestly would have struggled with it. I was naturally prob very slightly remain but had huge issues with how Europe is run. But the intervention of Obama and the likes, combined with our government spending millions on a propaganda leaflet telling us to vote remain would have probably been enough to push me to vote for Brexit. I know i had a smile to myself when i heard the vote coming through in France - I felt thats one up for the ordinary man

It wasn't a one up for the ordinary man it was basically shooting yourselves in the foot. No-one is denying the way Europe is run is perfect their response to the financial crash was far from perfect and the haphazard way with the refugee crisis was definitely less than ideal and the whole structure does need improvement for accountability but there's a difference between fixing something and walking away because one cannot get their own way. There are no benefits only drawbacks to all of this and the common man is going to get shafted for this.

The whole vote itself was a dysfunctional Tory exercise in incompetence. Not only did leave not have a clear plan on HOW to leave without causing massive damage BUT they're seemingly fine with crashing out causing damage to everyone but most of all to themselves for absolutely no benefit. When asked what these benefits are for Brexit they can only come up with soundbites not anything coherent: In other words they're taking out of their hole and haven't got a real clue as to what to do. The problem with all this is people voted partially as a protest and out of fear (this coming during the refugee crisis) but there is also evidence of dodgy campaign funding and blatant cheating by the Leave side. If there was any responsibility in government this alone should have should have been cause for either a delay or a rerun of the Brexit Referendum because of possible outside interference but those in charge are too cowardly to do so.

Through all this the whole process has been one of breathtaking arrogance from the UK that it can just bully those into getting its own way. When they don't some of them began resort to tired anti-Irish tirades thinking this is 50 to 100 years ago and that they can bully our country around forgetting we got the backing of 26 other member states and our position is reasonable and based on trying to minimize the damage being caused to our country BY them. We don't have to move to accommodate their blatant foolishness over this. The backstop is purely for one thing: keeping as much of the status quo on this island as possible because NI did NOT vote to leave in all of this and whether you like it or not or whether the DUP likes it or not that's a fact. When asked how the backstop negatively affects them all they come up with is slogans and soundbites they've not once come up with a tangible argument as to how it would affect them beyond ideological ones not PRACTICAL ones. This is all while ignoring pretty much the entire farming and business community of NI. They're ideologues which in my opinion is the pure definition of idiots and dumbásses because they put themselves before the good of everyone in NI and would rather cause damage to everyone for noone's benefit but for their own spite. If they had real tangible arguments that stood up to scrutiny it would be a whole different story here but they don't.

For everyone's sake I honestly hope that Brexit ultimately end's up being cancelled or the WA is ultimately passed because the no deal scenario is not just incompetent and stupid, it basically causes damage to everyone but to Britain more than anyone else for absolutely no benefit for anyone in Europe and the UK at all. PERIOD.

Folkstonian

EdgeCase wrote: »

I've been quite taken aback by comments on that topic in Britain over the years. A lot of people don't seem to have any idea of the circumstances of our leaving the UK back in the 1910s and assume that it was just some kind of amicable divorce.

I actually had one guy talking to me in a pub who seemed to be under the impression that our leaving the UK was something to do with the EU !?!?!

But in general, they seem to think that Ireland is somehow 'family' and should be on ultra warm terms with them.

There's a similar complete lack of awareness about the colonial era around the world and an assumption that various places that actually had wars of independence against them are going to be rushing to re-join some kind of Empire 2.0.

I don't think it's (in most cases) an attitude that comes from any kind of nasty place, rather just absolute ignorance of history. There's a tendency to see the imperial period in this very oddly positive way as if it were some kind of act of friendship and benevolence. It's really quite odd.

Also a lot of people in England genuinely don't seem to understand that Ireland is not in the UK.
I remember having a discussion with someone in a health centre there about how I didn't have a national insurance number because I was Irish. She argued : But you're British if you're from Ireland, how do you not have one...
It actually took a significant amount of explaining before she accepted that it was actually a different country.

None of that, however, can excuse that level of ignorance from someone presenting a flagship current affairs programme on BBC Radio 4. It's not a chat in a pub.

The BBC for decades was above politics and a benchmark of quality current affairs broadcasting. It's depressing to see it losing is standards.

I do think most English people would be horrified if they knew the level of antipathy that large sections of Ireland have for them. I didn’t have any idea how strong the feeling was until I started working here and subsequently took more of an interest in the political discourse.

I wouldn’t say that there is a deliberate ignorance in Englsnd towards Ireland but it’s only natural that we tend to look ‘upwards’ when consuming foreign media.
In Ireland people follow English sports, culture and politics to a degree that I have been surprised by, but in England people also look ‘upwards’ massively and consume ridiculous amounts of American television, sports, comedy and politics.

Just look at the numbers that protested on the streets of London following trump’s election, an event that was literally nothing to do with the English.

EdgeCase

Folkstonian wrote: »

...but in England people also look ‘upwards’ massively and consume ridiculous amounts of American television, sports, comedy and politics.

That's something that will also bite rather hard as they've an assumption that they've some kind of political influence in the US due to a special relationship that most Americans are entirely unaware of.

However, I wouldn't say there's a deliberate ignorance, but there is a rather surprising lack of any knowledge of what is *their* history. Irish history until 1921 was fully part of British history and the Northern Ireland troubles occurred almost exclusively in the UK - Northern Ireland being part of the UK and the majority of major attacks occurring in Northern Ireland or in Britain itself.

I just find it somewhat odd that they can just sort of package it up as "over there" and nothing to do with them.

Also to be honest, on an interpersonal level there isn't huge antipathy towards the English in Ireland. I have English relatives and lots of connections to England and Scotland at various levels of my family.

Any antipathy tends to be because of what happened during the war of independence era, particularly the use of the Black and Tans and so on. That was in widespread living memory until relatively recently and those kinds of memories tend to become cultural.

Also I would say that most Irish people tend to get on very well with most English people. It's just that there is a rather obnoxious layer in an aspect of the Tory party and English nationalism that genuinely tends to rub pretty much everyone up the wrong way. They're somewhat hard to like.

But, whatever about all of the above, it's mind-boggling that a high-level current affairs presenter would be so poorly briefed.

I don't expect your average person in a pub to know much about Irish politics, anymore than your average Irish person's going to know the ins and outs of how the House of Lords works, but I would expect a leading current affairs presenter on RTE or BBC to and I would hold them to a totally different standard.

My expectation of BBC current affairs is that it should be up here at the level of a political science department in a university.
It's supposed to be a world-leading, public broadcaster at the top of its game. They've VAST resources and expertise to pull from and they're increasingly behaving like they're some cheapo tabloid.

I think it's utterly reasonable to hold the BBC to a far higher standard.

UsedToWait

Infini wrote: »

for absolutely no benefit for anyone in Europe and the UK at all. PERIOD.

Except the disaster capitalists, who will be delighted to hoover up 'distressed assets' and the currency and market speculators who can profit from a freefall, and those who wish for deregulation, which will allow a diminution of workers rights, food safety, further privatisation of the NHS etc..

Coincidentally, many of Brexit's 'leading lights' have an interest in the above scenarios,

Strazdas

Folkstonian wrote: »

I do think most English people would be horrified if they knew the level of antipathy that large sections of Ireland have for them. I didn’t have any idea how strong the feeling was until I started working here and subsequently took more of an interest in the political discourse.

I wouldn’t say that there is a deliberate ignorance in Englsnd towards Ireland but it’s only natural that we tend to look ‘upwards’ when consuming foreign media.
In Ireland people follow English sports, culture and politics to a degree that I have been surprised by, but in England people also look ‘upwards’ massively and consume ridiculous amounts of American television, sports, comedy and politics.

Just look at the numbers that protested on the streets of London following trump’s election, an event that was literally nothing to do with the English.

Are you sure you're not confusing it with antipathy towards the Brexit crowd? I would say the voices of the moderates like John Major, Ken Clarke, Anna Soubry, Dominic Grieve, Chuka Umuna etc are well regarded in Ireland.

Irish people are well able to separate out the hard Brexiteers and know that they don't speak for the whole of England. Unfortunately though, the hawkish hardliners are winning the argument, drowning out the moderate voices, speaking with great authority and as if they represent the entire English nation. Put on any edition of Question Time or whatever and all we ever seem to hear is loud, angry Brexiteers.

EdgeCase

Strazdas wrote: »

Are you sure you're not confusing it with antipathy towards the Brexit crowd? I would say the voices of the moderates like Ken Clarke, Anna Soubry, Dominic Grieve, Chuka Umuna etc are well regarded in Ireland.

Irish people are well able to separate out the hard Brexiteers and know that they don't speak for the whole of England. Unfortunately though, the hawkish hardliners are winning the argument, drowning out the moderate voices, speaking with great authority and as if they represent the entire English nation. Put on any edition of Question Time or whatever and all we ever seem to hear is loud, angry Brexiteers.

I'd add that the late Mo Mowlam is probably at the level of folk hero in Irish political circles and she's very definitely English. She earned huge respect here and was extremely well liked.

Even John Major is very well liked and has made regular appearances here and he's a Tory.

I'd even go as far as saying that Queen Elizebeth has managed to be quite liked, even if many of us don't agree with the concept of a monarchy, she's come across very well, built bridges, even laid a wreath at the Garden of Remembrance in Dublin and got a pretty warm welcome as a visiting head of state from nextdoor.

It's very much an antipathy towards an arrogant aspect of British politics / Little Englander type and I honestly don't think that's unique to Irish people either. They've rubbed the entire EU up the wrong way too and they are absolutely not representative of the whole of English culture anymore than Trump's representative of the majority of the US.

So, to say there's a general antipathy towards English people is a bit unfair and inaccurate.

Bit cynical

Hurrache wrote: »

Humphry's is getting slated by sensible Brits for that interview, and McEntee phrase for her remarkable restraint in dealing with the clown.

In fairness Humphrys is a highly respected journalist.

Strazdas

EdgeCase wrote: »

I'd add that the late Mo Mowlam is probably at the level of folk hero in Irish political circles and she's very definitely English. She earned huge respect here and was extremely well liked.

Even John Major is very well liked and has made regular appearances here and he's a Tory.

I'd even go as far as saying that Queen Elizebeth has managed to be quite liked, even if many of us don't agree with the concept of a monarchy, she's come across very well, built bridges, even laid a wreath at the Garden of Remembrance in Dublin and got a pretty warm welcome as a visiting head of state from nextdoor.

It's very much an antipathy towards an arrogant aspect of British politics / Little Englander type and I honestly don't think that's unique to Irish people either. They've rubbed the entire EU up the wrong way too and they are absolutely not representative of the whole of English culture anymore than Trump's representative of the majority of the US.

So, to say there's a general antipathy towards English people is a bit unfair and inaccurate.

As I said above too, the hardliners appear to be winning the political and media battle. People calling for a second referendum are being accused of being undemocratic and defying "the will of the British people".

It would be very easy to interpret the current stand off between the UK and Ireland as representing anti-British feeling from the Irish side but it's really the Brexit crowd and nobody else who are in the thick of things (and they are running the UK of course......this is a very right wing and Eurosceptic government by any stretch).

First Up

downcow wrote:

and as for the example i gave of how eu doesn't run very efficient. i guess you think thats a fine way to run an operation

I think its a pretty ridiculous reason to throw away membership of the largest and most prosperous trading bloc on the planet where you get 44% of your business.

Bit cynical

Strazdas wrote: »

The backstop came about because of May's red lines. The EU proposed that NI be in a special customs union and GB could be free to do whatever it wanted, including sign trade deals, but May said 'No'.

The idea of the UK being in a UK wide customs union with a backstop came from the British themselves.....the EU were reluctant to go down this route and were actually ruling it out early last summer.

I don't think leaving the customs union can be regarded as a red line although it is made out to be; it is too fundamental to the brexit referendum result. It is a bit like saying leaving the EU is a red line. To be a legitimate red line, I would say that it has to be something extraneous to the main negotiation that is nevertheless insisted upon.

jm08

EdgeCase wrote: »

So, to say there's a general antipathy towards English people is a bit unfair and inaccurate.

I'd agree. Jack Charlton is another one who took on hero status here and at the moment both Stuart Lancaster and Andy Farrell (I know he has strong Irish connections) are well respected and liked. I haven't heard one negative comment about their nationality and both of them seem to like being here.

Professor Moriarty

Bit cynical wrote: »

In fairness Humphrys is a highly respected journalist.

Indeed. However, it didn't stop him asking a monumentally stupid and arrogant question.

Akrasia

Bit cynical wrote: »

I don't think leaving the customs union can be regarded as a red line although it is made out to be; it is too fundamental to the brexit referendum result. It is a bit like saying leaving the EU is a red line. To be a legitimate red line, I would say that it has to be something extraneous to the main negotiation that is nevertheless insisted upon.

Whatever about the customs union, the brexit leave campaigners during the referendum were absolutely adamant that they were campaigning to leave the EU but stay in the single market

"‘Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the single market’ – Conservative MEP Daniel Hannan"

Nigel farage wanted us to be like Norway and Switzerland, ie, in the single market

Owen Patterson said "only a madman would leave the market"

The brexit vote and Theresa May's red lines have nothing to do with each other

ArmaniJeanss

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Indeed. However, it didn't stop him asking a monumentally stupid and arrogant question.

I don't see a lot wrong with it as a question.

Most of these interviews are framed to have a few questions for the interviewee to 'bat away'. That was one for Helen McEntee.
If the question had come from a fellow debater then yes it would be stupid and arrogant. But from an interviewer its ok. Up there with 'should your leader resign?' 'are you confident you have the correct policy?' etc.

ThePanjandrum

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So we are to be upset by a government who support Remain asking somebody to underwrite that position?

Did Leavers invite both opinions to address their meetings? I must have missed that non- partisanship gesture. :rolleyes:

Presumably you missed the question in quotes that I was answering, "How was Obama partisan."

But in answer to your first question, I do get upset about a government using my money to promote a particular view that I disagree with and I would expect people with a different outlook to feel upset when it happens to them.

FrancieBrady

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Presumably you missed the question in quotes that I was answering, "How was Obama partisan."

But in answer to your first question, I do get upset about a government using my money to promote a particular view that I disagree with and I would expect people with a different outlook to feel upset when it happens to them.

He was only 'partisan' because you disagreed with him. Which is why the 'neutral' Downcow tripped himself up.

Obama was speaking BEFORE the referendum vote took place, before we knew what the majority view was, therefore he was just offering his opinion which he is entitled to have and which a government is entitled to have.
Isn't that why downcow is against referendums? He thinks the government should make these decisions. They did make a decision to back Remain.

cml387

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

I don't see a lot wrong with it as a question.

Most of these interviews are framed to have a few questions for the interviewee to 'bat away'. That was one for Helen McEntee.
If the question had come from a fellow debater then yes it would be stupid and arrogant. But from an interviewer its ok. Up there with 'should your leader resign?' 'are you confident you have the correct policy?' etc.

I thought that John Humphries was quite respectful in that interview, and you must remember his job is to ask questions that British people want to hear answers to, and questions that are "arguing" from the opposite view of the interviewee.
That said helen mcEntee was extremely measured in her responses in what has been a difficult week for the Irish government.

However his false statement about exports from the ROI to the UK seems to have come from Brexit central, and in that was disappointing.

Spanish Eyes

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Anyone a link to the McEntee interview?

This is a "clickable link" for sharing obviously

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrtlNLg1lqQ

UsBus

Just listened to the Humphrys interview...

First off all, Helen McEntee, excellent speaker, very clear and concise in everything she says. 10 out of 10 for keeping calm and collected with the shear arrogance of Humphrys.. When you hear that kind of rhetoric from the UK you really feel like telling them not to let the door hit you on your way out. It's mind boggling, the questioning of Irish politicians after the circus that is British parliament over the last 2 years..It was their decision to leave, how about sorting your own mess out. Once again Helen McEntee, top notch in response to an arrogant interview. I thought more of Humphrys but this opinion seems rife over there.. If they do crash out, which now looks likely due to stubbornness, we'll do fine with McEntee & Coveney.. Leo, well Leo is Leo...

Zubeneschamali

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/01/25/one-way-england-achieve-brexit-achieving-independence-uk/

This I would pay to see. A United Kingdom of Scotland and Northern Ireland and perhaps Wales could stay, too.

London would vote to remain in the UK, of course, so the new capital would be, let's see, Chelmsford.

And a new, proudly independent nation, the finest in the wide world, Engerland.

Flag: George's cross, innit.
National anthem: Vindaloo.

An Ciarraioch

Juncker tells May that the price for any discussion on the backstop is a permanent customs union:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/26/juncker-may-backstop-eu-customs-union