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

Sam Russell

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

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

Well there we have it, once they are out of EU they will turn on each other.

Paywall for that link.

Here is a full version.

https://www.reddit.com/r/northernireland/comments/ajzqh0/theres_one_way_for_england_to_achieve_brexit_and/

Bit cynical

Akrasia wrote: »

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

If I remember correctly Hannon was part of a fairly small group arguing for continued membership of the single market.

While Norway is in the single market it is not correct to say that Switzerland is in the single market, and neither Norway nor Switzerland is in a customs union with the EU.

Leroy42

I think the big thing that always strikes me, and was again apparent on the Humpreys interview, is the UK continuing to ask why the EU haven't come up with a different solution than a backstop.

Why is nobody asking why TM agreed to it, why Davies agreed to it, why Boris agreed to it? And further to that, apart from the "do nothing at all" calls, there has no been a workable alternative provided by the UK, which McEntee alluded to a number of times.

So the EU came up with their solution and the UK have come up with nothing, well apart from magic technology which by the sheer fact they are so scared of the backstop shows even they don't think will happen.

But the BBC et al have seemingly simply forgotten to ask any of this and they are completely focused on asking what are the EU going to do. Even some of the amendments for net week are of the variety of simply remove the backstop, without giving any indication of how they intend to deal with the issue.

judeboy101

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

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

Doesn't prevent border on island. The 6 counties would have to be in sm

Professor Moriarty

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.

Well, I thought it was a form of trolling. Unless he was utterly uninformed. Why should Ireland 'join' Britain in leaving the EU? What an arrogant suggestion. Never mind the fact that he hadn't a clue about the fact that the vast majority of Irish people are pro EU. Or he knew and was trolling as I say.

Sam Russell

judeboy101 wrote: »

Doesn't prevent border on island. The 6 counties would have to be in sm

There are other requirements as well.

1. The single electricity market

2. The VAT system so that VAT is not chargeable at point of entry.

3. The VET inspections at ports to go to 100%, plus SM inspections - like Cert of Origin, SM conformance, etc.

plus many more I'm sure.

listermint

I saw this and thought it was too amusing not to share in context with the McEntee and Humphreys interview.

https://twitter.com/GeorgeMonbiot/status/1089083878546067457?s=20

ThePanjandrum

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.

Yet an Irish girl I used to work with who came from Cork and who would regularly have a go at the English was distraught when she thought that she might have to return to live in Ireland.

Incidentally, she didn't want the United Kingdom to leave the EU and was horrified when I mentioned (by name) the majority of her fellow workers whom she liked who had voted to leave. This confused her because all her friends and acquaintances told her that Leavers were hate-filled, racist bigots and she knew that the people she worked with were not like that.

Just a final word, when you talked to a lot of the old boys (like my father-in-law) who came over in the fifties, they would say that it wasn't the English who were the problem, but people who came from different counties in Ireland would never employ you.

cml387

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Just a final word, when you talked to a lot of the old boys (like my father-in-law) who came over in the fifties, they would say that it wasn't the English who were the problem, but people who came from different counties in Ireland would never employ you.

My parents lived in the UK up to 1966.
All our friends were English. My father's best friends at work were English. He always said that Irish foremen were the worst to work for.

It adds nothing to the debate I suppose, but I remember a quote from men In Black, of all things that might apply to this situation:

"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals, and you know it!"

EdgeCase

I agree it adds nothing to the debate. A lot of English people would find those at the front of this wave of jingoism rather unpalatable and impossible to relate to too. We really are seeing the result of a particular aspect of (mostly) English nationalism.

There's another side to England which is modern, progressive, openminded and fair and it's that side of the country that drove it to economic and cultural prominence in the second half of 20th century and was very much to the fore until recently.

I would also add that a lot of us have connections to relatively prosperous areas of urban England and to some degree that distorts Irish impressions of English politics. If you were in London, Manchester, Liverpool and quite a few other big urban areas you'd have had no idea that Brexit was ever a likelihood. It seemed like a fringe movement.

The driving force for Brexit has come from the English rustbelt - old industrial towns, former coal mining areas and places that have been left behind largely. It's a part of England that not all that many people from Ireland would be extremely familiar with as I was never a particularly attractive place to move to or interact with in modern times.

I would suspect that if Brexit does happen and happened without a deal and there's a major economic crisis in the UK, there'll be serious public unrest and it will be just another example of the Tories running the country into the ground and exiting power with riots in the background. It's happened in the recent past ... Poll Tax ... etc etc etc

backspin.

UsBus wrote: »

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...

I wouldn't read too much into Humphrey's interview. Have you heard our own morning Ireland rte journalists interview our Irish politicians. The arrogance and contempt is palpable. I don't know how they get away with it.

Zubeneschamali

EdgeCase wrote: »

I would also add that a lot of us have connections to relatively prosperous areas of urban England and to some degree that distorts Irish impressions of English politics.

The same is true of America. Irish people visit New York, Boston, Washington DC, LA, San Francisco and Chicago. (Oh, and DisneyWorld, but it doesn't count).

We seldom visit Red America, so the whole Republican party seems alien to us.

Zubeneschamali

backspin. wrote: »

Have you heard our own morning Ireland rte journalists interview our Irish politicians. The arrogance and contempt is palpable. I don't know how they get away with it.

Pardon? If RTE's FF-packed coterie of insiders are a little bit hostile, it's because politicians come on and (coached by a troop of ex-RTE heads in PR consultancies) try to spoof their way through interviews without answering hard questions.

cml387

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Pardon? If RTE's FF-packed coterie of insiders are a little bit hostile, it's because politicians come on and (coached by a troop of ex-RTE heads in PR consultancies) try to spoof their way through interviews without answering hard questions.

It's the same everywhere.

In the old days there was the fawning interview:

"Is there anything else you'd like to say to us minister"
"No"
"Thank you".

Then you had the beginnings of more robust questioning, e.g. Robin Day.

As a reaction, politicians got media training and now can speak coherently and rationally for minutes (our attention span now) without saying anything.

John Humphries likened interviewing politicians to "nailing custard to the wall".

joe40

As everyone knows In 1998 The UK, Ireland and the EU signed up to the good friday agreement. This was an international treaty. The arrogance of the Brexit referendum campaign, meant that this was totally ignored. The NI border was just a minor inconvenience.
Now when the reality of the border situation is hitting home it is the irish government fault. If the British media had either been honest or competent the ni border would have been a much bigger issue during the campaign and after the result.
The GF agreement means that the relationship between Ni and Ireland (and by extension the EU) is not the same as for the rest of the UK. That cannot be denied
How can Britain now simply pretend that doesn't exist and NI is just another part of the UK.

downcow

joe40 wrote: »

As everyone knows In 1998 The UK, Ireland and the EU signed up to the good friday agreement. This was an international treaty. The arrogance of the Brexit referendum campaign, meant that this was totally ignored. The NI border was just a minor inconvenience.
Now when the reality of the border situation is hitting home it is the irish government fault. If the British media had either been honest or competent the ni border would have been a much bigger issue during the campaign and after the result.
The GF agreement means that the relationship between Ni and Ireland (and by extension the EU) is not the same as for the rest of the UK. That cannot be denied
How can Britain now simply pretend that doesn't exist and NI is just another part of the UK.

This gfa stuff is very one sided. My community swallowed some very unsavoury pills to support it but were promised it “copper-fastened” the union until such times as a majority in north wanted to change that. There would be no change to the sovereignty without the consent of the NI people.
The backstop is clearly a change to the sovereignty of NI. So in breach of gfa. Does that matter to you guys. Or does the integrity of the gfa only matter when it supports your position?

Sam Russell

downcow wrote: »

This gfa stuff is very one sided. My community swallowed some very unsavoury pills to support it but were promised it “copper-fastened” the union until such times as a majority in north wanted to change that. There would be no change to the sovereignty without the consent of the NI people.
The backstop is clearly a change to the sovereignty of NI. So in breach of gfa. Does that matter to you guys. Or does the integrity of the gfa only matter when it supports your position?

I'd say that the Brexit referendum was a change in Sovereignty, and it was voted down by the NI population. Therefore the GFA was breached by it and the backstop is merely an attempt to mitigate that wrong.

jm08

downcow wrote: »

This gfa stuff is very one sided. My community swallowed some very unsavoury pills to support it but were promised it “copper-fastened” the union until such times as a majority in north wanted to change that. There would be no change to the sovereignty without the consent of the NI people.
The backstop is clearly a change to the sovereignty of NI. So in breach of gfa. Does that matter to you guys. Or does the integrity of the gfa only matter when it supports your position?

How is it a change to sovereignty. I've listened to an export witness at one of those House of Commons committees stating clearly that the backstop does not affect the sovereignty of the UK (NI is not a sovereign state). There will only be a difference in customs and the need for regulatory alignment. You will still be paying your taxes to HMRC. In fact, except for Brexit, NI would probably have a corporate tax rate of 12.5% to match the Republic and would be different to the rest of the UK.

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

This gfa stuff is very one sided. My community swallowed some very unsavoury pills to support it but were promised it “copper-fastened” the union until such times as a majority in north wanted to change that. There would be no change to the sovereignty without the consent of the NI people.
The backstop is clearly a change to the sovereignty of NI. So in breach of gfa. Does that matter to you guys. Or does the integrity of the gfa only matter when it supports your position?

Your own Attorney General has rubbished that opinion and this is just more DUP whinging about abstract notions of belonging.

The backstop does not affect the constitutional status of Northern Ireland or breach the Good Friday Agreement, according to the British Attorney General's legal advice on the proposed withdrawal agreement.

Attorney General Geoffrey Cox QC said Theresa May's deal does not affect the principle of consent, or the "essential state functions or territorial integrity of the United Kingdom".

The DUP has argued that the deal brokered last month threatens the integrity of the union but according to the attorney general's legal position, the north cannot cease to be part of the UK without the consent of a majority of its people.

joe40

My point is that the gfa agreement was totally ignored durng the Brexit campaign. This should annoy ni unionist the most. Any change to the UK relationship with the EU would have unique implications for the north. That was totally ignored or at least downplayed. The DUP carry a lot of blame for this. Brexit was always going to be more complicated for the north because of the gfa. Whether or not you agree with the gfa it exists and the ramifications of this should have been explored and developed during the referendum campaign.
The only reason I can think of why the DUP supported brexit was to distance themselves from the republic rather than the EU. I don't believe this was the view of wider unionism which was more pragmatic

Infini

downcow wrote: »

This gfa stuff is very one sided. My community swallowed some very unsavoury pills to support it but were promised it “copper-fastened” the union until such times as a majority in north wanted to change that. There would be no change to the sovereignty without the consent of the NI people.
The backstop is clearly a change to the sovereignty of NI. So in breach of gfa. Does that matter to you guys. Or does the integrity of the gfa only matter when it supports your position?

Again I ask HOW?
You make these statements then dont give any backing to them.

downcow

Infini wrote: »

Again I ask HOW?
You make these statements then dont give any backing to them.

Cambridge dictionary
sovereignty definition: 1. the power of a country to control its own government: 2 . the power or authority to rule.

Does that help? Under the backstop we would have zero contro over those setting our rules.

And before you get carried away again saying it’s your own fault etc. I don’t really care about gfa. My concern is how it is being spun to suit one side.

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

Cambridge dictionary
sovereignty definition: 1. the power of a country to control its own government: 2 . the power or authority to rule.

Does that help? Under the backstop we would have zero contro over those setting our rules.

And before you get carried away again saying it’s your own fault etc. I don’t really care about gfa. My concern is how it is being spun to suit one side.

So because you 'don't care' about an agreement between two governments that has brought peace and stability to the island, we should all just give in to you?

Is that not straight from the DUP playbook?

Pa8301

downcow wrote: »

Cambridge dictionary
sovereignty definition: 1. the power of a country to control its own government: 2 . the power or authority to rule.

Does that help? Under the backstop we would have zero contro over those setting our rules.

And before you get carried away again saying it’s your own fault etc. I don’t really care about gfa. My concern is how it is being spun to suit one side.

How would the backstop infringe your power to control your own government or to rule?

Curly Judge

downcow wrote: »

Cambridge dictionary
sovereignty definition: 1. the power of a country to control its own government: 2 . the power or authority to rule.

Does that help? Under the backstop we would have zero contro over those setting our rules.

And before you get carried away again saying it’s your own fault etc. I don’t really care about gfa. My concern is how it is being spun to suit one side.

Any chance of you people in the HoC voting to accept Theresa May's deal in perpetuity on condition we remove the backstop? There is a good chance that they would vote down the WA anyway, even after we removed out objection.
We'd look right loolas then, with our trousers down and a hole in our underpants.

PopePalpatine

Let me get this straight: UK sovereignty good, Stormont/NI sovereignty bad?

joe40

downcow wrote: »

Infini wrote: »

Again I ask HOW?
You make these statements then dont give any backing to them.

Cambridge dictionary
sovereignty definition: 1. the power of a country to control its own government: 2 . the power or authority to rule.

Does that help? Under the backstop we would have zero contro over those setting our rules.

And before you get carried away again saying it’s your own fault etc. I don’t really care about gfa. My concern is how it is being spun to suit one side.

It is abundantly clear that the DUP and the brexiteers share your disregard for the gfa. Unfortunately the international treaty agreed in 1998 exists. It can't be wished away

Irishmale0399

Lads the simple facts as they stand are:

1. If their is a hard Brexit, then there will be a border. Who has caused this problem??? The UK...they want to leave and have refused the EU deal on the table. Still havent offered an alternative and they should forget Ireland leaving the EU.......we want to stay.

2. It is the British parliment who are causing the problems and are trying to push the fault to Ireland. Fact is the British government were well aware of the GF agreement when they went to Strasburg to parttake in talks........now they are trying to use it as leverage. Total disrespect towards the people of Northern Ireland and any agreements with the Irish government.

3. If the people of Northern Ireland want no border they should be out lobbying the DUP and whoever else they can find to make sure it isnt in place. At the moment here on mainland Europe it looks like the DUP are not using their power and are maybe hoping for a good stance in London after Brexit instead of fighting for the wishes and security of their own people.

All in all if we have a new border...the UK government is to blame and no one else. They voted to leave, they vetoed the deal on the table.....and they still dont know what they want. The EU is not responsible for their failings nor are they responsible for the well being of the British people and their wishes.

lawred2

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Let me get this straight: UK sovereignty good, Stormont/NI sovereignty bad?

Well yeah because stormont means legitimizing themmuns

They know they don't have to deal with them over in Westminster. They can pretend they don't exist

RobMc59

Sam Russell wrote: »

I'd say that the Brexit referendum was a change in Sovereignty, and it was voted down by the NI population. Therefore the GFA was breached by it and the backstop is merely an attempt to mitigate that wrong.

The EU has stated the referendum result counts as one country (the UK)-as the SNP were told by the EU when they enquired about remaining in the EU-I don't understand why the same things are trotted out when it's common knowledge that is the situation.
I live in England which voted to leave but the area I live in voted remain (Merseyside)-I voted remain and haven't changed my opinion but unless there's a 2nd vote or article 50 revoked thats the way it is-I hate it-but what can you do?-I've written to my MP and signed the peoples vote petition and am pinning my hopes on article 50 being revoked.