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

An Ciarraioch

Corbyn finally making some positive moves:

http://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1090252200230690819

Terence Rattigan

According to Fintan O Toole in the IT, 1000 Bombardier jobs will be unviable in the event of a hard Brexit, the mind boggles. How will that sit with Unionist/DUP voters??

farmchoice

Joe_ Public wrote: »

That 1/8 is to leave with a deal OR to see A50 extended so it’s by far the likeliest outcome (as odds suggest). Particularly if Brady amendment is passed which seems likely.

do you mean the cooper amendment?

Joe_ Public

franglan wrote: »

The great barometer of what's actually happening - the bookies! The UK to leave EU on 30th March without a deal is now 4/1 with Paddy Power. Has to be value in that you would think? I don't see the 1/8 that they leave with a deal...? I would have had a no deal brexit as marginal favourite at this point.

That 1/8 is to leave with a deal OR to see A50 extended so it’s by far the likeliest outcome (as odds suggest). Particularly if Brady amendment is passed which seems likely.

ancapailldorcha

Mod: Keep the Irish political matters that aren't directly relevant to Brexit (ie Casey and the 8th Referendum) to the appropriate threads please.

Professor Moriarty

franglan wrote: »

The great barometer of what's actually happening - the bookies! The UK to leave EU on 30th March without a deal is now 4/1 with Paddy Power. Has to be value in that you would think? I don't see the 1/8 that they leave with a deal...? I would have had a no deal brexit as marginal favourite at this point.

5/2 with Coral so 4/1 looks good value. Cooper's amendment might radically change those odds.

LuckyLloyd

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Perhaps, but Casey got a huge vote (28% iirc) on the back of one remark that many saw as the first bit of truth on the Traveller issue and as two burned out hotels show you DP is a significant issue as well. I wouldn't call either of these niche tbh.

23.3%

Casey said something notable as part of a staid campaign with a known inevitable end result. You're right that it indicates a level of pent up dissatisfaction with legislative moves on Travellers. It doesn't however indicate that the media has minimised or stonewalled the topic over the years.

It also could indicate that a percentage of those not willing to vote for MDH in an uninspiring campaign went elsewhere to the candidate who had garnered the highest profile during the campaign. I don't think there was any sort of white wash or refusal to engage with his comments. He raised the topic and it was amply discussed.

The issue of hotels being burned has been widely and openly reported. As was the recent incident in Strokestown and follow on incidents. It is not the responsibility of the media to push a particular narrow editorial position on such things. Just put the facts in the public domain.

MrMusician18 wrote: »

They point I'm making is you don't see interviewers taking such a hard line on those topics, when hard questions are justified. Correcting farage is easy here when the ideas he pushes have little public support and have no support in the media.

Make no mistake, I love seeing a take down of Farage but the idea that we have "a fine tradition of well informed and fact confident current affairs presenters with a sense of the importance of their role" is a total nonsense.

Again, it's not nonsense. Watch Pat Kenny's handling of the final 8th Amendment debate last May and tell me it was anything other than as described above. Claire Byrne correct a clear factual inaccuracy. I'm open to an example of a media piece on the topics of interest to you where a clear factual inaccuracy is not corrected. Because that's what's required here to prove your point.

Genuinely open to some examples if you have them by the way...

MrMusician18 wrote: »

The time for the Irish media to shine was during the financial crisis and it failed miserably. Just as the UK media has failed miserably over the past three years.

I think the Irish public came out the other side of the financial crisis with a decent understanding of what happened. The media failed to flash the red warning signs 2005 - 2008, but Irish media could hardly be singled out in that regard. The Financial crisis and the decades lead up to same highlighted a capability gap within media for certain areas of public life. We ultimately had authoritative public inquiries into the matter via the Oireachtas that was reported on and debated in Irish media to a substantive degree. What more would you have expected from your media in this regard?

Christy42

Seriously? How is that amendment not a joke?

Even if the EU opposes it it would be nice to get a declaration of what the UK actually wants after two years.

Instead they come up with "we want something". It is like a parody of the UK's unwillingness to make a decision over the last two years. There is no deal they will vote for but they don't want new people making the deal so they just try and vote in a deal that says " insert deal here".

Sure pass the Brady amendment and then let's stick in the backstop into that blank space once they have already voted it in!

franglan

The great barometer of what's actually happening - the bookies! The UK to leave EU on 30th March without a deal is now 4/1 with Paddy Power. Has to be value in that you would think? I don't see the 1/8 that they leave with a deal...? I would have had a no deal brexit as marginal favourite at this point.

Professor Moriarty

Enzokk wrote: »

I guess there goes the notion of working together with other parties in the HoC. Did she take one thing on board from any of the opposition parties other than the DUP?

Nothing at all. At this stage, she is the DUP/ERG's glove puppet. They couldn't be having Labour ideas about the place. Nevermind that dreadful Sturgeon woman.

Enzokk

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Always look at this in the context of Tory unity. That is the core motivation in everything May is doing.

I guess there goes the notion of working together with other parties in the HoC. Did she take one thing on board from any of the opposition parties other than the DUP?

ilovesmybrick

Winters wrote: »

if I understand correctly the USA would not be allowed by its own Senate to negotiate with the UK if it breaks the Good Friday Agreement.

I'm not sure about that, but Tony Connolly was making the point on Brexit Republic last week that any semblance of a border would cause Irish American senators to have serious problems with negotiating with the UK.

Dyr

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Be some craic if Brussels just announce don’t bother flying over love, the deal is not gonna be reopened

It's becoming like the scene in The Holy Grail where King Arthur rocks up to the Norman castle and gets told to do one.

Crossed with Groundhog day.

How many more times is she going to try pull this stunt. How can a Leader have any credibility at this stage? There are some countries where the monarchy or judiciary or even the military would have stepped in by now and taken the toys away from parliament.

Winters

ilovesmybrick wrote: »

And this is the easy part. Never mind trying to negotiate free trade deals with the EU after whatever happens on March 29th, imagine this government trying to negotiate with the US or China?

if I understand correctly the USA would not be allowed by its own Senate to negotiate with the UK if it breaks the Good Friday Agreement.

ilovesmybrick

CelticRambler wrote: »

Back in the mists of time, shortly after the ref result was announced, it was pointed out that because of 40 years of EEC/EU membership, Britain had no recent experience of serious solo negotiations on the world stage. We're seeing that point illustrated now in glorious Technicolor and Dolby surround sound. While it makes for a wonderful spectacle, it doesn't bode well for the many similar negotiations ahead.

And this is the easy part. Never mind trying to negotiate free trade deals with the EU after whatever happens on March 29th, imagine this government trying to negotiate with the US or China?

Strazdas

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

They also seem to be utterly oblivious to damage being done to their image as a stable country with a stable democracy. Any potential investor looking at Britain over the past two years will simply throw their eyes to heaven and move on - especially any European investor.

Indeed and I don't see any obvious way they can undo the huge PR damage of Brexit. Every Brexit outcome looks a terrible one......they're nearly three years after that blasted referendum and have burned a lot of bridges.

Professor Moriarty

Strazdas wrote: »

The best thing the EU can do is simply keep out of this. What goes on in the UK Parliament is no concern of theirs : they have already signed off on the agreement.

They also seem to be utterly oblivious to damage being done to their image as a stable country with a stable democracy. Any potential investor looking at Britain over the past two years will simply throw their eyes to heaven and move on - especially any European investor.

CelticRambler

EdgeCase wrote: »

I get the impression the UK side is completely out of it depth and negotiating with itself in the Westminster and tabloid newspaper bubble again.

Hurrache wrote: »

Who the hell will want to negotiate with, and trust, these clowns in their brave new world of trade agreements?

Back in the mists of time, shortly after the ref result was announced, it was pointed out that because of 40 years of EEC/EU membership, Britain had no recent experience of serious solo negotiations on the world stage. We're seeing that point illustrated now in glorious Technicolor and Dolby surround sound. While it makes for a wonderful spectacle, it doesn't bode well for the many similar negotiations ahead.

trellheim

Link to Order of Business - contains all the motions for debate this evening

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmagenda/OP190129.pdf

The Brady Amendment

Sir Graham Brady
Dr Andrew Murrison
Damian Green
Mr Charles Walker
Dame Cheryl Gillan
Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown

At end, add “and requires the Northern Ireland backstop to be replaced with
alternative arrangements to avoid a hard border; supports leaving the European
Union with a deal and would therefore support the Withdrawal Agreement subject to
this change.”.

Amendment (n)

Strazdas

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

An extremely important question asked by Tory MP Peter Bone. Essentially, he asked that if he backs the Brady amendment, does that mean he is committed to voting for any new deal that May brings back? She answers "No". So, this means that what May brings to Europe over the next few days MIGHT be what parliament wants. It's actually becoming insulting to the EU at this stage.

The best thing the EU can do is simply keep out of this. What goes on in the UK Parliament is no concern of theirs : they have already signed off on the agreement.

WomanSkirtFan8

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Always look at this in the context of Tory unity. That is the core motivation in everything May is doing.

Absolutely. no arguments there. :rolleyes:

Leonard Hofstadter

Thought this was worth posting from the Guardian:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2019/jan/29/brexit-vote-commons-latest-news-developments-liam-fox-says-may-now-saying-withdrawal-deal-text-must-be-rewritten-politics-live

Basically, if in the hypothetical situation that the EU were to accept the Brady amendment (which we already know they won't) and they were to renegotiate the deal, Brexiter MPs (or MPs of any persuasion) don't have to vote on any hypothetical final deal.

I mean, you really couldn't make this nonsense up.

Skelet0n

Sammy Wilson up in the HoC saying that Barnier has said the EU want technology to solve the border so “we must press this opportunity”.

How that man manages to tie his laces every morning is beyond me.

Professor Moriarty

An extremely important question asked by Tory MP Peter Bone. Essentially, he asked that if he backs the Brady amendment, does that mean he is committed to voting for any new deal that May brings back? She answers "No". So, this means that what May brings to Europe over the next few days MIGHT be what parliament wants. It's actually becoming insulting to the EU at this stage.

woohoo!!!

Two plus years of groundhog day. No point in further negotiations with that.

Professor Moriarty

WomanSkirtFan8 wrote: »

Why the hell would she ever bother when she already knows the EU are going to say no to whatever she proposes? The deal that's already been agreed is the only deal the eu will agree to and must include the backstop (if it's ever actually needed) and that's it.

TM going back to brussels is absolutely pointless.:rolleyes:

Always look at this in the context of Tory unity. That is the core motivation in everything May is doing.

Strazdas

Seth Brundle wrote: »

The EU are ready for the Brady nonsense...
https://twitter.com/IanWishart/status/1090244783354851329

It would simply too dangerous for them to reopen negotiations. They are dealing with a political basket case, an unstable country. If they reopened the deal and made even more concessions, the risk of it blowing up in their face would be huge (ie. they make big concessions, sign off on a new deal and within a week or two, things start kicking off in the UK again and Brexiteers demanding more concessions).

ilovesmybrick

Hurrache wrote: »

Unfortunately it's May's plan now, she has said in parliament she's going to go back to the EU to ask them to reopen the negotiations.

So we have the hilarious situation of May, Rabb, Davis and whoever else were on the team voting against a deal that they bloody negotiated in the first place.

Well it's just as surreal as the Tories voting to retain May before Christmas shortly after voting against her deal and calling for a no confidence vote.

She's currently suggesting a "significant and legally binding change", which will then be debated in commons, despite everyone telling them repeatedly that it won't happen. The sheer amount of time wasted in commons on changes they know won't pass over the past two years is staggering.

WomanSkirtFan8

Hurrache wrote: »

Unfortunately it's May's plan now, she has said in parliament she's going to go back to the EU to ask them to reopen the negotiations.

So we have the hilarious situation of May, Rabb, Davis and whoever else were on the team voting against a deal that they bloody negotiated in the first place.

Why the hell would she ever bother when she already knows the EU are going to say no to whatever she proposes? The deal that's already been agreed is the only deal the eu will agree to and must include the backstop (if it's ever actually needed) and that's it.

TM going back to brussels is absolutely pointless.:rolleyes:

Hurrache

Unfortunately it's May's plan now, she has said in parliament she's going to go back to the EU to ask them to reopen the negotiations.

So we have the hilarious situation of May, Rabb, Davis and whoever else were on the team voting against a deal that they bloody negotiated in the first place.

Who the hell will want to negotiate with, and trust, these clowns in their brave new world of trade agreements?