Leroy42 wrote: » TBF, how many people would have read it from cover to cover. He agreed he didn't read it and said he focused on the key areas.
10000maniacs wrote: » I think you are misrepresenting what O'Rourke was saying. See my previous post to find out what he actually said on the subject.
ArthurDayne wrote: » I get what Varoufakis is saying but, ultimately, the EU did try to address some UK grievances prior to the referendum. The UK was offered a reform deal in February 2016 -- which was subsequently derided by arch-Brexiteers who always wanted nothing short of the full nuclear option. One of the biggest concessions was the agreement to write into the Treaties, and therefore into the primary fundamental basis of EU law itself, that the UK was exempt from references to "ever closer Union" along with recognition that the UK was not committed to further political integration. Cameron also won concessions on EU migrant benefits, Eurozone recovery measures (i.e. guarantees that non-Eurozone countries would not take part in bailouts of Eurozone countries etc) and other areas. He didn't get all that he wanted, but that is the nature of international diplomacy -- you will concede along the way. I hear this a lot about "EU needs to reform" etc etc, but far too often this seems to be an argument which obfuscates the need for reform at the domestic level. There is always room for reform, and there always will be when it comes to something as complex as the EU, but people need to stop looking for bogeymen in Brussels and start asking themselves what it is about their own country that needs to be fixed. You say that the EU "stuck it to us" over the banking crisis. Well, that's because we had piss poor regulation, our financial institutions acted like the music would never end, and our regulatory inadequacies ultimately led to Ireland threatening the very integrity of the Euro. Sure, better pan-Eurozone financial regulation at the EU level (which is now in place) would probably have alleviated the disaster to an extent. . .and yes . . .the ordinary Irish people got utterly shafted by economic intricacies which were beyond their understanding or control. But at least we looked inwards at ourselves, and didn't hurl ourselves down the rabbit hole of seeking out foreigners to blame, or jump to the cowardly safety net of pinning it all on "Brussels bureaucrats". We may have cursed the Troika, but we didn't run away from blaming the bankers in our own land and abroad -- rather than Polish guys on a building site or some pen-pusher in the European Commission. Ireland has beefed up its regulatory framework immensely over the past 10 years, while the Central Bank of Ireland has become much more proactive in dealing with financial entities here. This doesn't make us immune, this doesn't mean that regulatory inadequacy will suddenly end, this doesn't mean that all is well and will be forever, but Ireland's improved fortunes stand testament to what even a small country can achieve when it looks inwards and applies a little national humility . . . rather than constantly looking across the seas for foreigners to blame out of a misplaced sense of national pride.
For Forks Sake wrote: » Raab getting his arse handed to him by Sylvia Hermon, turns out he hasn't read the GFA.https://twitter.com/GPDoran/status/1090739338474860545?s=19
Lady Hermon Share I am very grateful to the Father of the House for allowing me to intervene. I just want to say ever so gently that in his very nice tribute to the hon. Member for North Down, I think he might have accidentally referred to the lady as an Irish Member of this House. No, I am very much a British Member of this House.
trellheim wrote: » Sylvia Hermon does herself zero favours In the HoC on Tuesdayhttps://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2019-01-29/debates/BB8A5769-12B4-4D0E-9B4E-158F89F9FCDE/EuropeanUnion(Withdrawal)Act2018
trellheim wrote: » Sylvia Hermon does herself zero favours In the HoC on Tuesday Lady Hermon Share I am very grateful to the Father of the House for allowing me to intervene. I just want to say ever so gently that in his very nice tribute to the hon. Member for North Down, I think he might have accidentally referred to the lady as an Irish Member of this House. No, I am very much a British Member of this House. https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2019-01-29/debates/BB8A5769-12B4-4D0E-9B4E-158F89F9FCDE/EuropeanUnion(Withdrawal)Act2018
Baron de Charlus wrote: » Mod Note Hi folks, Please do heed the charter and don't just copy/paste links. It's a discussion forum, not a news feed. If you're not prepared to discuss what you post, don't post.
10000maniacs wrote: » He wasn't saying that. What he said was failing to prevent a hard border is not the same thing as causing it. And that in a hard Brexit situation, Ireland would have to implement it. He also said that if Varadkar concedes on the backstop principle, any border between ROI and NI becomes permanent, whereas if we don't concede the backstop and there is a hard Brexit, this may turn out to be temporary as surely a hard Brexit is not the end of the story. And if its not the end of the story, they backstop is waiting there to be put in place.
ancapailldorcha wrote: » [*]Labour is still deciding its own stance and is arguably pushing for disaster socialism
VinLieger wrote: » Thats not going to happen as weve seen both May and Corbyn are entrenched and putting party politics before country so whats the next viable solution?
Shelga wrote: » Does anyone think this will all lead to the rise of anti-NI sentiment in the UK- and they could be effectively forced out by people (people who had no clue about the north a couple of years ago) who think that NI is stopping their perfect Brexit?
prawnsambo wrote: » Your second paragraph doesn't make sense to me at all. Could you elaborate please?
El Weirdo wrote: » She's an Independent unionist. How else would you expect her to refer to herself (the whole Britain ≠ UK thing notwithstanding)?
Macy0161 wrote: » I think the point is that removal of the border/ reinstatement of the backstop would/ could/ should be a condition of an UK-EU FTA.
CelticRambler wrote: » SkyNews were reporting at lunchtime that moves are afoot to "allocate funding for the regeneration of northern cities" (= bribe Labour Leave MPs) so I think there's is some chance it might happen. Will it be enough to get May's deal through on the third/fourth vote? Who knows ... :rolleyes:
Russman wrote: » If this is, in fact, true, then maybe the DUP are about to go under the proverbial bus. It can't be too hard to find 10 Lab MPs willing to put country before party (whilst possibly also looking good for their constituents).
Macy0161 wrote: » Labours stance has actually been pretty consistent, and the only thing May has conceded on (albeit none directly to the Labour Party) is a Customs Union. She conceded workers rights already. A Customs Union is another of May's own Red Lines. Her own red lines are the consistent issue preventing agreement in both the HoC and with the EU
trellheim wrote: » For Forks Sake wrote: » Sylvia Hermon does herself zero favours In the HoC on Tuesday Lady Hermon Share I am very grateful to the Father of the House for allowing me to intervene. I just want to say ever so gently that in his very nice tribute to the hon. Member for North Down, I think he might have accidentally referred to the lady as an Irish Member of this House. No, I am very much a British Member of this House. https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2019-01-29/debates/BB8A5769-12B4-4D0E-9B4E-158F89F9FCDE/EuropeanUnion(Withdrawal)Act2018 Surely central to the GFA is the principle that those in NI can identify as British, Irish, both or neither. Lady Hermon has probably read it in full. I'd be very surprised if she objected to a nationalist MP referring to themself as Irish. She's well within her right to make the correction.
For Forks Sake wrote: » Sylvia Hermon does herself zero favours In the HoC on Tuesday Lady Hermon Share I am very grateful to the Father of the House for allowing me to intervene. I just want to say ever so gently that in his very nice tribute to the hon. Member for North Down, I think he might have accidentally referred to the lady as an Irish Member of this House. No, I am very much a British Member of this House. https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2019-01-29/debates/BB8A5769-12B4-4D0E-9B4E-158F89F9FCDE/EuropeanUnion(Withdrawal)Act2018
prawnsambo wrote: » 10000maniacs wrote: » if Varadkar concedes on the backstop principle, any border between ROI and NI becomes permanent, whereas if we don't concede the backstop and there is a hard Brexit, this may turn out to be temporary as surely a hard Brexit is not the end of the story. Your second paragraph doesn't make sense to me at all. Could you elaborate please?
10000maniacs wrote: » if Varadkar concedes on the backstop principle, any border between ROI and NI becomes permanent, whereas if we don't concede the backstop and there is a hard Brexit, this may turn out to be temporary as surely a hard Brexit is not the end of the story.
An Ciarraioch wrote: » The Daily Telegraph continues its descent towards Express-level quality standards:http://twitter.com/PropertySpot/status/1090946448303239168
the Republic imports more from the UK than from any other EU country, and the UK is its second biggest European export market
prawnsambo wrote: » I'm not sure that would be possible imo. Once the UK have left, the possibility for NI to be treated differently ends as far as I can see. I'm not sure how, legally, it can be brought back into the single market and the customs union. It's not a separate country.
ancapailldorcha wrote: » It has in the sense that Labour has had an actual stance that the whole party is happy with which of course it hasn't really had. The stuff about the six tests was just a stalling tactic and now that that hasn't happened they now find themselves in a position where there is much less room for their equivocating.
Macy0161 wrote: » A Customs Union is Labours main sticking point at the moment. A deal with a Customs Union would get over the line in the HoC tomorrow, with cross party support.
ancapailldorcha wrote: » I think this is a bit ridiculous. I don't think anyone is anti-UK. It's perfectly understandable that Irish people would be incensed at the UK's leaving with such feckless disregard for the peace process in NI. Maintaining this takes priority whatever the consequences for the British.
eagle eye wrote: » The first thing they have to do is internal as in find another supporter of government so they can get rid of the DUP. The DUP is the disaster in all of this.
BonnieSituation wrote: » How could the EU look at improving itself when it's spent the last 2 and a half years dealing with a toddler that still won't tell us what they want?
snailsong wrote: » trellheim wrote: » Surely central to the GFA is the principle that those in NI can identify as British, Irish, both or neither. Lady Hermon has probably read it in full. I'd be very surprised if she objected to a nationalist MP referring to themself as Irish. She's well within her right to make the correction. If every Unionist politician in the North had the same political views as Hermon then there would be a lot more harmony.
trellheim wrote: » Surely central to the GFA is the principle that those in NI can identify as British, Irish, both or neither. Lady Hermon has probably read it in full. I'd be very surprised if she objected to a nationalist MP referring to themself as Irish. She's well within her right to make the correction.
jmayo wrote: » The thing is for some Brits, who would coincidentally be Brexiters, NI and Ireland don't rank highly on their concern list. They couldn't care less if those in NI were slaughtering themselves so long as it wasn't costing them anything.
ancapailldorcha wrote: » The problem there is that a customs union means being out of the single market and prevents the UK for signing its own trade deals. While the latter might be just as well, it makes the option unviable.
