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

Donald Trump

First Up wrote: »

I really wish people would forget this nonsense. Brexit is going to push Northern Ireland closer to Britain as they seek comfort in each other's arms. Talk of a united Ireland is only going to push them even closer.

I hope a borderless solution can be found but our future is in Europe and there's isn't and that's how it will be for a long long time.

You'll need to assume that UK is still going to pony up the big bucks to keep NI afloat.

If it gets to the stage where they're looking across the border at all the lights in the Republic while they are in darkness, like the North Koreans looking across the river at the Chinese, then it might not last so long :pac:

eagle eye

Enzokk wrote:

All options leads to chaos, it really is just what type of chaos you are choosing right now.

The only option that doesn't result in blood being spilt is to.continue with what we have had for the last number of years.
The UK voted to leave and regardless of what deal is struck there should be no border.
If the Brits want to create a border then let them but the EU should not create, or place any personnel on, a border between NI and us.
That way the only targets are those in power in the UK. Let them live with that hanging over them and maybe they'll quickly come to their senses.

s3rtvdbwfj81ch

AtomicHorror wrote: »

Yes, Celtic Federation- it's been tossed around a bit before, usually with Ireland added.

I love the idea, but it's like something from an alternate history sci-fi. Zeppelins everywhere, Nazis rule London, Superman landed in the USSR, doppelgangers with goatees.

Also the name would be problematic for a vocal faction within Scotland.

Not to mention the Hard Border requirement on the larger island, it's just shifting the same issue really.

Havockk

First Up wrote: »

I really wish people would forget this nonsense. Brexit is going to push Northern Ireland closer to Britain as they seek comfort in each other's arms. Talk of a united Ireland is only going to push them even closer.

I hope a borderless solution can be found but our future is in Europe and there's isn't and that's how it will be for a long long time.

I'm not so sure. I've had a few of those conversations with Unionist folk of late (the type where you internally sigh and ask yourself where this is going to go) that has shocked me where they have flat out said that in the event of a border poll they will be voting for the interest of their kids, and it's because of brexit.

Now of course this is anecdotal, but these are conversations that just wouldn't have happened 5 years ago. You definitely get a sense of a changing atmosphere.

irelandrover

Desiree Kind Valve wrote: »

Not to mention the Hard Border requirement on the larger island, it's just shifting the same issue really.

It would be a smaller border however, easier to control.

First Up

Donald Trump wrote:

If it gets to the stage where they're looking across the border at all the lights in the Republic while they are in darkness, like the North Koreans looking across the river at the Chinese, then it might not last so long

Yeah and we really want to inherit responsibility for an economic basket case riven by sectarian factions.

BonnieSituation

For Forks Sake wrote: »

I think (depending on timing) that a reunification vote could be rejected heavily in the RoI, there are a lot of concerns and leaps of faith that a lot of people may not be willing to take on board.

And you're basing this on what?

100% of the political parties (well, do Renua count anymore?) in the State support reunification with consent.

The vote for the GFA confirmed that the citizens did too and it hasn't looked to me like the people of this country have changed tack in the last 20years.

Exactly who is going to lead the "No to Reunification" campaign?

You? Blanch?

Come off it.

fash

As a mildly engaging idea- I would personally be open to allowing the UK insert their "alternative arrangements" clause- so long as it was accompanied with a clause requiring them to pay a penalty of (say) €1 billion/day to the Republic for each day that a hard border remains after a certain date - it would be interesting to see how strongly they believe in such alternative arrangements in that case.

VinLieger

eagle eye wrote: »

The only option that doesn't result in blood being spilt is to.continue with what we have had for the last number of years.
The UK voted to leave and regardless of what deal is struck there should be no border.
If the Brits want to create a border then let them but the EU should not create, or place any personnel on, a border between NI and us.
That way the only targets are those in power in the UK. Let them live with that hanging over them and maybe they'll quickly come to their senses.

We may have to depending on what kinds of goods the UK decide to let in to their market.

For example if the UK sign off on whats expected to be an absolute anal reaming of a trade deal with the US then we definitely don't want their garbage meat and poultry products seeping their way over the border into our market.

There definitely shouldn't be a border but in every scenario where there is one the fault lays at the door of the UK regardless of who is policing it be it one or both of us.

s3rtvdbwfj81ch

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Exactly who is going to lead the "No to Reunification" campaign?

Do you think there wouldn't be agitators against, at least arguing the economic suicide of importing a state that is so heavily relaint on the public purse.

Or the very real possibility of an armed faction of loyalists bombing Dublin?

VinLieger

BonnieSituation wrote: »

And you're basing this on what?

100% of the political parties (well, do Renua count anymore?) in the State support reunification with consent.

The vote for the GFA confirmed that the citizens did too and it hasn't looked to me like the people of this country have changed tack in the last 20years.

Exactly who is going to lead the "No to Reunification" campaign?

You? Blanch?

Come off it.

When the economic cost is laid bare before the republic of Ireland there may be a majority simply unwilling to take that burden on.

Nobody knows how much NI takes to run, the most common figure bandied about is of course 12bil per year but then add onto that the very likely heightened security costs and we have no clue what it could do to us financially.

The decision to reunite needs to have all emotion removed from it and it should be based purely on facts....... ironically like how brexit should have been ran.

Imreoir2

VinLieger wrote: »

When the economic cost is laid bare before the republic of Ireland there may be a majority simply unwilling to take that burden on.

Nobody knows how much NI takes to run, the most common figure bandied about is of course 12bil per year but then add onto that the very likely heightened security costs and we have no clue what it could do to us financially.

The decision to reunite needs to have all emotion removed from it and it should be based purely on facts....... ironically like how brexit should have been ran.

The bandied about figure is actually 11bn, and that includes much that would not be transferable in the case of a UI, such as NI's notional share of the cost of Trident and the UK's carrier fleet.

The credible figures I have seen suggest that the burden would likely be somewhere in the region of 5-6 bn, which is small when compared to the burden we successfully faced during the financial crisis.

Nody

New EU regulation coming in which will make all the Brexiteers call for the war fleet to be sent out again....

The EU has ruled Gibraltar is a "colony of the British crown" whose sovereignty is disputed Spain.

In a proposed regulation that could grant Britons visa-free access to the EU even in the case of a no-deal Brexit, the bloc made a distinction between those living in Britain and those who are citizens of Gibraltar, a British Overseas Territory on the southern tip of Spain.

Guess they should actually have bothered to speak with Spain a bit on the topic...

First Up

Imreoir2 wrote:

The credible figures I have seen suggest that the burden would likely be somewhere in the region of 5-6 bn, which is small when compared to the burden we successfully faced during the financial crisis.

To be funded how exactly? Another ECB loan? Higher taxes? Water charges? Cuts to nurses pay? And all while dealing with retrenchment (at best) or civil disobedience and violent disorder (at worst)?

If the cost of "unification" (which would be seen as annexation in NI) is included, I wouldn't bet on any referendum being passed.

Russman

eagle eye wrote: »

The only option that doesn't result in blood being spilt is to.continue with what we have had for the last number of years.
The UK voted to leave and regardless of what deal is struck there should be no border.
If the Brits want to create a border then let them but the EU should not create, or place any personnel on, a border between NI and us.
That way the only targets are those in power in the UK. Let them live with that hanging over them and maybe they'll quickly come to their senses.

Its not a matter of anyone creating a border for the craic. There can't not be one if the UK isn't aligned with the EU rules. No trading bloc will ever just throw a blind eye to an open frontier with God only knows what crossing over into its territory/food supply, they'd be mad to. If a few head bangers up north start trouble again that's just how its got to be, til its clamped down on (hard) or the UK crashes so badly within a few months that they come looking for a new deal and the border will be item 1 or 2 on the agenda.

lawred2

First Up wrote: »

To be funded how exactly? Another ECB loan? Higher taxes? Water charges? Cuts to nurses pay? And all while dealing with retrenchment (at best) or civil disobedience and violent disorder (at worst)?

If the cost of "unification" (which would be seen as annexation in NI) is included, I wouldn't bet on any referendum being passed.

Unification can only happen with a majority support north and south

annexation is a nonsense term in that context

Enzokk

First Up wrote: »

To be funded how exactly? Another ECB loan? Higher taxes? Water charges? Cuts to nurses pay? And all while dealing with retrenchment (at best) or civil disobedience and violent disorder (at worst)?

If the cost of "unification" (which would be seen as annexation in NI) is included, I wouldn't bet on any referendum being passed.

Voting against unification if there are indications that it will pass in NI would be like voting against not picking up survivors of a ship wreck. I would think the vote should be an automatic yes from Ireland whatever the cost. I am talking from the point of view that things would have gotten very bad for people in NI to vote in a majority for a united Ireland. If those undecided (not unionist or republican) voters that are happy for things to stay as they are because they are comfortable get to a point where they know it is better to leave the UK you know they will be looking for help desperately.

Dyr

BonnieSituation wrote: »

And you're basing this on what?

100% of the political parties (well, do Renua count anymore?) in the State support reunification with consent.

The vote for the GFA confirmed that the citizens did too and it hasn't looked to me like the people of this country have changed tack in the last 20years.

Exactly who is going to lead the "No to Reunification" campaign?

You? Blanch?

Come off it.

Ah there's plenty of people out there with chronic cases of Cruise O'Brien Syndrome who would lead that charge. A lot of them are in FG.

Pretty sure the Socialist Party aren't in favour of a United Ireland unless its part of a Glorious Workers Union of the UK.

First Up

lawred2 wrote:

annexation is a nonsense term in that context

You can bet those who voted against unification would see it like that.

josip

Enzokk wrote: »

Voting against unification if there are indications that it will pass in NI would be like voting against not picking up survivors of a ship wreck. I would think the vote should be an automatic yes from Ireland whatever the cost. I am talking from the point of view that things would have gotten very bad for people in NI to vote in a majority for a united Ireland. If those undecided (not unionist or republican) voters that are happy for things to stay as they are because they are comfortable get to a point where they know it is better to leave the UK you know they will be looking for help desperately.

I think your analogy fails because up to half of the shipwreck survivors in this case would be intent on sinking the boat which had just rescued them.
I suspect a significant proportion would prefer to drown or be taken by sharks instead.

jmayo

jm08 wrote: »

I like the Scots, but with a large body of water between us. Twice in recent years they have sold Irish rugby down the river for financial gain. First time was over the Heineken Cup when they were bought off by BT Sport with large sponsorship (BT Sport had the TV rights). 2nd time was over the staging of the rugby world cup - they would get more money if France hosted it. The Welsh are not much better

They have engaged in some backstabbing alright, but they do have a lovely anthem.:D

First Up wrote: »

I really wish people would forget this nonsense. Brexit is going to push Northern Ireland closer to Britain as they seek comfort in each other's arms. Talk of a united Ireland is only going to push them even closer.

I hope a borderless solution can be found but our future is in Europe and there's isn't and that's how it will be for a long long time.

As Donald Trump said the English might not be willing to keep pumping in the billions and NI farmers could be really hard hit with lack of subsidies.
Of course yes some will look to London, but they even did that when they were being treated like shyte in centuries gone by.
Others though may look South, particularly the younger folks who see a more enlightened state.

First Up wrote: »

Yeah and we really want to inherit responsibility for an economic basket case riven by sectarian factions.

Back when younger with romantic ideals and Irish education fresh in my mind in the 70s and 80s I would have jumped at united Ireland, over last couple of decades No.

There are some grand people of both persuasions up there, but by Christ there are some right fookwits on both sides that have serious chips on their shoulders that we could well do without.

Nody wrote: »

New EU regulation coming in which will make all the Brexiteers call for the war fleet to be sent out again....

Guess they should actually have bothered to speak with Spain a bit on the topic...

Actually I think Gibraltar is being forgotten in all this.
They voted 98% to stay.
A lot of Gibraltans actually unofficially live in Spain because more room for nice villas, so not sure what the Spanish are going to do with them.

Imreoir2

First Up wrote: »

To be funded how exactly? Another ECB loan? Higher taxes? Water charges? Cuts to nurses pay? And all while dealing with retrenchment (at best) or civil disobedience and violent disorder (at worst)?

If the cost of "unification" (which would be seen as annexation in NI) is included, I wouldn't bet on any referendum being passed.

It is funded through taxaction, borrowing, support from the EU and over time reforming the NI economey so that it becomes productive rather than in constant need of subvention.

Who in NI would view unification as annexation? Those who lost a democratic vote on the issue? You can't help it if some children throw their toys out of the pram when democracy goes against them.

I won't abandon the legitimate aspiration of the majority of the population of NI under threat of violence from terrorists, would you?

lawred2

First Up wrote: »

You can bet those who voted against unification would see it like that.

well them's the rules

That's what the majority approved GFA states.

If you want to sing from the DUP hymn sheets and tear up the GFA then that's your call

Paranoid Bob

Nody wrote: »

New EU regulation coming in which will make all the Brexiteers call for the war fleet to be sent out again....

Guess they should actually have bothered to speak with Spain a bit on the topic...

There are so many problems with this.
1: The new regulation mentioned is one that allows UK citizens the right to short stays in the Schengen area without a visa. That is hardly a cause for war.
2: There is no ruling involved. This was a press release. Apparently the Spanish government got a say in the release and added the language about Gibraltar being a disputed colony.
3: Gibraltar is a British Overseas Territory. Up to 1983 all British Overseas Territories were referred to a British Crown Colonies, so the language used by the Spanish is out of date, but arguably accurate.

MrMusician18

jmayo wrote: »

They have engaged in some backstabbing alright, but they do have a lovely anthem.:D

As Donald Trump said the English might not be willing to keep pumping in the billions and NI farmers could be really hard hit with lack of subsidies.
Of course yes some will look to London, but they even did that when they were being treated like shyte in centuries gone by.
Others though may look South, particularly the younger folks who see a more enlightened state.

Back when younger with romantic ideals and Irish education fresh in my mind in the 70s and 80s I would have jumped at united Ireland, over last couple of decades No.

There are some grand people of both persuasions up there, but by Christ there are some right fookwits on both sides that have serious chips on their shoulders that we could well do without.

Actually I think Gibraltar is being forgotten in all this.
They voted 98% to stay.
A lot of Gibraltans actually unofficially live in Spain because more room for nice villas, so not sure what the Spanish are going to do with them.

Make it more and more difficult for them to get to and from work.

Hammer Archer

jmayo wrote: »

Sadly John Fortune passed away a few years ago so we don't have this type of political satire anymore.

Hopefully the mods will allow this even though it is not Politics Cafe, because I think this sketch might actually sum up the Rees Moggs and other Brexiters more aptly than paragraphs of print.

That video is 23 years old. It's scary how accurate it still is today. Even the bit where John Bird uses all the "fancy" words without really saying anything at all and refusing to explain what exactly he wants pretty much sums up the likes of JRM.

If John Fortune were alive they would have a field day with the current goings on.

Enzokk

josip wrote: »

I think your analogy fails because up to half of the shipwreck survivors in this case would be intent on sinking the boat which had just rescued them.
I suspect a significant proportion would prefer to drown or be taken by sharks instead.

Sure, especially when some of those that want not to be rescued or are intent to sink the boat was responsible for their boat sinking initially. However they are in a minority and their view shouldn't take precedent over the majority.

I still only see a serious shock to the UK economy as a way towards unification so you could already see riots and unrest due to job losses and food shortages when the vote would take place.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

A UI fixes many of the conundrums and pitfalls of Brexit. Given that no type of Brexit is going to please or advantage everyone.
And it may be the only choice we have to stop us getting dragged out of the EU.

I doesn't fix the problem that most of the exports of Northern Ireland go to the rest of the UK.

If you look at the issue through a single lens, it does seem possible (maybe even probable, hence the feverish excitement about it) that Brexit will enhance the prospects of a United Ireland. However, looking at it through multiple lens, as with any complex issue, the picture is much more varied and a range of outcomes are possible, including a closer link to the UK, driven by irrational British resentment of the EU.

There were people on here five or six years ago proclaiming we would definitely have a united Ireland by the end of the decade, and with 10 months to go, that deadline is going to be missed. I am treating this round of speculation with the same skepticism.

To me, the most likely long-term outcome of Brexit, is Northern Ireland getting the best of both worlds, remaining in the Customs Union and Single Market but also retaining privileged access to the UK. That would copper-fasten the current constitutional arrangements as a united Ireland would see them lose privileged access to the UK.

Quin_Dub

Imreoir2 wrote: »

The bandied about figure is actually 11bn, and that includes much that would not be transferable in the case of a UI, such as NI's notional share of the cost of Trident and the UK's carrier fleet.

The credible figures I have seen suggest that the burden would likely be somewhere in the region of 5-6 bn, which is small when compared to the burden we successfully faced during the financial crisis.

That's today based on a reasonably stable economy etc.

What might the annual costs be in 3-5 years after a no-deal Brexit?

NI will be utterly destroyed in a no-deal scenario.

The concept of unification is fine in a scenario where both side of the border are functioning economies and it is a merger of relative equals..

But in a situation like we could potentially be facing post brexit , it would be Ireland doing reasonably well and NI being an utterly shattered economy.

People talk about German reunification as an example, but bear in mind that there is a strong argument to be made that those costs significantly contributed to the crash in '08 as the Germans kept pressure on the ECB to keep interests rates artificially low so that they could afford the repayments of the reunification costs.

Ireland would be at a different scale , but the costs could be astronomical for a population the size of ours (even including the extra few million from NI)

J Mysterio

They're completely losing the run of themselves in the UK.

As if the entire city of London and huge swathes of the UK being plastered in invasive CCTV were not enough, the MET in London are now trialing facial recognition cameras and harassing the public.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/facial-recognition-cameras-technology-london-trial-met-police-face-cover-man-fined-a8756936.html

This kind of bullsh1t in conjunction with the nasty, xenophobic Hostile Environment is just...
Then factor in whatever might become of the place after No Deal Brexit in terms of deregulation and slashing workers rights. It's a disturbing cocktail.