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

Capt'n Midnight

otnomart wrote: »

Am just watching The One Show with Patrick Kielty and they are giving the low down on how to get an Irish Passport !

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-47040831

prawnsambo

trellheim wrote: »

Poor Jo Cox was shot and stabbed to death during the campaign for Remain 2 and 1/2 years ago . Her killer shouted "Put Britain First" during the attack.

He didn't say "put" at the start. It was 'Britain first' which is one of those painfully small but noisy right wing of the right wing 'political' parties. Been pretty much de-platformed out of existence.

Capt'n Midnight

greenpilot wrote: »

Here is a question for you folks.

I live in Co.Roscommon and the whole area is full of retired UK citizens who bought cheap houses and are living off their pensions while living permanently here in Ireland.
Will they be entitled to receive their benefits while remaining here in Ireland? A few of the usual "We do things better in the UK" types are keen to tell me that they will be able to continue to live here as normal after Brexit.

What do you think?

Anyone on £ pension will probably have noticed the drop in Sterling by now. And there may be a further drop if there's a Hard Brexit.

There won't be a 25% exit tax on UK pension transfers until the end of 2020.

So if you are in the UK and planning to retire to the EU it might be worth considering early retirement to lock in the current sterling rate and tax treaties.

FrancieBrady

cml387 wrote: »

Here's a possibility, it was mooted by an expert on EU affairs on Today this morning, and it comes from the EU's method of dealing with intractable problems.

After March 29th, the EU implements on the WA on a provisional basis.

From that point on, the EU and Britain start negotiations on the Future Arrangements. that gives two years to agee the shape of that agreement.

By that time, it's hoped that with calm heads a solution can be found.

The UK will be a 3rd country and in quite a weaker position though, surely. The backdrop of anger and resentment in the UK will be quite something to behold I would imagine.
They will have to accede to a border poll too as it will be clear that the numbers will be there.

trellheim

The key difference as well is that they dont NEED to resort to violence (though there always will be a cohort who will at the drop of a hat).

Poor Jo Cox was shot and stabbed to death during the campaign for Remain 2 and 1/2 years ago . Her killer shouted "Put Britain First" during the attack.

otnomart

Am just watching The One Show with Patrick Kielty and they are giving the low down on how to get an Irish Passport !

cml387

Here's a possibility, it was mooted by an expert on EU affairs on Today this morning, and it comes from the EU's method of dealing with intractable problems.

After March 29th, the EU implements on the WA on a provisional basis.

From that point on, the EU and Britain start negotiations on the Future Arrangements. that gives two years to agee the shape of that agreement.

By that time, it's hoped that with calm heads a solution can be found.

tuxy

Sand wrote: »

Perhaps, but it will/should never arise in practise. Its an insurance policy no one wants to trigger. To the extent it affects the UK outside of Northern Ireland, it is at the request of the British themselves.

When it was first included it was something that was just an insurance policy and seemed unlikely to be triggered. But after watching the HOC the last few months it would seem it is something that will be triggered. It's going to take much longer than 2 years for them to come up with something that prevents the backstop coming in to place.
If the UK had confidence in the HOC working as a functioning government then the backstop would not be a worry. Unfortunately they know that they may have to continue deadlock in an attempt to play stupid games to keep unstable political parties together and the next general election is not until 2022.
I believe both the Tories and Labour may have splintered by now if there was not a first past the post voting system.

Sand

MrMusician18 wrote: »

The backstop is not a tiny clause. It's a huge part of the document

Perhaps, but it will/should never arise in practise. Its an insurance policy no one wants to trigger. To the extent it affects the UK outside of Northern Ireland, it is at the request of the British themselves.

The British have built this up into some nefarious conspiracy, which is so ludicrous that it does support the view that its merely a (misunderstood) cause the Tory faithful can rally around.

spacecoyote

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-x6Ct2OwOA

Hoping mods will allow a slight bit of discretion in this one. The language is NSFW in it, but I feel like it accurately, in the space of 4 minutes captures the feeling of probably 98% of the posters in this forum as well as likely most of Europe & a sizable portion of the UK.

In essence, why the hell did it take so long to get to this position in the HoC, and that they blame lies firmly with the UK parliament & PM, not Ireland or the EU

jmayo

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

This from the headline article in today's Telegraph. An informative insight into the mindset of Brexiteers.

"Britain’s best chance of getting revenge on Brussels for its Brexit bullying is to remain in the European Union. For the EU’s most fanatical and full-throated theologians, few outcomes could be more horrific than an intransigent, hostile Britain trapped in a project that it plots to undermine from the inside."

Lovely.

Some one was watching Yes Minister for tips on dealing with Europe.

Infini

blanch152 wrote: »

If the troubles start again in Northern Ireland the fault will lie with those who start them and those who give them succour and suppport. The issue of Irish unification is not one worth committing criminal acts or violence over.

The key difference as well is that they dont NEED to resort to violence (though there always will be a cohort who will at the drop of a hat). What they will need in this whole fiasco if a Hard Border is to organise, protest and get information out not just that a UI is the best solution in the circumstances but WHY it is and that the fear and sectarianism of the past is truly meaningless.

Realistically down here religion to be honest is a non factor the corruption of the catholic church and the scandals destroyed their hold on society along time ago and along with changing views and such means in many ways parts of NI are still having arguments like this and fearmongering on it may not even realise that those arguments are not even valid or relevant anymore.

WomanSkirtFan8

Akrasia wrote: »

Is it the start of a pivot towards staying in the EU?

Pretending its their own choice is one way to back down with less humiliation

Quite possibly. I wouldn't be at all surprised if TM and her absolute shambles of a so-called 'governement' do give in first before our government or the EU do.

Irishmale0399

briany wrote: »

The backstop was always an issue, and MPs loudly voiced their opposition to it the moment it was announced in December 2017 that the UK and EU had agreed to it in principle. So much so that the UK quickly reneged on it.

Don't get me wrong, I think it would have been a more right and proper thing to have parliament involved. Whether that was workable I don't know, but I don't think that they would have arrived at an alternative to the backstop that was agreeable to both the HoC and the EU. Not a lot the HoC can agree on, these days. So we'd still arrive at this scenario of Ireland and the EU wanting the backstop, and the UK government paralysed by infighting, looking squarely down the barrel of no-deal.

More fool she was for agreeing to it then in the first place. Simple fact is and remains she agreed to the WA with the knowledge that the EU wouldnt renegotiate. No one to blame but herself.

MrMusician18

Strazdas wrote: »

Totally agree here : the idea that 230 MPs voted down the deal because of a tiny clause in a 600 page agreement is laughable.

A lot of people have latched onto it because the ERG and Daily Telegraph have (the whole Brexit debate is beyond surreal at this point)

The backstop is not a tiny clause. It's a huge part of the document

Christy42

If the UK crashes out then we have to put up a border. We might be allowed fudge for a bit which would be a good idea to see if they come to their senses.

If not and we don't have a border then the damage to the single market as every other country demands the same deal the UK is effectively getting would lead to economic collapse. It raises the possibility of riots but the real damage would be in a massive increase in homelessness, stress, suicides as well as having a worse healthcare system.

It may not be as dramatic as a bomb but economic collapses lead to deaths.

cml387

EdgeCase wrote: »

I don't think they fully comprehend how much damage they've done either.
Even if Brexit doesn't happen, I could see a lot of companies feeling very jittery about the UK for the next decade or more.

Also, France would want to watch that trend too. I am hearing people starting to have jitters about French stability due to the possibility of a Marine Le Pen government taking France down a Brexit-like route.

I don't think the French electorate would necessarily go that far, but you can see why investors would be a bit iffy about it.

Italy has a chaotic political system that tends to be able to go off the deepens and then right itself quite quickly. That is not the case in the UK or France.

Regardless of Europe's problems, of which there are many, the current car crash is hardly a useful road map (oh my mixed metaphors) for any country to follow Britain on the exit ramp (kill me now).

EdgeCase

I don't think they fully comprehend how much damage they've done either.
Even if Brexit doesn't happen, I could see a lot of companies feeling very jittery about the UK for the next decade or more.

Also, France would want to watch that trend too. I am hearing people starting to have jitters about French stability due to the possibility of a Marine Le Pen government taking France down a Brexit-like route.

I don't think the French electorate would necessarily go that far, but you can see why investors would be a bit iffy about it.

Italy has a chaotic political system that tends to be able to go off the deepens and then right itself quite quickly. That is not the case in the UK or France.

briany

Irishmale0399 wrote: »

She agreed to the backstop when negotiating with the EU, it wasnt an issue until she went to the HoC and flopped. Had she consulted the HoC during the process she would have known that they didnt want it......that is not the problem of the EU and is nothing but a British problem.

Would you sign a contract to buy a house or car without speaking to your wife or clearing the amount the bank would lend you before???

The backstop was always an issue, and MPs loudly voiced their opposition to it the moment it was announced in December 2017 that the UK and EU had agreed to it in principle. So much so that the UK quickly reneged on it.

Don't get me wrong, I think it would have been a more right and proper thing to have parliament involved. Whether that was workable I don't know, but I don't think that they would have arrived at an alternative to the backstop that was agreeable to both the HoC and the EU. Not a lot the HoC can agree on, these days. So we'd still arrive at this scenario of Ireland and the EU wanting the backstop, and the UK government paralysed by infighting, looking squarely down the barrel of no-deal.

Akrasia

WomanSkirtFan8 wrote: »

Delusional. Absolutely bloody delusional.

Is it the start of a pivot towards staying in the EU?

Pretending its their own choice is one way to back down with less humiliation

spacecoyote

Tell me how wrote: »

You could use that analogy to suggest a second vote would be the most righteous action.

This is so far from "Easiest deal in the World", "First call will be to Berlin", "They will be queuing up to talk to us", "£350M/week for the NHS" statement which were thrown around before the referendum that you could be forgiven for thinking they were never actually said.

Yeah but if you listen to the idiots like Farage, all of the above would have been true if only it hadn't been a remained PM doing the negotiating.

It's a very convenient excuse, and one that is never followed up with an explanation as to how he would have solved all the problems

Tell me how

Irishmale0399 wrote: »

Would you sign a contract to buy a house or car without speaking to your wife or clearing the amount the bank would lend you before???

You could use that analogy to suggest a second vote would be the most righteous action.

This is so far from "Easiest deal in the World", "First call will be to Berlin", "They will be queuing up to talk to us", "£350M/week for the NHS" statement which were thrown around before the referendum that you could be forgiven for thinking they were never actually said.

Irishmale0399

blanch152 wrote: »

If the troubles start again in Northern Ireland the fault will lie with those who start them and those who give them succour and suppport. The issue of Irish unification is not one worth committing criminal acts or violence over.

Those people who take to weapons because of Brexit or the consequences of Brexit are sad sick people who do not represent the majority of the population of the island. They are in fact a very small percentage of the population. Added to the fact that no one knows if the troubles will reignite it is a lame argument. They could paint a house the wrong colour or put up the wrong flag on a building and it could all kick off. If people are looking for a reason they will find one.

Fault for their actions cannot be laid at the feet of the EU nor the Irish government. They negotiated and agreed a WA with TM that would prevent a hard border by having a backstop. She and her government are the ones blocking that agreed backstop....hence she has gone back on the agreement she made with the EU. The UK government wants its cake with cherries on top as they still havent realised that the EU is much supierior to them and that the EU dont need them as they have nothing the EU depends on.

briany wrote: »

The main thing that the HoC cannot agree on is the backstop, so whether or not she had rigorously consulted parliament during the process, that would still have been the bugbear they arrived at.

She agreed to the backstop when negotiating with the EU, it wasnt an issue until she went to the HoC and flopped. Had she consulted the HoC during the process she would have known that they didnt want it......that is not the problem of the EU and is nothing but a British problem.

Would you sign a contract to buy a house or car without speaking to your wife or clearing the amount the bank would lend you before???

Strazdas

J Mysterio wrote: »

Im not sure that most really have a problem with the backstop really. I think the entire agreement is just so large, comprehensive and overwhelming in terms of its affects and scale that they themselves are just struggling.

The backstop is convenient in that it was identified as a 'problem' and May took that ball and ran with it. Now it's all anyone can talk about.

What about the other 'issues'? Everything else can now be glossed over.

Totally agree here : the idea that 230 MPs voted down the deal because of a tiny clause in a 600 page agreement is laughable.

A lot of people have latched onto it because the ERG and Daily Telegraph have (the whole Brexit debate is beyond surreal at this point)

First Up

EdgeCase wrote: »

The reality of it is that the structures of the EU were specifically designed to make conflicts like Northern Ireland be able to disappear by making the extremes of European nationalism fade into the background. Instead we are focused on pragmatic things and cooperation.

That's how places like Belgium have been calm and able to function - their borders don't matter. Even if Belgium were to split, practically within the EU it would make very little difference.

Northern Ireland (and the UK and the Republic of Ireland) benefited enormously from that system.

The UK is basically taking away a big part of NI's solution, which was the EU membership that made the border not matter, and then blaming the very solution it's ripping apart. It makes absolutely no sense and I don't think anyone, without going through a process of cognitive and logical contortions could possibly blame anyone other than the Brexiteers and the DUP for this.

The British Government has allowed itself to become wedded to the politics of Ian Paisley.

Its abundantly clear where the blame lies but it doesn't end with "blame". The consequences of the UK's stupidity and insanity will be widely felt and all the EU (and the rest of us) can do is take the least worse decisions that are being forced on us.

The EU project is too big, important and successful to allow one dysfunctional government and one regional (post-colonial) conflict undermine seventy years of peace and prosperity across the entire European continent.

The EU has offered the UK a solution that deals with the Irish border. The UK parliament has refused to accept it. The EU is not responsible for the decisions of the UK parliament (or electorate) but it is responsible for the collective well-being of its members.

The Single Market will not be compromised. Neither will the Common External Tariff, the Common Agricultural Policy or the common food and technical standards. Nor will a member state be disadvantaged in its membership by reason of geography or the actions of departing member.

To fail to understand this is to fail to understand what the EU is, where it has come from and where it is going. The EU will do what needs to be done.

fash

Leroy42 wrote: »

Just listening to the latest Brexit Republic Podcast and they are discussing the pathway to the WA, and how the backstop was devised, created and amended.

What an absolute craven pack of liars and cheaters the British (well TM and her team) have been throughout the process.

I can imagine the dismay when they saw that TM was simply throwing back everything they had all worked so hard on for the last 2 years, all the compromises, all the facilitation.

All because she doesn't have the balls to stand up for what she believes in.

She believes only in staying in power and holding the Tories together. That’s all she will stand up for.

J Mysterio

briany wrote: »

The main thing that the HoC cannot agree on is the backstop, so whether or not she had rigorously consulted parliament during the process, that would still have been the bugbear they arrived at.

Im not sure that most really have a problem with the backstop really. I think the entire agreement is just so large, comprehensive and overwhelming in terms of its affects and scale that they themselves are just struggling.

The backstop is convenient in that it was identified as a 'problem' and May took that ball and ran with it. Now it's all anyone can talk about.

What about the other 'issues'? Everything else can now be glossed over.

johnnyskeleton

jm08 wrote: »

Whats your view on the War of Independence then?

Mod note:

I appreciate the point you are making re: the blame for potential violence in Northern Ireland. However, let's not deviate off topic.

cml387

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

This from the headline article in today's Telegraph. An informative insight into the mindset of Brexiteers.

"Britain’s best chance of getting revenge on Brussels for its Brexit bullying is to remain in the European Union. For the EU’s most fanatical and full-throated theologians, few outcomes could be more horrific than an intransigent, hostile Britain trapped in a project that it plots to undermine from the inside."

Lovely.

Actually, for all it's bluster,there is a germ of truth in that statement.
Britain was quite successful in the past, while in the EU, accepting the best bits (free trade, Maggie's rebate) and refusing the nasty bits (EU working rights, Schengen).
Inadvertently the quote demonstrates why leaving was a stupid option

jm08

blanch152 wrote: »

If the troubles start again in Northern Ireland the fault will lie with those who start them and those who give them succour and suppport. The issue of Irish unification is not one worth committing criminal acts or violence over.

Whats your view on the War of Independence then?