Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

prawnsambo · 23-03-2019 09:43AM

irishproduce wrote: »

I suggest you are quite right to feel cynical.
There are backstage actors up to dirty tricks on both sides.
The ultimate desire of both is to stop brexit.

That looks a tad contradictory?

Akrasia · 23-03-2019 09:57AM

Scarinae wrote: »

Uri Geller (the fella who claims to bend spoons with his mind) has published an open letter to Theresa May saying he's going to telepathically stop Brexit:

So he's telepathically influencing her by writing her a letter, just like I telepathically influence the pizza delivery driver by calling them and giving them my address

iguana · 23-03-2019 10:00AM

Deleted User wrote: »

Abortion: Yes: 66.4 No: 33.6% Turnout: 64.13%
SSM: Yes: 62% No: 38% Turnout: 61%
Brexit: Leave 51.89% Remain: 48.11% Turnout: 72%

One of these is not like the other.

An even bigger difference. The changes in law following those two referenda in Ireland made very little difference to the lives of those who voted against them. Don't want to marry a person of your gender? Then don't. Don't want an abortion? Don't have one. On the other hand, those who voted remain are having their lives directly impacted by the choice made by those who voted leave. They will lose a variety of rights which many people have enjoyed their whole lives. They will likely become poorer as prices of European imports rise and the value of Sterling falls. Many have lost jobs. Food standards will almost certainly drop. And many, many other small cuts. They aren't comparable situations at all.

Water John · 23-03-2019 10:14AM

Spook, that line does not refer to discussing alternative deals or options. It was inserted specifically to prevent the UK Govn't offering specific assurances to the DUP, which they had hinted at, that would not be in the spirit of the WA.

prawnsambo · 23-03-2019 10:20AM

Water John wrote: »

Spook, that line does not refer to discussing alternative deals or options. It was inserted specifically to prevent the UK Govn't offering specific assurances to the DUP, which they had hinted at, that would not be in the spirit of the WA.

Yeah. The word 'unilateral' should be a clue as to what it means.

Leroy42 · 23-03-2019 10:22AM

Shelga wrote: »

Say it ends up being a no deal exit due to sheer incompetence.

Could the EU and the UK agree to some temporary measures to limit the catastrophic effects? Ie in the car industry, could they agree that 0% tariffs will apply both ways for up to 12 months, until more formal trade agreements are reached? In order to stop the immediate decimation of the car industry in the UK.

Or is this just wishful thinking?

It is not wishful thinking, it is the very basis for the entire Brexit process. That everything can be changed, but nothing will change.

The UK can be in and out, the EU will have to break all its rules just to save trade with the UK.

Now lets looks at that position. It is on the basis that the EU will sacrifice its core to get a trade deal. Much like it did with the US and how they tore up the EU standards in agriculture?

Water John · 23-03-2019 10:23AM

You could sorta guess which country had it included.

Leroy42 · 23-03-2019 10:25AM

And reading the DUP statement, it reads so much like the statements they put out in terms of issues within NI. Their position is that TM simply has to stand strong, refuse to yield, dig her heals in until the EU crack.

The problem is that, unlike in NI, a no deal means massive changes, whilst in NI refusing to move on some NI issue means that things stay the way they are, which suits the DUP in many cases.

They are completely different scenarios.

Irish Praetorian · 23-03-2019 10:46AM

josip wrote: »

Mods please remove if too far off topic, but Irish Praetorian is keen to have falsehoods tackled as they arise.

I believe it was the Titanic that hit the iceberg and not the other way around as he has hannanised.

I will gladly accept the rebuke if for no other reason than a chance to popularize the new expression of "Hannanising" history XD

Gringo180 · 23-03-2019 11:43AM

Is democracy dead and buried in the UK? The people voted to leave the E.U so why are the government dragging there feet?

robindch · 23-03-2019 11:46AM

Stand back everybody, Uri Geller, or somebody posing as him, is threatening to use his telepathic powers to stop Brexit:

https://twitter.com/JewishTelegraph/status/1109145636216152065

lawred2 · 23-03-2019 11:48AM

Gringo180 wrote: »

Is democracy dead and buried in the UK? The people voted to leave the E.U so why are the government dragging there feet?

Welcome to the thread. Your viewpoint is fresh and new. I hadn't thought of Brexit in terms like this.

Just get on with it.

Who cares about collateral damage, economics, international treaties, diplomatic relations or parliamentary procedures.

Just lift those feet.

Sorted

Gringo180 · 23-03-2019 11:53AM

lawred2 wrote: »

Welcome to the thread. Your viewpoint is fresh and new. I hadn't thought of Brexit in terms like this.

Just get on with it.

Who cares about collateral damage, economics, international treaties, diplomatic relations or parliamentary procedures.

Just lift those feet.

Sorted

Lol.

So why even have the referendum in the first place? Its like something that would happen in China or Russia. Democracy is a myth, unless it suits the establishment of course.

Tell me how · 23-03-2019 11:54AM

Gringo180 wrote: »

Is democracy dead and buried in the UK? The people voted to leave the E.U so why are the government dragging there feet?

Because it has become apparent that actually leaving would be nothing like it was promised it was going to be before the referendum was held.
Because it is now clear that leaving as they thought they could is incompatible with their responsibilities to the Good Friday Agreement.
Because they haven't been able to identify a single approach within the House of Commons which will receive the support of the majority of the members of that house.
Because all those who said it would be the simplest thing in the world have not being able to provide a single workable solution on how to make this happen.
Because nearly 3 years have passed since the referendum and it is increasingly likely that there is no longer a majority of people in the UK who wish to leave.

Enzokk · 23-03-2019 12:00PM

Gringo180 wrote: »

Lol.

So why even have the referendum in the first place? Its like something that would happen in China or Russia. Democracy is a myth, unless it suits the establishment of course.

Hindsight is 20/20 off course, but there was no way that the UK could leave the EU without a pre-determined outcome of single market membership and customs union or accepting that Northern Ireland will be separated from the rest of the UK. Now the problem is these 2 options will not be enough for those that want to leave the EU and thus we find ourselves where we find ourselves.

It is not that democracy has failed, it is that those that tried to use democracy failed at doing it properly. They failed to take into account the history of Northern Ireland and the GFA and the impact the EU has had with this and arrogantly thought it would not be a problem.

lawred2 · 23-03-2019 12:01PM

Gringo180 wrote: »

Lol.

So why even have the referendum in the first place? Its like something that would happen in China or Russia. Democracy is a myth, unless it suits the establishment of course.

No idea why such an open ended poorly considered referendum was held in the first place.

Definition of reckless stupidity.

Donald Trump · 23-03-2019 12:01PM

Gringo180 wrote: »

Is democracy dead and buried in the UK? The people voted to leave the E.U so why are the government dragging there feet?

Referendums are not binding in UK because of their belief that they can be manipulated by extremists and dictators

Isn't it ironic, don't ya think

Gringo180 · 23-03-2019 12:02PM

Surely we can come to an agreement with the Brits over the north, but no the pro E.U cronies we have in power would rather jeopardise peace with our neighbours for what they want, in what will be a failed superstate of European nations? Its complete and utter madness. As the years go by our sovereignty is slowly but surely being eroded away.

Donald Trump · 23-03-2019 12:06PM

Gringo180 wrote: »

Surely we can come to an agreement with the Brits over the north, but no the pro E.U cronies we have in power would rather jeopardise peace with our neighbours for what they want, in what will be a failed superstate of European nations? Its complete and utter madness. As the years go by our sovereignty is slowly but surely being eroded away.

Yeah, sure didn't the Brits treat us well over the past few hundred years until, like a crying mother cutting the apron strings of her adult child, gently pushed us out towards independence for our own good

Not the mention, they are the only ones that understand us and our history. #danielhannon

mickoneill31 · 23-03-2019 12:06PM

Gringo180 wrote: »

Is democracy dead and buried in the UK? The people voted to leave the E.U so why are the government dragging there feet?

Have you been paying any attention at all to the UK government over the last two years? They want to leave and they want to keep all the good parts of the EU treaties.
They can pick one. Trouble is they haven't been able to agree amongst themselves. So they're paralysed. And they slightly over estimated the importance of the UK to the rest of the EU so they got a crappy deal.

They can leave tomorrow if they want. Trouble is they're trying to minimise the damage to the economy while the hard Brexiters won't be affected and will probably profit from a hard Brexit.

The leave promoters promised itd be the easiest deal in history. They've been shown to be either liers or incompetent or both.

ancapailldorcha · 23-03-2019 12:10PM

The BBC are reporting that there might not be a MV3 next week if May doesn't believe it will pass:

Theresa May has told MPs there might not be a third vote on her Brexit deal next week if there is insufficient support for it to pass.

If it does not pass, the EU has set a deadline of 12 April for the UK to propose a new plan.

Meanwhile, supporters of another EU referendum will march through central London later.

Labour's Tom Watson will speak at the event, pledging to back May's deal if she agrees to hold a referendum on it.

Surely this must mean a second referendum if either Watson can back up his words or May doesn't hold the vote.

Either way, it looks like it's heading to the wire.

Donald Trump · 23-03-2019 12:10PM

mickoneill31 wrote: »

Have you been paying any attention at all to the UK government over the last two years? They want to leave and they want to keep all the good parts of the EU treaties.
They can pick one. Trouble is they haven't been able to agree amongst themselves. So they're paralysed. And they slightly over estimated the importance of the UK to the rest of the EU so they got a crappy deal.

They can leave tomorrow if they want. Trouble is they're trying to minimise the damage to the economy while the hard Brexiters won't be affected and will probably profit from a hard Brexit.

The leave promoters promised itd be the easiest deal in history. They've been shown to be either liers or incompetent or both.

Brexit backers made hundreds of millions on the night of the vote shorting GBP. Especially with Farage conceding defeat after being told poll results and before the official result. (Which he admitted but brushed it off as losing confidence)

Rees Mogg has billions of capital which he invests in emerging markets. the same emerging markets which would be free to flood the UK with cheap/inferior goods off the back of exploited labour should his plans/vision for free-trade no tariff actually materialize

recedite · 23-03-2019 12:15PM

Enzokk wrote: »

Hindsight is 20/20 off course, but there was no way that the UK could leave the EU without a pre-determined outcome of single market membership and customs union or accepting that Northern Ireland will be separated from the rest of the UK. Now the problem is these 2 options will not be enough for those that want to leave the EU and thus we find ourselves where we find ourselves.

It is not that democracy has failed, it is that those that tried to use democracy failed at doing it properly. They failed to take into account the history of Northern Ireland and the GFA and the impact the EU has had with this and arrogantly thought it would not be a problem.

Except that's just not true. The UK and NI could leave, and with some mutual goodwill and co-operation a soft border with RoI could have been arranged.

But the Coveney/Varadkar insistence on a totally frictionless border with NI is of course incompatible with Brexit.

By insisting on that "backstop" they are likely to cause a hard border instead, after Brexit. Preparations for the hard border are being drawn up at this very moment in Brussels.

The GFA has no bearing at all on Brexit, as has already been proved in a Belfast court. But if you want to tell me what exactly in the GFA stipulates that NI must remain in the EU or its customs union, I'm all ears.

Enzokk · 23-03-2019 12:19PM

Gringo180 wrote: »

Surely we can come to an agreement with the Brits over the north, but no the pro E.U cronies we have in power would rather jeopardise peace with our neighbours for what they want, in what will be a failed superstate of European nations? Its complete and utter madness. As the years go by our sovereignty is slowly but surely being eroded away.

Well the problem is we owe a lot of our own prosperity not to the UK but our membership of the EU. We have to choose either the EU or the UK if the UK wants to diverge from the EU. So we can choose to come to a agreement with the UK and cut ourselves off from the EU, which all projections show, I believe, will be worse for us than the UK leaving the EU with no-deal.

So our choice will be do we stay with the EU or the UK when the EU will be a better choice economically. What would your choice be?

robindch · 23-03-2019 12:20PM

recedite wrote: »

But the Coveney/Varadkar insistence on a totally frictionless border with NI is of course incompatible with Brexit.

It is, however, compatible with the Good Friday Agreement which ended violence in Northern Ireland. While it's probably of little consequence to ardent disaster capitalists, signatories to international agreements - particularly ones which end violence - are expected to stick to what they have agreed.

recedite wrote: »

By insisting on that "backstop" they are likely to cause a hard border instead, after Brexit. Preparations for the hard border are being drawn up at this very moment in Brussels.

UKGov was the institution which proposed, negotiated and accepted, the backstop in the first place - it's hardly IRGov's problem if UKGov decides to go back on their commitment.

Enzokk · 23-03-2019 12:26PM

recedite wrote: »

Except that's just not true. The UK and NI could leave, and with some mutual goodwill and co-operation a soft border with RoI could have been arranged.

But the Coveney/Varadkar insistence on a totally frictionless border with NI is of course incompatible with Brexit.

By insisting on that "backstop" they are likely to cause a hard border instead, after Brexit. Preparations for the hard border are being drawn up at this very moment in Brussels.

The GFA has no bearing at all on Brexit, as has already been proved in a Belfast court. But if you want to tell me what exactly in the GFA stipulates that NI must remain in the EU or its customs union, I'm all ears.

After almost 3 years and a lot more intelligent people looking at the GFA and EU membership implications the fact that the UK hasn't just walked away is not a sign to you that you are wrong? The continued insistence from May on keeping the border open and frictionless is because she is stupid and being bullied?

Just stop and think about that, think about what sort of conspiracy it should be from all sides to make this happen. It would take cooperation from Ireland and the UK and the EU and the US all to agree to something that is so obviously not true.

Or, while the GFA does not write in black and white that a border has to be open for it to work, it was written at a time when there was no customs or regulation checks between the two countries and thus you have to take that as the default for the agreement to continue.

recedite · 23-03-2019 12:31PM

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/border-to-be-discussed-between-ireland-and-eu-as-brexit-pressure-intensifies-1.3835698

Plans on how to deal with the Irish Border issue in the event of a no-deal Brexit are to be discussed urgently between the European Commission and Irish Government officials.
This comes after EU leaders at Friday’s European summit raised the need to protect the single market if the UK crashes out of the union without a deal. Several senior EU and Irish sources said there was a desire that the issue be prioritised immediately.
Senior Irish Government sources acknowledged preparations now needed to be intensified, but stressed EU leaders were also committed to keeping an open border in Ireland and protecting the Belfast Agreement.

Notice how the language is changing. An "open border" is not the same as the "frictionless border" specified in the backstop.
"Open" can mean anything. It can mean cameras, and pre-clearance and checks on lorries carrying goods. Just like at the Norwegian and Swiss borders with the EU.
In fact, just the sort of thing that the UK was suggesting all along, but which was roundly dismissed as unacceptable by Varadkar and Coveney.
And by rejecting those ideas, they EU side made the WA unacceptable and unworkable to the UK parliament.

fash · 23-03-2019 12:33PM

recedite wrote: »

Except that's just not true. The UK and NI could leave, and with some mutual goodwill and co-operation a soft border with RoI could have been arranged.

But the Coveney/Varadkar insistence on a totally frictionless border with NI is of course incompatible with Brexit.

By insisting on that "backstop" they are likely to cause a hard border instead, after Brexit. Preparations for the hard border are being drawn up at this very moment in Brussels.

The GFA has no bearing at all on Brexit, as has already been proved in a Belfast court. But if you want to tell me what exactly in the GFA stipulates that NI must remain in the EU or its customs union, I'm all ears.

Let us not forget that the Brexiters/leave campaign promised that there would be NO change to the border and no "soft" border - none. Furthermore, the UK government continues to insist that there will be none. Surely we should trust them at their word? Surely you are not saying they would lie?

Secondly, the people of NI want to be in the single market and want the back stop - against the will of people, that is being blocked by the DUP and ERG. Surely the Will of the People ™ must be not be betrayed ?

Donald Trump · 23-03-2019 12:34PM

recedite wrote: »

Except that's just not true. The UK and NI could leave, and with some mutual goodwill and co-operation a soft border with RoI could have been arranged.

But the Coveney/Varadkar insistence on a totally frictionless border with NI is of course incompatible with Brexit.

By insisting on that "backstop" they are likely to cause a hard border instead, after Brexit. Preparations for the hard border are being drawn up at this very moment in Brussels.

The GFA has no bearing at all on Brexit, as has already been proved in a Belfast court. But if you want to tell me what exactly in the GFA stipulates that NI must remain in the EU or its customs union, I'm all ears.

You do know that the UK agreed to the "backstop" a long time ago. You know that? It's not something that was unilaterally demanded by "Coveney/Varadkar"

Your Belfast court case is irrelevant. Basically that said that that court had no power to intervene to prevent a political decision. No more than that. Do you not understand that?

There is no written constitution in the UK. Think of the Parliament as having "executive power". All the court said was that it did not have the authority to prevent that.

In the US, there is an international trade agreement between Canada/US/Mexico. It is called NAFTA. Trump said he will tear this up. You know that he has the power to do this? Unless the US supreme court can find something that is against their written constitution, they cannot impinge on his authority to do so.

Using your logic, if NAFTA was torn up and not replaced, and someone took a case to try to prevent it on the basis that there was an agreement signed to allow free trade, but the court said that they could not arbitrarily impinge upon executive power, you would infer that there is nothing in NAFTA to allow free trade.

fash · 23-03-2019 12:38PM

recedite wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/border-to-be-discussed-between-ireland-and-eu-as-brexit-pressure-intensifies-1.3835698
Notice how the language is changing. An "open border" is not the same as the "frictionless border" specified in the backstop.
"Open" can mean anything. It can mean cameras, and pre-clearance and checks on lorries carrying goods. Just like at the Norwegian and Swiss borders with the EU.
In fact, just the sort of thing that the UK was suggesting all along, but which was roundly dismissed as unacceptable by Varadkar and Coveney.
And by rejecting those ideas, they EU side made the WA unacceptable and unworkable to the UK parliament.

The Norwegian and Swiss borders involve significant traffic jams (I know as I've been stuck in some) - and a tiny fraction of the number of crossings that NI/Ireland has.
The Swiss border in fact even has some German exclaves which are subject to Swiss customs jurisdiction (what! Outrageous! German exclaves say no! Etc.).

Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

Comments