Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

ThePanjandrum · 07-09-2019 12:40AM

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Do you want folk banned?

As far as I'm concerned they can say what they like about me. Go ahead.

Forty Seven · 07-09-2019 12:40AM

ElectronVolt wrote: »

The entire continent has actually survived *much* worse than the UK has ever done and rebuilt itself from literal ashes after WWII. I'm not saying the UK hasn't been through a lot over the 20th century, but this WWI/II nostalgia is getting ludicrous.

I find the accusations of everyone else indulging in Schadenfreude about the UK tends to wear very thin when many of those on the Brexit side seem to just want to bring about the end of the EU. There seems to be an extremely strong sense of joy in some quarters about ideas of hurting the EU, damaging the Euro, undermining the Irish economy and so on.

All that anyone's ever asked was the UK leaves in a managed exit and doesn't cause itself or the EU serious harm. That's turned into a big load of ranting and raving and blame because nobody can just wave a magic wand and make the practical consequences go away, without compromise.

A discussion about facts, figures and practical and pragmatic solutions might be more helpful, but all we are getting is ranting, raving and rhetoric.

Well, I haven't seen any of that if I'm honest, maybe the clowns on the Daily Mail comments section engage in that type of discussion, (I wouldn't put it past them) but they do not speak for the majority of the nation and I would call any of that out too if I came across it.

Brexit is about the UK leaving Europe, not damaging Europe, nobody I speak to has ever indulged in that type of rhetoric and all hold respect for our neighbours, sure, there will be crackpots on all sides, that's life.

For the UK there is no practical solution, someone is going to lose either way and opinion is split down the middle. Sometimes there just isn't a compromise and the fallout just has to be absorbed and becomes an education for the future.

Facts, figures and pragmatism went out the window before May resigned. We are in full emotional stalemate here.

ThePanjandrum · 07-09-2019 12:45AM

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

To me here in ROI it is a bit puzzling to try to understand the power that the Press has across the pond in influencing people.

Seems to me there is the Telegraph, Sun, Express, Mail, all in favour of Leave, and then there is the Guardian that is the counterpoint.

I don't think there would ever be that much influence on public opinion here from the papers.

But maybe that's because we here are cynical and can see through the bullcrap. Dunno.

The Mail is not in favour of leave under Geordie Greig. The Times, the Mirror, the Independent etc are against Brexit as are the BBC and most other broadcasters (LBC has presenters from both sides).

ElectronVolt · 07-09-2019 12:45AM

The only huge stumbling block is Northern Ireland and that was pointed out before Brexit was ever voted for and then the UK tied itself in knots with the DUP in a confidence and supply arrangement minority government, which removed all discussion about how a practical solution for that issue was ever going to be found.

So, really that's the crux of this and pretending otherwise is just not going to achieve anything.

If you pull Northern Ireland out into a situation where there's a hard border, you'll likely re-start the Troubles. A solution has to be found to preserve the status quo, without wrecking the Irish economy and without undermining a desire to leave the EU on the UK's side either.

The only solution I can see is a Northern Ireland Only backstop - which was the EU's original proposal. It would effectively just keep the status quo in Northern Ireland, which is what they voted for anyway in the referendum.

The alternative is strife in the short to medium term. We all know that and it's head-in-sand nonsense to pretend otherwise.

If there's a huge issue, why not just give Northern Ireland a referendum on an agreement that allows the region to maintain its status quo? That would be a democratic solution without annoying either side and without frustrating anyone's referendum.

If the population of NI endorses a NI-only backstop, that should be the end of it.

Being dogmatic about national identity in NI is always a recipe for violence and it's idiocy to keep pushing this along.

All most people in NI want is peace, stability and the ability to have a decent society that's growing away from that history of violence. It's not THAT much to ask to give them the opportunity to continue with it. Or, does English nationalism really just not care a jot?

SeaBreezes · 07-09-2019 12:46AM

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

The proper choice is easy.

The first referendum decided that the UK should leave.

Leaving under article 50 means leaving with a Withdrawal Agreement or Without one.

Therefore, to be consistent the choice needs to be between leaving with an agreed Withdrawal Agreement and leaving with no Withdrawal Agreement.

Putting Remain on the Referendum when it has been rejected is undemocratic.

im not sure you know exactly what democratic means... going by your logic the FIRST democratic vote was wether to join the EU which was won by a majority of 66% and it was undemocratic to have a 2nd vote asking them if they wanted to leave? At best another vote would be best of three? Why restrict the informed options? Afraid an informed public would give a sensible decision?

Strazdas · 07-09-2019 12:46AM

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

I'm a registered supporter, I became one as soon as this was possible. I am as wedded to Brexit as any of the names you have given.

No Deal I assume? That is now their stated policy : Farage says he is opposed to any form of WA as he believes it would be too restrictive

ThePanjandrum · 07-09-2019 12:48AM

Is no-one going to tell me why I'm ghastly then? If the allegation that was made cannot be backed up then it needs to be withdrawn.

BonnieSituation · 07-09-2019 12:53AM

Forty Seven wrote: »

I think we are witnessing something here that transcends Brexit. This is the rise of the proletariat, only they are not rising as Marx predicted. Years of immigration coupled with austerity has the lower rung of the nation becoming more right wing, this was evident with the rise of UKIP and the tories moving away from the center right to counter.

I have thought for some time that we are heading into a global catastrophe akin to the last two wars. History shows there are stages coming into a conflict. Often they start with a financial crisis, check, then polarisation of political views, check, a minority group or country to blame, check both, (immigrants, EU) political stalemate resulting in a strong leader emerging, check (he doesn't have to be strong, just appear it) the disastisfaction of the political classes among the populace, check, nationalism becoming more widespread, check, people in the streets protesting, check.

I surmise we are on about chapter 5 of the coming bestseller on WW3. It is globally unfolding, the US and China in a trade war, the immigration problem in Europe, the re-emergence of Russian muscle flexing. Europe fragmenting. (Like it or not, Brexit has dented the credibility and will have unforseen consequences)

We are witnessing England burgeoning into a far right nation and probably the break up of the union. The gloves are going to come off at some point. I am going to start buying gold again.

With England burgeoning into a far right nation as you put it, why would you still be a unionist?

ThePanjandrum · 07-09-2019 12:54AM

ElectronVolt wrote: »

The only huge stumbling bloc is Northern Ireland and that was pointed out before Brexit was ever voted for and then the UK tied itself in knots with the DUP in a confidence and supply arrangement minority government, which removed all discussion about how a practical solution for that issue was ever going to be found.

So, really that's the crux of this and pretending otherwise is just not going to achieve anything.

If you pull Northern Ireland out into a situation where there's a hard border, you'll likely re-start the Troubles. A solution has to be found to preserve the status quo, without wrecking the Irish economy and without undermining a desire to leave the EU on the UK's side either.

The only solution I can see is a Northern Ireland Only backstop - which was the EU's original proposal. It would effectively just keep the status quo in Northern Ireland, which is what they voted for anyway in the referendum.

The alternative is strife in the short to medium term. We all know that and it's head-in-sand nonsense to pretend otherwise.

If there's a huge issue, why not just give Northern Ireland a referendum on an agreement that allows the region to maintain its status quo? That would be a democratic solution without annoying either side and without frustrating anyone's referendum.

If the population of NI endorses a NI-only backstop, that should be the end of it.

Being dogmatic about national identity in NI is always a recipe for violence and it's idiocy to keep pushing this along.

Two countries are involved in the GFA, the UK and Ireland.

If the GFA requires open borders and free trade (as is claimed by the EU) then the two countries obviously need to have Common Travel Area and a Free Trade Agreement. Any other Treaties or Agreements should be subject to this.

ElectronVolt · 07-09-2019 12:58AM

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Two countries are involved in the GFA, the UK and Ireland.

If the GFA requires open borders and free trade (as is claimed by the EU) then the two countries obviously need to have Common Travel Area and a Free Trade Agreement. Any other Treaties or Agreements should be subject to this.

The GFA was built based on the status quo that existed in the 1990s and that brought about the end of the border - i.e. the single market which ended the Northern Ireland customs border in 1993. The Good Friday Agreement came about just 5 years after that date.

The UK has unilaterally walked away from those arrangements and has offered no viable solution for Northern Ireland which would respect that agreement, having brought one of the most extreme parties in Northern Ireland directly into supporting the British Government and becoming fully involved in the design of the chaos that has brought us to this point.

The Belfast Agreement / GFA did not envisage a situation where the UK Government would be siding with the DUP nor did it ever envisage a situation where the European freedoms of movement of goods and services and EU framework that underpinned making that border nor matter would just disappear overnight like this.

Yet, you seem to be trying to blame the Republic of Ireland?

Doesn't make sense.

The onus for finding a solution to this is is on the party that has undermined the status quo and that is the UK.

ThePanjandrum · 07-09-2019 01:00AM

Strazdas wrote: »

No Deal I assume? That is now their stated policy : Farage says he is opposed to any form of WA as he believes it would be too restrictive

I would prefer an good and equitable Free Trade Agreement which means that the UK would not be in the Customs Union and have access to, not membership of, the single market. This essentially would be like other Free Trade Agreements. If this is not on offer then I would be happy to leave without a Withdrawal Agreement. This was my position before and during the Referendum, it's still my position now.

Forty Seven · 07-09-2019 01:01AM

BonnieSituation wrote: »

With England burgeoning into a far right nation as you put it, why would you still be a unionist?

I don't believe Scotland is an economically viable country. Most go on about North Sea Oil but that is almost beyond economically recoverable, sure, modern technology is making it more so but that is coming online as oil is becoming unfashionable. The future is here and oil is not that welcome.

There are other reasons, I don't hold resentments from history. No English ever raped or pillaged their way through my back garden and I just don't see the need for seperation. This historical nonsense is rife in the independence crowd.

The cost of independence would be enormous. Totally unnecesary in my view. Never mind the problems of borders between England, possibly the EU and NI routes. It's a minefield at best.

The rise of the right is just a temporary thing. It usually is when it rears its head anywhere it goes.

Strazdas · 07-09-2019 01:03AM

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Is no-one going to tell me why I'm ghastly then? If the allegation that was made cannot be backed up then it needs to be withdrawn.

I referred to the BXP being a ghastly party and said I believed many of their members (electoral candidates) are closet racists.

I cannot comment on their 'supporters' or voters as I don't have enough information about them.

ElectronVolt · 07-09-2019 01:04AM

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

I would prefer an good and equitable Free Trade Agreement which means that the UK would not be in the Customs Union and have access to, not membership of, the single market. This essentially would be like other Free Trade Agreements. If this is not on offer then I would be happy to leave without a Withdrawal Agreement. This was my position before and during the Referendum, it's still my position now.

I'd be happy if Dunnes Stores would just give my all of my groceries for free when I said I felt like not paying and gave me a lovely mug of hot chocolate and helped me load them into the car, but that's not how the world works.

If the UK is going to negotiate a trade deal with the EU, it will have to go through pretty much the same process that Canada or South Korea did. The whole point of the single market is to ensure freedom of trade within in on an equal and fair basis. Having a 3rd party plugged into it with full access without the rules that ensure a fair playing field is simply a non-starter for the EU.

You're also not going to get a trade deal like that with the US either. It will be absolutely based on US interests and driven by their domestic interests, not yours.

Unfortunately you're moving from a situation where you can have an expectation of solidarity and friendship as member of an organisation to a purely transactional relationship based on economics and trade alone. That is a huge change of relationship.

ThePanjandrum · 07-09-2019 01:06AM

ElectronVolt wrote: »

The GFA was built based on the status quo that existed in the 1990s and that brought about the end of the border - i.e. the single market which ended the Northern Ireland customs border in 1993. The Good Friday Agreement came about just 5 years after that date.

The UK has unilaterally walked away from those arrangements and has offered no viable solution for Northern Ireland which would respect that agreement, having brought one of the most extreme parties in Northern Ireland directly into supporting the British Government and becoming fully involved in the design of the chaos that has brought us to this point.

The Belfast Agreement / GFA did not envisage a situation where the UK Government would be siding with the DUP nor did it ever envisage a situation where the European freedoms of movement of goods and services and EU framework that underpinned making that border nor matter would just disappear overnight like this.

Yet, you seem to be trying to blame the Republic of Ireland?

Doesn't make sense.

Both Ireland and the rest of the UK made the same commitments to the borders (which don't seem to be in the GFA). Therefore, if "Open Borders" are mandatory for one country they are mandatory for both.

The GFA does not specify that both countries have to be members of the EU and the UK's electorate have chosen to leave.

ElectronVolt · 07-09-2019 01:09AM

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Both Ireland and the rest of the UK made the same commitments to the borders (which don't seem to be in the GFA). Therefore, if "Open Borders" are mandatory for one country they are mandatory for both.

The GFA does not specify that both countries have to be members of the EU and the UK's electorate have chosen to leave.

OK, so let's imagine the roles were reversed and the UK had remained in the EU and was quite happy with the status quo it had pre-Brexit, economy booming away and everything was fine and then Ireland had gone into a political mess, let's say after the 2008 recession and left the EU, blaming it for everything and then demanded that the UK dropped out of the single market to facilitate the Good Friday Agreement Commitments both countries made?

We'd be rightly told where to go in no uncertain terms and the special status of Northern Ireland would have had to be where any compromise was made.

ThePanjandrum · 07-09-2019 01:09AM

ElectronVolt wrote: »

I'd be happy if Dunnes Stores would just give my all of my groceries for free when I said I felt like not paying and gave me a lovely mug of hot chocolate and helped me load them into the car, but that's not how the world works.

If the UK is going to negotiate a trade deal with the EU, it will have to go through pretty much the same process that Canada or South Korea did. The whole point of the single market is to ensure freedom of trade within in on an equal and fair basis. Having a 3rd party plugged into it with full access without the rules that ensure a fair playing field is simply a non-starter for the EU.

You're also not going to get a trade deal like that with the US either. It will be absolutely based on US interests and driven by their domestic interests, not yours.

Unfortunately you're moving from a situation where you can have an expectation of solitary and friendship as member of an organisation to a purely transactional relationship based on economics and trade alone. That is a huge change of relationship.

How much do Canada and South Korea pay to the EU annually for their Free Trade Agreements? Are they subject to the laws of the EU and in particular the ECJ? Why should the UK pay the EU when the EU exports more to the UK than the UK does to the EU?

jm08 · 07-09-2019 01:11AM

Forty Seven wrote: »

I don't believe Scotland is an economically viable country. Most go on about North Sea Oil but that is almost beyond economically recoverable, sure, modern technology is making it more so but that is coming online as oil is becoming unfashionable. The future is here and oil is not that welcome.

There are other reasons, I don't hold resentments from history. No English ever raped or pillaged their way through my back garden and I just don't see the need for seperation. This historical nonsense is rife in the independence crowd.

The cost of independence would be enormous. Totally unnecesary in my view. Never mind the problems of borders between England, possibly the EU and NI routes. It's a minefield at best.

The rise of the right is just a temporary thing. It usually is when it rears its head anywhere it goes.

If I were a Scot, I would find it completely unacceptable the way Scotland was first of all was encouraged to stay in the UK because it could continue to be a member of the EU, but far more seriously, how Scotland is completely ignored by the British Government in the Brexit situation. Basically, Wales and Scotland are treated like colonies of England.

ThePanjandrum · 07-09-2019 01:14AM

ElectronVolt wrote: »

OK, so let's imagine the roles were reversed and the UK had remained in the EU and was quite happy with the status quo it had pre-Brexit, economy booming away and everything was fine and then Ireland had gone into a political mess, let's say after the 2008 recession and left the EU, blaming it for everything and then demanded that the UK dropped out of the single market to facilitate the Good Friday Agreement Commitments both countries made?

We'd be rightly told where to go in no uncertain terms and the special status of Northern Ireland would have had to be where any compromise was made.

Personally I would have been quite happy for that, but I have never said that Ireland should leave the Single Market anyway. The Single Market is the EU's problem, they need to work out how you have full access to the Single Market (as is your right) without breaching the GFA which they claim is of paramount importance.

ElectronVolt · 07-09-2019 01:16AM

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

How much do Canada and South Korea pay to the EU annually for their Free Trade Agreements? Are they subject to the laws of the EU and in particular the ECJ? Why should the UK pay the EU when the EU exports more to the UK than the UK does to the EU?

Emm, possibly because the UK has yet to negotiate any free trade agreement with the EU and because the Customs Union comes with significantly more access than either of those could have and also has overheads in terms of infrastructure, administration and so on.

The UK's exit bill is largely covering services that were pooled with the EU. It's not some kind of punishment fee or something. It's just tidying up loose ends and closing off accounts for shared services.

The most logical approach would have been a phased and managed exit over a decade or more, but none of that was quick enough and "to hell with the practical consequences" seems to have been the attitude.

Popeleo · 07-09-2019 01:17AM

Forty Seven wrote: »

Nonsense like this just feeds the leavers. The UK is a global power and will remain so. Permanent UN security council member, nuclear power, financial powerhouse, major tourist destination and cultural behemoth.
This type of belligerent schadenfreude is just uncalled for and does not help anyone.

Brexit does, however, have negative implications for some of the items you have listed.

Financial services will take a big hit in a no-deal scenario. Everything from Switzerland that is cleared through London will go somewhere else. Even in the case of a deal, a lot of euro-denominated business will end up moving.

Anti-immigrant sentiments may be off-putting to tourists. And if some Chinese tourists get attacked by yobs, it will be over Chinese social media in hours and expect a sharp decrease in visitors. And that is not schadenfreude as that would hit Ireland too due to the visa waiver scheme. (Also, the Home Office is already doing your tourism industry no favours. I have helped a few non-EU friends fill in visa applications over the years and the process is getting more off-putting.)

And the nuclear one is being complicated by UK politics being so dominated by Brexit that little else is getting done. The Trident submarines will have to be replaced as they will only last about another 10 years and deciding and building replacements will probably take longer than that. As a Scot, you will be all too aware that if Brexit leads to Scottish independence, it would mean the rUK having to find a new base to replace Faslane. And if Tory meltdown leads to the almost unelectable Corbyn getting into power, he mightn't pull the plug on Trident but I can't see him signing off on a replacement.

ted1 · 07-09-2019 01:18AM

BluePlanet wrote: »

I had read somewhere that there were ranklings in some quarters that the WA already offered Britain too much access.
It's madness they turned it down, they won't get a better deal, ever.

I can see them putting the border in the Irish Sea yet.

What’s gas is if we make things hate for them and they eventually ask to rejoin they’ll have to give to the pound.

SeaBreezes · 07-09-2019 01:19AM

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Both Ireland and the rest of the UK made the same commitments to the borders (which don't seem to be in the GFA). Therefore, if "Open Borders" are mandatory for one country they are mandatory for both.

The GFA does not specify that both countries have to be members of the EU and the UK's electorate have chosen to leave.

And Northern Ireland's population voted to stay in the EU...

ThePanjandrum · 07-09-2019 01:19AM

jm08 wrote: »

If I were a Scot, I would find it completely unacceptable the way Scotland was first of all was encouraged to stay in the UK because it could continue to be a member of the EU, but far more seriously, how Scotland is completely ignored by the British Government in the Brexit situation. Basically, Wales and Scotland are treated like colonies of England.

England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales are each treated as what they are, constituent parts of the UK. The Referendum was UK wide and each Scottish vote counted exactly the same as an English vote. In Parliamentary elections a Scottish Vote counts more than an English one, just as in European Elections a UK vote counts less than that of any other nation.

SeaBreezes · 07-09-2019 01:21AM

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Personally I would have been quite happy for that, but I have never said that Ireland should leave the Single Market anyway. The Single Market is the EU's problem, they need to work out how you have full access to the Single Market (as is your right) without breaching the GFA which they claim is of paramount importance.

They have. It's called the backstop.

ElectronVolt · 07-09-2019 01:21AM

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Personally I would have been quite happy for that, but I have never said that Ireland should leave the Single Market anyway. The Single Market is the EU's problem, they need to work out how you have full access to the Single Market (as is your right) without breaching the GFA which they claim is of paramount importance.

And they did: They offered Northern Ireland unique, special status and all sorts of abilities to be both in the UK and the Single Market at the same time, that was flatly rejected by one narrow, dogmatic Northern Irish party - the DUP and flies in the face of the NI referendum result.

The solution to Northern Ireland's always going to be a compromise and always resulted in both Irish and British nationalists in Northern Ireland having bite their tongues and hold their noses to some extent to allow things to function. Neither side of that conflict can have everything they want and both have to accept some degree of compromise.

The Tories allowed themselves to be rolled into a mess with the DUP and that is fundamentally the problem and has been the problem since the start of this.

07-09-2019 01:21AM

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Is no-one going to tell me why I'm ghastly then? If the allegation that was made cannot be backed up then it needs to be withdrawn.

Batting for the other side can never be forgiven by many here, I don't have a "side", but do take some flak for some of my opinions here as well.

ThePanjandrum · 07-09-2019 01:21AM

SeaBreezes wrote: »

And Northern Ireland's population voted to stay in the EU...

So did Newcastle's but Nottingham voted to Leave.

The Referendum was UK wide so the fact that different areas voted different ways is meaningless.

ThePanjandrum · 07-09-2019 01:25AM

ElectronVolt wrote: »

And they did: They offered Northern Ireland unique, special status and all sorts of abilities to be both in the UK and the Single Market at the same time, that was flatly rejected by one narrow, dogmatic Northern Irish party - the DUP and flies in the face of the NI referendum result.

The solution to Northern Ireland's always going to be a compromise and always resulted in both Irish and British nationalists in Northern Ireland having bite their tongues and hold their noses to some extent to allow things to function. Neither side of that conflict can have everything they want and both have to accept some degree of compromise.

The Tories allowed themselves to be rolled into a mess with the DUP and that is fundamentally the problem and has been the problem since the start of this.

Any solution needs to be accepted by all parties and you cannot constrain another country to accept a deal against its will. Ireland and the EU have a relationship between them which means that they should be able to agree a solution. If not, maybe the ECJ can enforce one.

ElectronVolt · 07-09-2019 01:25AM

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

So did Newcastle's but Nottingham voted to Leave.

The Referendum was UK wide so the fact that different areas voted different ways is meaningless.

Well, if you want to ignore the fact that Northern Ireland is a distinct and discrete geopolitical entity within the UK system and that it has unique crisis of national identity that caused a very deadly and violent conflict that was only recently solved by a tortuously complex peace process and that that is what underlies why it's treated differently, then I don't really know what the point in arguing is.

Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

Comments