Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

Some reaction to Laura Kuenssberg and her tweets,

https://twitter.com/drphiliplee1/status/1174336409496379392?s=20


And then to point out that this was a PR exercise for Johnson and he tried to deny it,

https://twitter.com/MarkDiStef/status/1174324138590253066?s=20

I guess the strategy worked, we are talking about her tweets rather than the serial liar.

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Well, everyone knows the EU always caves. He's painted himself into a corner with his rhetoric. Full-throated oomph, bulldog spirit, boosterism, yadda yadda. You know you're losing when May starts looking more statesmanlike. Mind you, he's still miles ahead of Corbyn in the polls though, which tells you all you need to know about Corbyn.

The fault isn't with Corbyn despite his flaws, it's with the British electorate itself. If the monumental mess and clown show that UK politics has turned into, which has even got worse since Boris became leader, isn't enough to sway voters, what possibly is? Do you actually think there's any member of the Labour party who would poll better, if given the current scenario they still choose Conservative. What could possibly change these voters minds?

johnmcdnl wrote: »

The fault isn't with Corbyn despite his flaws, it's with the British electorate itself. If the monumental mess and clown show that UK politics has turned into, which has even got worse since Boris became leader, isn't enough to sway voters, what possibly is? Do you actually think there's any member of the Labour party who would poll better, if given the current scenario they still choose Conservative. What could possibly change these voters minds?

So Corbyn is right and everybody else is wrong?

There aren't many options at the moment, but if the pre Iraq version of Tony Blair was leader of the Labour Party at the moment, I'm convinced he'd win an even bigger majority than what he did in 1997.

It's all its and buts but I wonder what would have happened if back in 2010 Labour had voted in David Milliband instead of Ed.

bilston wrote: »

if the pre Iraq version of Tony Blair was leader of the Labour Party at the moment, I'm convinced he'd win an even bigger majority than what he did in 1997.

Well, yes, of course. That is Tony Blair's legacy - no-one cares about all the Cool Britannia election winning bull**** because he went on to commit giant war crimes with his buddy George Bush.


There is no pre Iraq war Blair now, we're just lucky the Labour party survived that disaster at all.

The tiny DUP party is irrelevant.
The UK government signed up to the terms of their withdrawal from EU in November 2018. EU was very nice to extend the leaving date to 31 October. That's it ... we were nice once and UK messed it up again. No more extensions.

Enzokk wrote: »

And then to point out that this was a PR exercise for Johnson and he tried to deny it

"The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. His heart sank as he thought of the enormous power arrayed against him, the ease with which any Party intellectual would overthrow him in debate, the subtle arguments which he would not be able to understand, much less answer. And yet he was in the right! They were wrong and he was right' - 1894, George Orwell. 

At least it's not an embarrassment, just part of the job

https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson/status/1174415346561945601?s=19

54and56 wrote: »

Wow, looks like Arlene has thrown Sammy and Nigel under a NI built Boris Bus after her meeting with Leo tonight - “The presentation of the DUP as a ‘no deal’ party is wrong. People get very alarmed when they see that sort of rhetoric, We do want to see a deal but it has to be a deal that works for everybody,” she said.

That's not much different to what Jeffrey Donaldson was saying to RTE a few months ago:

Speaking on RTE's Morning Ireland, Jeffrey Donaldson said that while the DUP wanted to leave with a deal, it would not join parliamentary efforts to prevent Brexit from happening and would not take no-deal "off the table".

"We know that is the strongest lever the UK government has in its negotiations with Brussels," Mr Donaldson said.

However, he stressed the DUP wanted to see a deal and he hopes that Brussels would compromise on a withdrawal agreement.

https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2019/0725/1065127-brexit/

The party line is they want a deal - but they also won't take any steps to ensure that a No Deal is taken off the table.

This just sounds to me like the DUP being in election mode trying to protect their own skin. If there winds up being No Deal then they'll need a defence against the charge that they didn't do enough to prevent it.

bilston wrote: »

What the hell went in whatever strategy meeting the DUP leadership had to determine which side to back in the Referendum?

I seem to recall reading that they didn't really think about it - it was basically a brief discussion and since they have always had problems with the EU (popish plot, liberal agenda etc) that they would support Brexit thinking that it would never happen!

Bit cynical wrote: »

On the other hand continued commitment to the CTA is one of the things required of the UK in the WA.

"The United Kingdom shall ensure that the Common Travel Area and the associated rights and privileges can continue to apply without affecting the obligations of Ireland under Union law, in particular with respect to free movement for Union citizens and their family members, irrespective of their nationality, to, from and within Ireland."

We can't get rid of the common travel area while at the same time insisting that it is essential to us.

I am an EU citizen. BUT, because of this "CTA"agreement, my rights are less than other EU citizens. I say again ... that is disgusting.

Scoondal wrote: »

I am an EU citizen. BUT, because of this "CTA"agreement, my rights are less than other EU citizens. I say again ... that is disgusting.

Unfortunately, Brexit makes Ireland joining Schengen less likely as it makes the CTA and related reciprocal right to work more essential.

Any of you ever listen to Dunphys podcast. He seems to have gotten all 6 people on this island who thinks that the backstop is a bad idea. It's infuriating to listen to

fash wrote: »

https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/1174418355991797767?s=20
Nice comment on this from David Allen Green
https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/1174420060976373760?s=20

"I have been in the job 57 days, it wasn't me who did this."
Not quite Boris. He approached Brexit like a bull in a china shop since 2016.
Arlene Foster ditto and also pathetically trying to step down from her Brexit ladder yesterday.

Scoondal wrote: »

Somebody is going to take a legal case about this discrimination of Irish people in EU law. It is morally and legally wrong. EU citizens cannot be treated differently in law because of a bi-lateral agreement with a soon to be non EU country. I can expand my case if anyone wishes because I have jumped through all the hoops that were put in front of me.

I would like to hear more about your thoughts.
My initial thought on your comments are that the EU would have to be sympathetic to the strong cultural, historical, genetic, economic and social connection that Ireland has with NI, England, Wales and Scotland.

I believe it would be a misstep on the EU's part to put in place restrictions on Irish citizens because of the moral objection of someone from another member state who refuses to accept that there is in reality a deeper relationship between the UK and Ireland than the EU has been able to foster among it's member states. (If that is what you are getting at)

From what I recall, I don't think they have a legal obligation to provide equality at any cost in this manner and in the same way that the law of 1973 (France) for example has a pretty complex arrangement with its overseas territories and departments that doesn't necessarily extend to Schengen in the same manner.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_policies_of_the_French_overseas_departments_and_territories

I think it would be the case of the tail wagging the dog to try and extend Anglo Irish treaty provisions to all EU member states and citizens .

Leroy42 wrote: »

Another ultimatum for Johnson. Why do the EU bother? What will they do if Johnson doesn't produce within 2 weeks?

Nothing, of course, because it wouldn't make any more sense to pull the plug in 2 weeks than it does now.

Wasn't today the end of the 30 day period that Johnson so joyously jumped on?

Couple more to go (Saturday the 20th).
Ultimatums mean nothing unless you enforce them, and nothing will happen prior to 31 Oct imo, why should the EU rush?

Leroy42 wrote: »

Another ultimatum for Johnson. Why do the EU bother?

Johnson is still trying to give the impression that he expects a UK/EU deal to be hammered out at the European Council on 17 October - late night, last-minute, the usual stuff.

That's not going to happen, of course. All along the EU has treated these negotations - as Article 50 requires - as a negotiation with an external party. Any deal will be hammered out between the UK and EU teams before the European Council, and will then go back to the two sides for approval by their respective executive authorities - Cabinet in the case of the UK; the European Council in the case of the EU.

So, on 17 October the European Council will consider whether to approve any deal that may already have been thrashed out between the negotiators. The UK will not be represented at the meeting and will not be involved in the discussion or the decision. The UK will make its own decision about whether to approve any deal that may have been thrashed out.

So, the point of this ultimatum is twofold:

- To convey to Johnson, who doesn't appear to have grasped it, how this works; if there's a deal, it will be negotiated well in advance of the Council on 17 October, not at that Council.

- If Johnson doesn't grasp this, or has grasped it all along but pretends for domestic consumption not to have grasped it, to manage public expectation about how this process will unfold, and to position themselves not to be blamed for the failure of a deal to eventuate.

Leroy42 wrote: »

What will they do if Johnson doesn't produce within 2 weeks?

What they're doing now; prepare for a no-deal Brexit on 31 October, and for what follows a no-deal Brexit.

Leroy42 wrote: »

Wasn't today the end of the 30 day period that Johnson so joyously jumped on?

Yes, I think it is. Or close enough, anyway. But nobody ever thought there was a real 30-day period, and SFAIK Johnson was the only person who even pretended to think that.