prawnsambo wrote: » Johnson's government is in a minority and can basically be a glove puppet for parliament. He has to ask how high when they say jump and it's wonderful to think that the Tories are reduced to this. So he'll be sent off to Brussels to get an extension or he'll go to jail. He'll be told when to have an election and he'll be told when to dissolve parliament. What do they need a GNU for?
briany wrote: » She said that it would be worth reminding the EU in negotiations that in the event of a no-deal, Ireland's current supply chains would be disrupted, which is true.
farmchoice wrote: » well they have presented themselves as the anti brexit party who will do anything to save Britain from a disastrous crash out brexit and their recent increase in support seems to be a direct result of this. they now have the opportunity to support a GNU (government of national unity) to unseat boris and place an alternative in situ to agree an extension and take matters forward to an election in an orderly manner. corbyn as the leader of the main opposition party is on a democratic basis if nothing else the most entitled. the lib dems have refused to countenance this, even discuss it and this is very much a party political position to take, so after all this talk of the opposition coming together to stop a crash out when it came to it they were frightened of losing potential votes more then they were committed to stopping Johnson.
Labour swiftly dismissed the idea. Its officials said that as leader of the main opposition party, Corbyn was the only clear candidate. They also rejected the idea of a government of national unity, calling instead for a “strictly time-limited caretaker administration” that would be formed by Labour and supported by other opposition parties.
briany wrote: » I'll preface this by saying that I don't think Patel is a very nice person, and that she strikes me as the mascot of the Conservatives' lurch to the right. However, I don't remember her saying that the UK should starve Ireland. I know what quote people are getting that from, but it's been subjected to some Chinese whispers. She said that it would be worth reminding the EU in negotiations that in the event of a no-deal, Ireland's current supply chains would be disrupted, which is true. The hurt would come from the UK simply observing its newfound trading relationship with the EU, not from going above and beyond. I only point this out because if we let ourselves go with the hyperbole, we become as bad as the Brexiteers.
Professor Moriarty wrote: » The "significant issues" in the paper were that Ireland's GDP would suffer a greater fall than Britain's GDP. And that Ireland would suffer food shortages.
Enzokk wrote: » Bloomberg is telling us that the EU is ready to consider a time limit on the backstop.EU Ready to Consider Major U.K. Concession on Irish Backstop I unfortunately cannot access the article but from the responses to a tweet that highlighted the article there is one caveat, Ireland has to agree to the time limit. So the EU will give us the chance to get the UK out of a hole that will hurt us now and in 2 or whatever years time the time limit ends. And it will throw a current member under the bus, one that is a net contributor as well, for one looking to leave the union.
prawnsambo wrote: » Doesn't appear to have been a very well researched paper. Were they using the import figures from Dev's time again?
European Union governments have discussed giving the U.K. a major concession on Brexit by possibly time-limiting the contentious backstop mechanism for the Irish border, two people familiar with the matter said. A time limit -- something the EU has long said was out of the question -- would only be on offer if the U.K. accepted the backstop, which would keep Northern Ireland in a customs union with the bloc.
Nate--IRL-- wrote: » "European Union governments have discussed giving the U.K. a major concession on Brexit by possibly time-limiting the contentious backstop mechanism for the Irish border, two people familiar with the matter said." I'm calling bull**** on this one. Nate
prawnsambo wrote: » Here's the salient bit from a very short article: Which two people I wonder. Afaik, Wishart (who wrote the piece) is based in the UK.
jimmycrackcorm wrote: » Patel, like many English, has no concept of how the Irish psyche responds to centuries of British dominance. Probably also unaware that we import potatoes from Cyprus these days also.
jimmycrackcorm wrote: » It's interesting though... What happens after the backstop? What if the thinking is that they're still be a comprehensive trade agreement, and at that point, the EU says, as part of that, the border issue has to be solved. It's kicking the can down the road, but the can is still there
Zubeneschamali wrote: » She wasn't just saying that there would be disruption, which would be true. She wanted to use the threat of disruption to bully Ireland into dropping the backstop, quite different.
prunudo wrote: » If the current extension is anything to go by they can't be trusted. Any time limited backstop will be wasted away and before you know it we're approaching the deadline. There should be no movement on the backstop from the Irish governments. Also to add, I don't believe they could get the WA through parliament even with the backstop time limited or gone. There are too many opposing views to get anyhing through at present. Best outcome is a further extension followed by an GE.
Sam Russell wrote: » Patel is of Ugandan Asian stock - kicked out by Idi Amin. I doubt that many of the CP would look on her as English - whatever else she might be considered to be.
Any time limit granted by the EU could be linked to giving the Northern Ireland Assembly a say in whether the province remains in the backstop the people said.
During the 2011 to 2016 Assembly, there were 118 petitions of concerns used. Investigative website The Detail analysed 115 last November, and found DUP members had signed 86 – almost three times more than second-biggest users Sinn Fein.
Enzokk wrote: » Bloomberg is telling us that the EU is ready to consider a time limit on the backstop.
A time limit -- something the EU has long said was out of the question -- would only be on offer if the U.K. accepted a backstop which would keep Northern Ireland in a customs union with the bloc. Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who is planning to reveal his own proposals for the issue this week, has said he won’t allow the U.K. to be trapped in the backstop, which was agreed to by his predecessor Theresa May but opposed by the British Parliament. The discussions on a time limit haven’t found their way into the negotiating room but have taken place between major EU capitals including Paris and Berlin, one of the people said. Any backstop concession could only come if the U.K. and EU could rebuild trust. It wouldn’t be the starting point of a new negotiations, according to the second person. “The EU is not considering this option at all,” a European Commission spokesman said. “We are waiting for the U.K. to come forward with a legally operational solution that meets all the objectives of the backstop.”
correct horse battery staple wrote: » The damage has been done however by this fake news. Newstalk going on about how EU is about to throw Ireland under the bus. Which helps fuel eurosceptics here even though it's obviously fake news.
