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 XI (Please read OP before posting)

Quin_Dub

This is the eleventh incarnation of our Brexit discussion thread,

Same warnings etc still apply:

As we are approaching the critical end of March October 2019 period, please bear the following in mind before posting:
Insults directed at popular figures are not acceptable in this forum
Please do not post memes, videos or comedy links here
Please do not be uncivil to other posters
Please use the report function to alert the mods when necessary

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Varta

Bambi wrote: »

It was highly unlikely that UK would leave the EU
It was highly unlikely that Boris would be PM
It was highly unlikely that Dominic Cummings would be spearheading the UK governments withdrawal negotiations
It was highly unlikely that Jeremy Corybn would be leading the Labour Party in the UK.

Highly unlikely doesn't cut it when it comes the putting a hard border on this Island

Nonsense. There were times when I would have placed a decent bet on any of those outcomes.

FrancieBrady

It's the Anglo Irish Agreement again...Unionists being told again, you don't have a veto.

farmchoice

Varta wrote: »

1. Do MPs from Labour pro-brexit constituencies want another extension? Maybe yes and maybe no.

2. The Benn act doesn't guarantee anything until it has been tested and Johnson's camp are playing that one very close to their chests.

Take a moment to review the behaviour of the opposition over the past year or so. They have been all over the place, squabbling amongst themselves. The chances of them stooping this now are growing weaker... not stronger.

on point 1. i believe they all voted fro the Benn act so we can assume they do.

on point 2. they are now quite obviously much stronger, they have managed to take control of parliament and pass legislation that has hamstrung the government, they have challenged the government in court and won.

they can now decide when an election will be called and possibly have the numbers to pass an amendment to the WA necessitating a confirmatory referendum.

Adamcp898

Michael Gove just now on Radio 4 sounds a suspiciously confident chap on how this deal will fare on Saturday.

Varta

munstermagic11 wrote: »

Corrected your post.
Not denying that the opposition has been poor, but this has been a government led farce.

Without wishing to be confrontational, please don't correct my posts.

That said, I agree that the entire UK political establishment has been a disaster with regard to brexit.

Kermit.de.frog

Bambi wrote: »

Thats some Mark Francois level dissembling right there. You can spin all you like but the Irish Government just ran straight over its main red line to get this deal done, that it would not agree to anything that could create a hard border on this Island.

They've basically handed responsibilty for the GFA over to Stormont.

Are you saying the people in NI should have no say whatsoever over these arrangements on them?

That's not right either.

The assembly will never vote to leave the arrangements. That is just practical reality and the DUP know it.

Imreoir2

Bambi wrote: »

They've basically handed responsibilty for the GFA over to Stormont.

God forbid the people of NI should have a say in their own future. If the GFA does not hold in NI, there is nothing Ireland or the UK can do about it. The elected representatives of NI will have to take responsibility for this.

Water John

Oliver Letwin motion in HOC today would allow amendments on Saturday. That would mean a vote attaching a Ref to it. Thus it may pass with a Ref required.

Penn

Water John wrote: »

Oliver Letwin motion in HOC today would allow amendments on Saturday. That would mean a vote attaching a Ref to it. Thus it may pass with a Ref required.

Wouldn't they need for the EU to grant an extension to hold the referendum?

VinLieger

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

The extremes of both sides will be the ones who gain from this as it brings constitutional issues to the fore, and will sideline issues like health, education, housing etc.

You think this issue will dominate every sitting day of stormont over all other concerns even though its on a 4 year cycle?

Varta

farmchoice wrote: »

on point 1. i believe they all voted fro the Benn act so we can assume they do.

on point 2. they are now quite obviously much stronger, they have managed to take control of parliament and pass legislation that has hamstrung the government, they have challenged the government in court and won.

they can now decide when an election will be called and possibly have the numbers to pass an amendment to the WA necessitating a confirmatory referendum.

They haven't managed to stop Johnson getting a new deal with the EU. The circumstances today are very different to how they were last week. If Baker can change tack you can be damn sure some Labour MPs can too.

Imreoir2

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Are you saying the people in NI should have no say whatsoever over these arrangements on them?

That's not right either.

The assembly will never vote to leave the arrangements. That is just practical reality and the DUP know it.

Maybe they will, probably not, but it could happen. That depends on who the people of NI choose to represent them.

The structure of this is interesting though, that two year cooling off period is key I think. Will the DUP want to launch NI into an interim period with a clock ticking down to a hard border? What is the likelyhood that such a scenario would see the conditions for a border poll being met during that interim period?

There can be no hard border unless a majority of the people of NI decide they want one, that is good enough for me.

Joe_ Public

Penn wrote: »

Wouldn't they need for the EU to grant an extension to hold the referendum?

Yes and a long one too. Grieve and others were in Brussels yesterday meeting EU officials so it's very possible they have got some sort of unofficial endorsement.

Imreoir2

Penn wrote: »

Wouldn't they need for the EU to grant an extension to hold the referendum?

Yes, probably a six month extension. The EU would probably accept that outcome.

Dyr

Imreoir2 wrote: »

If an informed majority in NI want a hard border, and the abandonment of the GFA, then the peace process is effectivly dead anyway. No point trying to hang on to a peace agreement that the people no longer support.

The peace process would never have come about in the first place if it was based on an internal settlement within Northern Ireland. It was agreed and signed by two governments, not elected representatives in the six counties

I would never have voted to remove articles 2 & 3 on the basis that the GFA agreement was subject to the continued approval of the Stormont Assembly. Varadker has just removed one of the foundations of the GFA.

It's the equivalent of a solicitor adding a clause to an agreement between his client and another party can now be declared null and void by a third party.

LuckyLloyd

Bambi wrote: »

It was highly unlikely that UK would leave the EU
It was highly unlikely that Boris would be PM
It was highly unlikely that Dominic Cummings would be spearheading the UK governments withdrawal negotiations
It was highly unlikely that Jeremy Corybn would be leading the Labour Party in the UK.

Highly unlikely doesn't cut it when it comes the putting a hard border on this Island

I suppose it’s a slam dunk for those who want to nail Varadkar to the wall. You said ‘never’ and came back with ‘maybe’.

Again:

If we reach a point where a majority of people in NI want out of this arrangement or out of the GFA well we better get everyone back around the table and spend two years figuring it out. Creating a situation via negotiation that will leave the DUP and the harder edge of their constituency perpetually unhappy with no mechanism by which to effectively express that is as bad as locking nationalists within a hard border by dint of No Deal.

I’m very happy with this compromise: the will of NI and clear timelines to find new arrangements if necessary.

Shelga

The only point of an extension from an EU point of view is for a referendum, or for a GE that will result in a government that want a softer Brexit.

It's clear that neither Labour nor the Lib Dems are going to get a majority, and are incapable of working together on this matter.

Should the EU be quite clear that they will only extend for a confirmatory referendum? I imagine the EU's stance on an extension will be extremely influential for Labour MPs?

ancapailldorcha

Penn wrote: »

Wouldn't they need for the EU to grant an extension to hold the referendum?

Yes but I would prefer a GE to win a mandate for a referendum. Cancelling this needs to be done in a pristine manner, not a quick referendum but I won't complain too loudly if the latter happens.

dancingwith

I have always suspected the DUP have an issue with democracy.
I guess thats why they put the word 'Democratic' into their name, like North Korea do, just for show.

trellheim

Steve Baker still not tweeting, looks like the ERG are in, must have been some line to make them swallow that.

J Mysterio

Varta wrote: »

I think you are taking an ideological stance. It is a fact that a huge number of Labour constituencies are pro brexit. Objectively, this could be a deciding factor.

A key element is that Johnson will remove the whip from any Tories who vote against the deal.

I suspect he will also make a one time offer to those who had the whip withdrawn to have it reapplied should they vote with government.

One question is will Corbyn remove the whip from those who vote with the government?

titan18

I hope/assume I'm wrong, but does this deal means custom checks for goods coming from EU into Ireland, or is it just from Ireland to UK? Just asking as BBC says the deal concerning NI as

The island will remain aligned to a limited set of EU rules, meaning goods will be checked on entry to the island, rather than across a border on the island. Is that the island of Ireland like?

J Mysterio

Bambi wrote: »

Leo has gone from "No hard border in Ireland" to "No hard border in Ireland unless the NI assembly says there is"

Fairly spectacular reversal.

Yes, but is that a defacto 'no hard border in Ireland' in any event?

VinLieger

titan18 wrote: »

I hope/assume I'm wrong, but does this deal means custom checks for goods coming from EU into Ireland, or is it just from Ireland to UK? Just asking as BBC says the deal concerning NI as

The island will remain aligned to a limited set of EU rules, meaning goods will be checked on entry to the island, rather than across a border on the island. Is that the island of Ireland like?

Thats referring to goods coming from the UK, there will be no checks on goods between Ireland and EU afaik

Rjd2

J Mysterio wrote: »

One question is will Corbyn remove the whip from those who vote with the government?

He might have to. A deal would make an election very hard and he has said this is a worse deal than May's. He can't have it pass.

However two of those who are most likely to vote for it are Hoey and Skinner, he doesn't mind Hoey and he and Skinner are very close.

The others who may vote to leave such as Mann, Flint and maybe Kinnock he has no time for though.

Water John

EU Parliament are actually the ones to approve the Deal on the EU side, when is that to happen?

lobbylad

Rees Mogg in HoC has said about the debate on Saturday:

"The debate that follows will be a motion to either approve a deal or to approve a no-deal exit."

I though the HoC could only have a vote that had a Yes or No answer, not a choice?

And if his statement is true, that doesn't that avoid the Benn bill?

LuckyLloyd

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

The extremes of both sides will be the ones who gain from this as it brings constitutional issues to the fore, and will sideline issues like health, education, housing etc.

You've a lot of faith in the pragmatism of a body that isn't in place at the moment because unionists can't stomach a basic Irish language act.

There’s a two year cooling off period. I’m confident that it would need to be a majority of people, not politicians winning a vote due to political tricks on a particular day, that would be required. And let’s face it: if there genuinely is a majority will for a hard border or some other sort of constitutional arrangement then it needs to be facilitated.

The noise of the DUP today doesn’t take away from this compromise being hugely positive. Anything they were happy with would have been abhorrent to SF. This is far far better than the spectre of a hard border, that much is inarguable.

[Deleted User]

J Mysterio wrote: »

One question is will Corbyn remove the whip from those who vote with the government?

He said earlier that he wouldn't. He said he prefers persuasion to threats.

Zubeneschamali

Varta wrote: »

I'm saying he is going to get some and it will be considerably more than 3 to 5.

You keep saying that, but you don't say why - what has changed?

How is their back against the wall? The HoC has not only voted against No Deal (as they did back in the indicative votes back in March), it has passed the Benn Act requiring the PM to avoid No Deal by requesting an extension to January, and to accept it if offered.

Johnson has said he won't do it to the press, but he has given an undertaking to the Scottish court that he WILL do it, and the court commented expressly that they were listening to his court statements, not his press waffle.

The only ones with their back against the wall are the Tory Brexiteers - if they don't get this deal through, there is a good chance that Brexit will be cancelled via a referendum and revoking of A50 while the Tory Party is attacked from the right by the Brexit party.