prawnsambo wrote: » That's a bit of a DUP talking point right there. Which is ironic since they hate the GFA. Sinn Fein, on the other hand have given it a lukewarm assent, mostly because it pushes a UI referendum back up the calendar a fair bit. As for the NI economy, NI Manufacturing have welcomed it for the fact that it ends uncertainty and protects business. So one of you are right. I think I'll go with NI Manufacturing.
Mr.Nice Guy wrote: » Manufacturing NI said this 24 hours ago: And they haven't said it ends uncertainty. They've said they're giving it a 'guarded welcome' and that there are additional administrative burdens, with issues to be decided in a FTA. They've basically calculated it's the least worst option compared to the potential of a crash-out Brexit, which from their point of view is correct.
Shelga wrote: » I really feel for Labour MPs in headbanger Leave constituencies tonight, ie Lisa Nandy of Wigan. It’s a completely lose-lose situation for both her and her ignorant constituents. If she votes for Johnson’s deal, she is voting to make the daily lives of her constituents significantly worse, and selling out her Labour principles. If she votes against it, she will undoubtedly face even more vile death threats and online abuse. If I was her, I’d be seriously concerned for my safety.
joeysoap wrote: » I’m confused too. Does the UK have to pay the €39b or not? Is there ongoing payments or is that part of future negotiations? I know Norway pays.
Bigboldworld wrote: » Can i ask folks, and it’s something that has bothered me for a while, I notice one group in all of the brexit news that are very seldom mentioned and appear to be very quiet almost too quiet, what is the position of loyalist paramilitaries in all that is going on particularly if the unionists come out with a deal they are unhappy with, is there any risk of them starting up again? I hope not, I remember the bad days all too well and just seems the focus is on the risk from dissident republicans and nothing about the other side.
jimmycrackcorm wrote: » What can they do? Go out in boats and plant mines in the sea against the border? Or start street protests with placards saying : "what do we want? TARIFFS! How much do we want? 50% on meats" The reality is life will go on as normal as it is today which was the point of not having a hard border.
Christy Sweets wrote: » Hard remainer myself and I have to say I think this will pass the House of Commons with probably double figures in terms of Labour defections. I think Brexit fatigue will be a key factor in this. But the deal looks terrible and it will be a case of not voting for it on the basis of its merits but voting for old rope because it's a "deal". These defectors will ensure Labour loses the election. The deal is bad for Ireland, bad for Britain, and bad for the North. It undermines the Good Friday Agreement, will build a siege mentality among Unionists and promote uncertainty so won't benefit the North's economy. One bad Stormont election result and there's your hard border. Britain itself can leave on no deal terms at the end of 2020. May's deal was bad but way more palatable than this.
joseywhales wrote: » Barnier!
Bigboldworld wrote: » Yes that would be my concern here too, I’ve just done a bit of reading and it appears their leadership is taking a wait and see approach, if they feel they are cornered I can see them kicking off, again all too quiet for my liking and people shouldn’t forget that it’s not just republicans who are capable of launching a murderous campaign, can’t see them sitting on their hands and taking if they feel they are being shafted
Johnny Dogs wrote: » The DUP voted for brexit, pushed back against s soft brexit, and rejected Mays deal and then the slightly rewritten deal Boris came back with. They ended up being thrown under the bus by the Tory's and British because they wanted their version of brexit done, regardless of the DUP/people of the north because ultimately they're irrelevant to them, as has been foretold/predicted from day zero. The Nationalist/Republican/Irish community didn't vote for brexit, indeed the vast majority of unionists didn't want it either. If, and it's only an if, loyalist paramilitaries kick off again, I cannot envisage them attacking the DUP for voting for brexit, (when the rest of the island of Ireland were pretty content with the status quo) nor the British government - who ultimately shafted them in the long run (as many here said would happen) The DUP must be held solely accountable for the corner hardcore unionists in the north feel they have been backed into, the lure of kingmaker was always too much for their ego's to resist, but ultimately they ended up becoming sh1tmakers. Saturday's TV will be epic now.
lightspeed wrote: » https://www.google.ie/amp/s/amp.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/brexit-explainer-whats-in-the-deal-and-what-happens-now-957882.html "Q8: So what about the future? Very importantly, both the EU and the UK have agreed to a “free-trade” where no tariffs will apply in a document called the “political declaration.”" So its clear as i mentioned EU leaders have surrendered to ensure Britain will get to have its cake and eat it. Britain gets the following: 1.a tariff free deal,
2.complete control of immigration
3. no longer have to pay into EU budget
4. Also will be able to take back its fishing waters.
North Macedonia and Albania due to join EU despite French opposition. That will mean more immigration one way and id assume further contributions from existing member states required.
We will also have many of the french, spanish etc boats fishing in uk waters now hoovering up fish in irish waters.
Im at a loss which part of this deal irish people should be celebrating?
The uk parliment passed the Benn act demanding no deal not an option. It clearly would have been better for all especially EU if they refused to negotiate further and ensured new referendum was held in hope it would be remain and all this mess all forgotten about.
Nody wrote: » EU already offered 100% FTA from the start; nothing new there. The issue is not in the tariffs but the paperwork which was always the case. Except they have to accept EU people moving there and settle; third party immigration was already under their control so nothing changed there. Correct; instead they are going to take a 7.5% hit on their BNP which is about 10x as much as their net payment to EU. Wrong; fishing waters is in the deal as part of them being allowed to export fish to EU. You mean that EU has somehow changed the rules that one country can't block the start of or accepting a new member? By all means do share the secret cabal who made that possible; or maybe you should consider getting a news source that actually knows what it talks about? Exactly as many as before since the EU fishing qoutas still apply as before. The lack of a hard border which was stated as a primary goal for the Irish state perhaps? No, it demanded the PM to request an extension which the PM could follow up with a second letter telling them to ignore or simply attach silly terms such as "We request an extension and you need to pay us 50 gazillion euros because you are a bunch of banana suckers etc" to make sure it would not go through. The Benn act was not as you seem to believe somehow forcing the PM to avoid a hard brexit no matter what; there were ways around it to ensure a crash out and be compliant to the act and that does not include the option of simply ignoring it completely and crash out (in the same route as lying to the queen to prorogue the parliament).
FrancieBrady wrote: » I *Can you withdraw that remark about me 'finally accepting that it is a compromise' please?
Bambi wrote: » SFs low profile on this has more to do with the whole Brexit thing completely wrong footing them. They're a party who are tied into ideological knots in this era. They're not going to give out about the NI assembly thing because it will suggest that they're not confident about continued success in assembly elections
VinLieger wrote: » Indeed their history of campaigning against every EU referendum shows their true feelings on the EU. Much like the DUP tried to do they are simply using this situation for their own benefit, however they are going about it far smarter way by shutting the hell up and letting FG push the agenda for them here and have the DUP stomp all over everything up North, whatever the result SF's hands are completely clean both North and South, its very clever.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Jeffery Donaldson blows about in the wind so much and manages always to keep a holier than thou tone to his voice. He was just on the radio there trying to take the moral high ground but basically it has come down to the GFA and rogue members of the Labour party that he is depending on to save the DUP and the Union.
Shelga wrote: » Even I'm sick of listening to Chuka Ummuna at this stage. He needs to accept that the remain side has utterly failed to coalesce around an alternative to exiting the EU, beyond 'remain'. He claims to be a Europhile- well what about the other 450m people in the EU, who want this sorted? It's not all about the UK. There is no appetite in the general public in other EU countries to keep this going indefinitely. Sucking all of the oxygen out of the EU and putting it into Brexit is damaging us. If the opposition parties can't agree to vote for this deal, can they agree to vote for it subject to a confirmatory referendum? No doubt they'll be squabbling about that too. What other choices are there? What does a three-month extension do? They all need to take a long hard look at the situation as it is, not as they would wish it to be. And I think the EU needs to tell them clearly- it's this deal or no deal.
Shelga wrote: » Even I'm sick of listening to Chuka Ummuna at this stage. He needs to accept that the remain side has utterly failed to coalesce around an alternative to exiting the EU, beyond 'remain'.
lawred2 wrote: » Why would that be of any relevance to him? Seriously. He has to do what he think is best for the people of the UK. The impatience of some Polish/Belgian/Swedish/etc/etc people are of no real consequence to him or the future of his country really.
Jeremy Corbyn’s letter to Theresa May last night offering to slightly soften his Brexit stance risks stirring a backlash from Labour supporters. A new poll makes it devastatingly clear that if Labour is perceived as having enabled Brexit, it will lose 45 seats – including five of its seven precious Scottish seats. Labour’s true heartlands are remain: four-fifths of Labour voters think May’s deal will hurt the British economy and 91% of them don’t trust the government to deliver a good Brexit. Remainers will desert and punish the party in droves unless it opposes Brexit. This outlook comes from a large poll of more than 5,000 people – it was commissioned by TSSA, the transport union, which has always backed Corbyn. It was meant to be private advice to him, but it leaked. “There can be no disguising the sense of disappointment and disillusionment with Labour if it fails to oppose Brexit, and there is every indication that it will be far more damaging to the party’s electoral fortunes than the Iraq war,” the polling document reports. “Labour would especially lose the support of people below the age of 35, which could make this issue comparable to the impact the tuition fees and involvement in the coalition had on Lib Dem support.”
seamus wrote: » Why would the remain side come up with alternatives to remaining. They want to remain. The remain group have had a singular goal, a singular message, a singular purpose. And you accuse them of "failing to coalesce". While across the table you have the Brexit crew, who have not even once, in 3 years of talking and negotiating, come up with a solid definition of what "Brexit" is, or ever was, supposed to be. I appreciate the sentiment that the rest of the EU are sick of this joke of a country causing chaos for the last three years. But I'm not going to criticise the guys who are appealing for calm and sanity when you have other MPs hanging from the rafters throwing faeces around.
