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

Imreoir2

Shelga wrote: »

I find your optimism that it would be anything other than an enormous economic drain incredibly naive! NI has been in the EU for over 4 decades, they've had peace for over 20 years and the region is still a complete basket case, economically. This surely has to be in large part because of two moronic main parties who are obsessed with tribalism and getting one up on each other, rather than looking out for their citizens in terms of developing infrastructure and making it a favourable place to do business. This isn't going to change any time soon- they can't even govern together. The fact that NI has been without a government for almost 3 years is disgraceful.

I don't think so. Prosperity is not a Green vs Orange issue. Neither side is going out of their way to make NI poorer (except in relation to Brexit of course). The reality is that NI is a peripheral region of the UK and British economic policy has largely abandoned its regions. NI is not the only poor underdeveloped region of the UK. The assembly does not have the economic levers to influence the prosperity of NI and British policy, focused as it is on the South East of England and the City of London does nothing for them. Before Brexit came along both sides were willing to work together in the economic sphere. The island is a single unit when it comes to tourism and that model has been successful. Even the DUP were on board to diverge from British policy and align with the rest of the island on the corporate tax rate in the hope of stimulating inward investment, but Stormont did not have the power to do it themselves and the proposal was ignored by London.

RobMc59

Deleted User wrote: »

So do you think that the exploitation of cheap foreign labour is a good idea!
Not really an EU thing, more a result of globalisation and the exploitation that it has allowed.

As far as I`m aware,the majority of pickers and farm owners are both happy with the arrangement-the thing that is causing the problem is the uncertainty for the pickers in regard to whether they will be allowed in.

[Deleted User]

This is a good read from Lewis Goodall. There could be unprecedented bedlam in the HoC this week. Watch out for any Customs Union related events, especially with the uncoupled DUP votes floating around in a vacuum.

https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1185989844281020418?s=20

Imreoir2

Deleted User wrote: »

Correct, they're highly skilled, but being imported at the expense of training locals.
That is the point I'm making, growth at any cost.

What do you mean at the expense of training locals? What is stopping locals from getting into that industry if they want to? The problem is a lack of locals interested in working in that sector, that is why labour has to be brought in.

4068ac1elhodqr

Maybe the DUP can be bought with a land connection to (indy) New Alba:
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/bridge-linking-northern-ireland-and-scotland-should-not-be-dismissed-varadkar-1.4056840
Just don't try taking a Honda50 across those very deep waters, during one of the many Atlantic storms.

Anyhoe, just added 'UK To Leave The EU On/Before 31/10/19? - UK Brexit Date' on the weekly accumulator bet @3.5.
It's now or never.

Imreoir2

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Would ROI really welcome a UI?

I doubt it given the polarity of things up North. Does ROI really need to take that on with no realistic benefit?

Well if there is a benefit, tell me now.

NI being a basket case is a drain on our economey. The benefit of peace and the development of the all-island economey has benefited us, the further development of the all-island economey and the elimination of the massive waste inherent in having two economic systems on one small island will also benefit us.

briany

Deleted User wrote: »

This is a good read from Lewis Goodall. There could be unprecedented bedlam in the HoC this week.

God, considering what we've seen from the HoC so far, I shudder to think what 'unprecedented bedlam' might look like! :eek::eek::eek:

Strazdas

Deleted User wrote: »

This is a good read from Lewis Goodall. There could be unprecedented bedlam in the HoC this week. Watch out for any Customs Union related events, especially with the uncoupled DUP votes floating around in a vacuum.

https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1185989844281020418?s=20

Very messy : Goodall thinks it was a mistake for Johnson not to hold a vote on the deal of some description yesterday.

The talk of a customs union amendment seems purely be a wrecking tactic by the opposition. They must know there's not a hope in hell the EU will reopen negotiations with the UK.

road_high

Imreoir2 wrote: »

NI being a basket case is a drain on our economey. The benefit of peace and the development of the all-island economey has benefited us, the further development of the all-island economey and the elimination of the massive waste inherent in having two economic systems on one small island will also benefit us.

The south benefitted massively from the peace process as it was part of a massive economic offensive focused on exports and attracting all possible investments- the north by contrast is stagnant and ruderless with no economic direction or anything much to build on- they always wait for a few crumbs from London rather than any local dynamism or initiative. Over dependence on welfare and state activity has stifled all initiative really. The north is an utter basket case economically now with a deeply ingrained dependency culture (both welfare and state employment). It’ll take massive strides to correct this if possible at all

LeinsterDub

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This is a good read from Lewis Goodall. There could be unprecedented bedlam in the HoC this week. Watch out for any Customs Union related events, especially with the uncoupled DUP votes floating around in a vacuum.

https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1185989844281020418?s=20

Was just going to post this. I'll be tuned to LBC all week!

Water John

Don't know how the EU would react to being asked for what is basically, a softer Brexit. They wouldn't be conceding anything.
On the other side Johnson won't do it, even if instructed by Parliament.

Kermit.de.frog

This would all end tomorrow in the HoC if the EU explicitly said they will not grant an extension.

So long as the EU is not going to block an extension or it seems likely they won't remainers will continue playing games and engaging in obstruction.

They have a deal tirelessly negotiated, people voted to leave, they should move on with it now.

listermint

Imreoir2 wrote: »

What do you mean at the expense of training locals? What is stopping locals from getting into that industry if they want to? The problem is a lack of locals interested in working in that sector, that is why labour has to be brought in.

I wouldn't bother .

He's a moving goal post.

First it's Indians getting all the jobs because theyre underpaid. Then when he finds out they're ionn over 70 grand a year it's they are taking jobs from locals.

Both equally as nonsense and non factual view points.

As I said people who hold these views never met this figment of their imagination in their lives and have no first hand experience of it.

Made up bogey man

listermint

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

This would all end tomorrow in the HoC if the EU explicitly said they will not grant an extension.

So long as the EU is not going to block an extension or it seems likely they won't remainers will continue playing games and engaging in obstruction.

They have a deal tirelessly negotiated, people voted to leave, they should move on with it now.

No they shouldn't.

They have a goal and they should stick to it. Fair play to them.

And frankly they are in the majority in the country they have no right to give up now nor should they . Nor should folks like yourself deride them for it.

Water John

Remainers etc are not playing games. They are fighting for the future direction of their country, the same as the Brexiteer side. It's a battle for the heart of the nation. People should be glad that, this time, it's being done without blood being spilt.
A bit of drama in the HOC I can live with.

Strazdas

Water John wrote: »

Don't know how the EU would react to being asked for what is basically, a softer Brexit. They wouldn't be conceding anything.
On the other side Johnson won't do it, even if instructed by Parliament.

If it came from the current Tory government, badly. There's not a chance they are going to negotiate anything more with Johnson....it would be farcical.

I suspect Labour are opting for this as a stalling tactic and to mess Johnson around.

[Deleted User]

Strazdas wrote: »

Very messy : Goodall thinks it was a mistake for Johnson not to hold a vote on the deal of some description yesterday.

The talk of a customs union amendment seems purely be a wrecking tactic by the opposition. They must know there's not a hope in hell the EU will reopen negotiations with the UK.

Not sure if its a case of reopening negotiations. As Water John says above its a softer Brexit, so its a pivot back towards what the EU (and Ireland) would like. Remain though would be liked most of all IMO.

GM228

Enzokk wrote: »

Off to court early Monday morning it seems if this is correct,

https://twitter.com/ShippersUnbound/status/1185661892557201408?s=20

I believe that there is some legal principle where he would not frustrate what the legislation is supposed to achieve and what he has done is exactly that. I am sure others (GM228?) would be able to clarify better than this layman lawyers.

RickBlaine wrote: »

I think it is always good to refer to David Allen Green on such matters ...

https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/1185666023418220545

You are quite right Enzokk, the principle is known as the Padfield Constitutional Principle, developed from the 1968 House of Lords Padfield vs Minister for Agriculture [1968] UKHL 1 case. The essential principle of Padfield is that for a minister to do (or fail to do) anything which frustrates the intention of an Act, it is an unlawful act. It would more than likely lead to a charge of Misconduct in Public Office if the court found this was the case.

David Allen Green (he has greater expertise in that area than myself) may be just playing things down by calling the other letters "look squirrels", but, there is still a danger Johnson has crossed the line and could be foul of the Padfield principle, in fact DAG has said previously numerous times any subsequent letter would be unlawful, see these for example:-

https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/1177490685919821832?s=19

https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/1177501350533316609?s=19

Weather the subsequent letters are a breach will depend on how the court views them, how they were written, who signed them, the intention of the letters etc and DAG is of the view they may be compliant (and well drafted with Padfield in mind).

However the courts may not agree, Jolyon et al etc are pushing ahead for contempt tomorrow at the Inner House when it resumes at 12.

Sam Russell

Strazdas wrote: »

Very messy : Goodall thinks it was a mistake for Johnson not to hold a vote on the deal of some description yesterday.

The talk of a customs union amendment seems purely be a wrecking tactic by the opposition. They must know there's not a hope in hell the EU will reopen negotiations with the UK.

Well, if it is the bill, it can be in the political declaration, or it could be a requirement for the UK Gov to negotiate for. The Customs Union goes some way to reduce the need for a border in the Irish Sea, or at Calais.

It is a good development.

Strazdas

Deleted User wrote: »

Not sure if its a case of reopening negotiations. As Water John says above its a softer Brexit, so its a pivot back towards what the EU (and Ireland) would like. Remain though would be liked most of all IMO.

But we have a Tory Government under PM Johnson. The idea that the EU are going to start renegotiating the WA in coming weeks with a Tory administration yet again is an absolute non runner (it would undoubtedly end in a fiasco / shambles).

Kermit.de.frog

listermint wrote: »

No they shouldn't.

They have a goal and they should stick to it. Fair play to them.

And frankly they are in the majority in the country they have no right to give up now nor should they . Nor should folks like yourself deride them for it.

I fundamentally disagree. They voted to leave. We have a deal.

There is also the real danger of civil strive if the referendum result is overturned.

We don't need that. They need to leave and they can continue debating with themselves.

That is in everyone's interest.

Strazdas

Sam Russell wrote: »

Well, if it is the bill, it can be in the political declaration, or it could be a requirement for the UK Gov to negotiate for. The Customs Union goes some way to reduce the need for a border in the Irish Sea, or at Calais.

It is a good development.

What negotiations though? The WA and NI protocol has been concluded.

How could such a thing even get through the Parliament as things stand?

Joe_ Public

Surely if labour push that cu amendment johnson will simply scupper his own bill and we'll be back at stalemate, maybe awaiting EU or details of GE or vonc or something. Johnson wont, cant have anything to do with cu, that much we can be certain of.

54and56

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Correct, they're highly skilled, but being imported at the expense of training locals.
That is the point I'm making, growth at any cost.

How do you mean "at the expense of locals"?

Sounds like the argument taxi drivers used to make before deregulation.

If "local" IT experts cost too much because there are too few of them to meet demand it results in an inflated cost to businesses which makes the economy less competitive and ultimately means fewer jobs

No one should Earn an artificially inflated salary just because the economy isn't producing enough people with the required skills. In such a mismatch allowing in talent from overseas to meet demand and normalise cost makes absolute economic sense to me.

Capt'n Midnight

Reina Creamy Clock wrote: »

Maybe the DUP can be bought with a land connection to (indy) New Alba:
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/bridge-linking-northern-ireland-and-scotland-should-not-be-dismissed-varadkar-1.4056840
Just don't try taking a Honda50 across those very deep waters, during one of the many Atlantic storms.

Anyhoe, just added 'UK To Leave The EU On/Before 31/10/19? - UK Brexit Date' on the weekly accumulator bet @3.5.
It's now or never.

There were suggestions earlier that Boris endorsing the Bridge to NI was to distract from the unbuild Boris Garden Bridge in London that spaffed £53m up the wall.

That bridge would never be economic.
It would cost more than the Channel Tunnel and only have a fraction of the traffic. Spain to North Africa or Corsica to Sardinia would also be shorter and cheaper. And they don't go through a trench filled with a million tonnes of explosives, poison gas and radioactive waste.

A better investment would be to link Japan to the Russian mainland via Sakhalin which would cut weeks off electronics and car deliveries, but like a Northern Ireland bridge you'd need to upgrade lots of roads on either side too.

There's a reason most of the traffic to NI comes in through Dublin.

Strazdas

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Surely if labour push that cu amendment johnson will simply scupper his own bill and we'll be back at stalemate, maybe awaiting EU or details of GE or vonc or something. Johnson wont, cant have anything to do with cu, that much we can be certain of.

The ERG would vote down an all UK customs union en masse. That's why I think the Labour amendment is purely a stalling tactic designed to disrupt Johnson.

listermint

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I fundamentally disagree. They voted to leave. We have a deal.

There is also the real danger of civil strive if the referendum result is overturned.

We don't need that. They need to leave and they can continue debating with themselves.

That is in everyone's interest.

Absolute horse crap.

There is no majority leave vote. The notion that there will be widespread civil unrest is nonsense peddled by hard right news papers.

Is that were you are consuming this crap from.

The leavers can't even muster more than a handful of people to turn up at rallies. Not once ever in the last here years.

So praytell where is it you get this information from

Sam Russell

Strazdas wrote: »

What negotiations though? The WA and NI protocol has been concluded.

How could such a thing even get through the Parliament as things stand?

The negotiations I am referring to start on the day after Brexit actually occurs, if it ever does.

[Deleted User]

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

This would all end tomorrow in the HoC if the EU explicitly said they will not grant an extension.

So long as the EU is not going to block an extension or it seems likely they won't remainers will continue playing games and engaging in obstruction.

They have a deal tirelessly negotiated, people voted to leave, they should move on with it now.

The easy answer is for the EU to say that there is a (time limited) "free pass" to rejoin, if after the next GE a pro EU government is elected.

Then the remainers can just sit back, call the GE and return the UK to the EU (if they win)

[Deleted User]

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I fundamentally disagree. They voted to leave. We have a deal.

There is no deal. Teresa May agreed a draft withdrawal agreement but couldnt get it through the HoC.

Along comes Boris, he agrees a draft agreement but so far can't get it through the HoC. Without a deal, there is a no deal. And then everyone is fukt.

There is also the real danger of civil strive if the referendum result is overturned.

There is danger of that either way.

We don't need that. They need to leave and they can continue debating with themselves.

That is in everyone's interest.

You really don't get the implications of this, do you?