The Irish protocol.

Hamsterchops wrote: »

I agree with Naomi Long, if you take the constitutional question out of the equation you de-escalate the situation, currently there is far too much talk about Constitutional (border) tensions, when all the talk should be about trade, forget where the sausages come from, NI is still part of the UK and it's safe in that regard, so once you park that, all you need is trade talk, and lots of it.

With one foot in the EU & the other foot in the UK = NI can have the best of both worlds.

Yes/No?

Clearly yes.

Why then are the DUP so opposed to the protocol?

schmittel wrote: »

Clearly yes.

Why then are the DUP so opposed to the protocol?

Bigotry - it leaves them close to the ROI where they would love a hard border

VinLieger

schmittel wrote: »

Clearly yes.

Why then are the DUP so opposed to the protocol?

For the same reason they do anything, SF support it. Thats literally their only reason for doing anything these days and its why they are in such a state now.

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Bigotry - it leaves them close to the ROI where they would love a hard border

VinLieger wrote: »

For the same reason they do anything, SF support it. Thats literally their only reason for doing anything these days and its why they are in such a state now.

Indeed. Because Ulster says NO.

It's the DUP way. They thrive on adversity. As Emma Little Pengelly put it last week:

The DUP has never sought to be loved, liked or even barely tolerated by the media or those who never have, nor never would, vote for it.

But it also not just about opposing themmuns for the sake of it.

Having the best of both worlds in trade with EU/UK could bring enormous investment and economic benefits to Northern Ireland.

This sort of potential prosperity is not the DUP way either. Their success depends on keeping their constituents in poverty and maintaining NIs status as an economic backwater dependent on the largesse of Westminster.

bilbot79

Hamsterchops wrote: »

I agree with Naomi Long, if you take the constitutional question out of the equation you de-escalate the situation, currently there is far too much talk about Constitutional (border) tensions, when all the talk should be about trade, forget where the sausages come from, NI is still part of the UK and it's safe in that regard, so once you park that, all you need is trade talk, and lots of it.

With one foot in the EU & the other foot in the UK = NI can have the best of both worlds.

Yes/No?

Yes. I totally agree with this statement in fact my position is that there is one paradox yet to come on the Protocol.

As someone else stated the DUP backed Brexit in the hope of a hard border and SF did not for obvious reasons leading commentators to decry the inevitability of a United Ireland. In all honesty I think the protocol, if allowed to be properly implemented, will only solidify the status quo of being in the UK and the EU

There isn't going to be a United Ireland I'm afraid. It's just too good without it

bilbot79 wrote: »

Yes. I totally agree with this statement in fact my position is that there is one paradox yet to come on the Protocol.

As someone else stated the DUP backed Brexit in the hope of a hard border and SF did not for obvious reasons leading commentators to decry the inevitability of a United Ireland. In all honesty I think the protocol, if allowed to be properly implemented, will only solidify the status quo of being in the UK and the EU

There isn't going to be a United Ireland I'm afraid. It's just too good without it

Being in the EU and the UK is just the status quo as it was before Brexit.

If you are foolish enough to believe that 'Brexit' is over and that the UK will not attempt to diverge further away causing all sorts of strains or that Scottish interests will not come to the fore and the UK will live happily ever after then you would be foolish enough not to prepare for the unity/constitutional question.

That is the bandwagon Leo (he may be many things but a fool he is not) was jumping on...the inevitability that this question - a UI or not - will be put to the test soon.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Being in the EU and the UK is just the status quo as it was before Brexit.

If you are foolish enough to believe that 'Brexit' is over and that the UK will not attempt to diverge further away causing all sorts of strains or that Scottish interests will not come to the fore and the UK will live happily ever after then you would be foolish enough not to prepare for the unity/constitutional question.

That is the bandwagon Leo (he may be many things but a fool he is not) was jumping on...the inevitability that this question - a UI or not - will be put to the test soon.

So the constitutional question is still on the table?

In which case the DUP are correct in keeping up their guard, that is if NI's place within the UK is still under threat.

Can't they just be left alone to work out trade relations with ourselves and GB instead of this constant background spectre of a "United Ireland", which clearly gets their goat.

Just to reiterate, I agree with everything Naomi Long said in that interview (post #386) ✓

bilbot79 wrote: »

Yes. I totally agree with this statement in fact my position is that there is one paradox yet to come on the Protocol.

As someone else stated the DUP backed Brexit in the hope of a hard border and SF did not for obvious reasons leading commentators to decry the inevitability of a United Ireland. In all honesty I think the protocol, if allowed to be properly implemented, will only solidify the status quo of being in the UK and the EU

There isn't going to be a United Ireland I'm afraid. It's just too good without it

Good point. If the DUP had any brains they'd use the protocol to manoeuvre the north into a position that would all but guarantee the union as long as UK was outside the EU.

Hamsterchops wrote: »

So the constitutional question is still on the table?

In which case the DUP are correct in keeping up their guard, that is if NI's place within the UK is still under threat.

Can't they just be left alone to work out trade relations with ourselves and GB instead of this constant background spectre of a "United Ireland", which clearly gets their goat.

Just to reiterate, I agree with everything Naomi Long said in that interview (post #386) ✓

What Naomi said was that the Protocol does not threaten the constitutional position.

And she is correct. The 'constitutional question' has been on the 'table' in one way or another since partition. The imperative to answer it was intensified by Brexit and will be further intensified by events outside the control of the DUP or even us here.

Plaintive cries from the heart to 'leave the Unionists alone' will fall on deaf ears. Even Leo addressed that by saying they have no veto on the discussion. That includes their agents/allies here I presume.

bilbot79

schmittel wrote: »

Good point. If the DUP had any brains they'd use the protocol to manoeuvre the north into a position that would all but guarantee the union as long as UK was outside the EU.

I think a quick trip down the yellow brick road is in order then ðŸ˜„

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What Naomi said was that the Protocol does not threaten the constitutional position.

Great, sorted then.

Let them get on with the Protocol + the trade talks, and leave all this UI background noise out of the equation.

Then the DUP would have little to say no to.

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Great, sorted then.

Let's get on with the Protocol then + the trade talks, and leave all this UI background noise out of the equation.

Then the DUP would have little to say no to.

Em...might shock you HC, but it was the DUP that caused the Protocol to be there and twas them who kicked up a fuss about it.

The UI 'background' chat has long been a feature, long before the Protocol in fact.

It ain't going away.

bilbot79 wrote: »

I think a quick trip down the yellow brick road is in order then &#55357;&#56836;

To the Emerald City?! Unlikely to sell it to the DUP!

We could call it the orange brick road, that might do the trick.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The UI 'background' chat has long been a feature, long before the Protocol in fact.

It ain't going away.

So the Constitutional position is not settled?

I give up.

Hamsterchops wrote: »

So the Constitutional position is not settled?

I give up.

No, how could it be? It will always be there until it is settled.

Border Poll - allowed every 7 years after the first one, if the SoS so decides.

If one of those polls succeeds then the question is settled unless a majority in Ireland votes to allow NI re-join the UK.

Hamsterchops wrote: »

So the Constitutional position is not settled?

I give up.

It depends on what you are referring to.
In terms of any constitutional issue arising from the NIP, there is none. Any mentioned by the likes of the DUP and their terrorist thug buddies are made up based on lies (which they must be aware of).
As already mentioned, the NIP is simply a trading protocol which in fact puts Northern Ireland in a very advantageous position.

In terms of the position of NI being part of the UK and potentially joining the republic in a re-unification, this has always been there. The GFA as agreed by all parties bar one (the DUP who have actively obstructed the GFA), has a clause for a border poll which would allow reunification if the majority want it. Brexit has shifted the position so much so that many unionists believe that their position in the UK is untenable and they want to fully rejoin the EU. Brexit has brought a united Ireland closer simply because Brexit in NI was a completely stupid act brought about by self-interested politicians to further their own narrow-minded beliefs and in Britain by self-interested politicians who wish to line their own pockets.

I was of course refering back to Naomi Longs comments that I wholeheartedly agree with.

That the DUP should stop worrying about the constitutional position of NI because it's not under threat, or is it? Maybe she is wrong and the Protocol does threated NIs place within the UK.

She's telling the DUP to chill, because there's no threat, or is there?

Hamsterchops wrote: »

I was of course refering back to Naomi Longs comments that I wholeheartedly agree with.

That the DUP should stop worrying about the constitutional position of NI because it's not under threat, or is it? Maybe she is wrong and the Protocol does threated NIs place within the UK.

She's telling the DUP to chill, because there's no threat, or is there?

She is telling the DUP to back off on the rhetoric and bull because it is inciting fear and encouraging the threat of violence. This could have a ripple effect in Westminster of agreeing to a border poll (as it would finally remove a nagging headache).

Seth Brundle wrote: »

She is telling the DUP to back off on the rhetoric and bull because it is inciting fear and encouraging the threat of violence. This could have a ripple effect in Westminster of agreeing to a border poll (as it would finally remove a nagging headache).

I agree with you, but surely it would only remove the headache for seven years, untill the next border poll.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

No, how could it be? It will always be there until it is settled.

Border Poll - allowed every 7 years after the first one, if the SoS so decides.

If one of those polls succeeds then the question is settled unless a majority in Ireland votes to allow NI re-join the UK.

There won't be a second border poll if the first one rejects it by a huge margin.

There is a minimum of seven years between polls, that means a second one may never be held.

Hamsterchops wrote: »

I was of course refering back to Naomi Longs comments that I wholeheartedly agree with.

That the DUP should stop worrying about the constitutional position of NI because it's not under threat, or is it? Maybe she is wrong and the Protocol does threated NIs place within the UK.

She's telling the DUP to chill, because there's no threat, or is there?

There has been a threat to the constitutional status since partition itself. It just varies in strength.

Brexit is what intensified the 'threat'. The DUP are back pedalling because they backed it believing it would put the question to bed for another century or more.

They are now trying to instill fear in their voters by lying that it was the south who inflicted the Protocol on them as an attempt to annex the north.

It's bull**** as Naomi candidly points out.

Speedline

blanch152 wrote: »

There won't be a second border poll if the first one rejects it by a huge margin.

There is a minimum of seven years between polls, that means a second one may never be held.

Conversely there won't be a second border poll if the first one reunifies the country.

Speedline wrote: »

Conversely there won't be a second border poll if the first one reunifies the country.

BonnieSituation

Hamsterchops wrote: »

So the constitutional question is still on the table?

In which case the DUP are correct in keeping up their guard, that is if NI's place within the UK is still under threat.

Can't they just be left alone to work out trade relations with ourselves and GB instead of this constant background spectre of a "United Ireland", which clearly gets their goat.

Just to reiterate, I agree with everything Naomi Long said in that interview (post #386) ✓

Again with the Unionist "poor cratur" schtick.

What have belligerent Unionists done to deserve your incessant love-bombing?

downcow

Seth Brundle wrote: »

There is no constitutional question.
The various legal challenges were unsuccesful in pointing any question out.
Lord Frost also has said that the NIP is about trade and not related to the constitution.

The constitution is being thrown about by the disingenuous parties such as the DUP in order to create an issue that is not there.

10am 30th June judge will rule. So I don’t know why you are saying the legal cases have been unsuccessful

Junkyard Tom

I can only imagine the reservoir of hatred the DUP are building up in Britain's political classes.

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

I can only imagine the reservoir of hatred the DUP are building up in Britain's political classes.

If by some miracle they do win the case, it has feck all to do with us and the EU. It means the UK is back to square one, Boris's 'great deal' in the bin and a lot of disgruntled people who are no longer in the EU, scrambling around looking for something as an alternative. Brilliant strategy for Unionists looking for love.

downcow wrote: »

10am 30th June judge will rule. So I don’t know why you are saying the legal cases have been unsuccessful

You were told why by Peregrinus previously if I'm not mistaken

VinLieger

God I watched Sammy Wilson's debate from the other night, someone really needs to tell him he's mixed up his talking points sheets with someone from Sinn Fein.

First we had the Mogg put down of explaining basic functionality of how the union works via Westminster taking over via direct rule if the DUP won't form an assembly then he's trying to argue that NI shouldn't have different laws to the rest of the UK.