Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Brexit discussion thread XIV (Please read OP before posting)

Options
1302303305307308555

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 18,026 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    BBC's Jessica Parker reporting from Brussels that the EU are "fuming" at Frost's speech. Is that the plan though?



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,541 ✭✭✭wexfordman2


    They won't do it because " a few of them are of irish descent" though, there are many many other reasons why, so cast aside your ridiculous simplistic beliefs in that regard.



  • Registered Users Posts: 45,535 ✭✭✭✭Mr.Nice Guy



    I'm not suggesting have the referendum now, rather that we should prepare for it, i.e. a citizen's assembly. I don't agree violence would stem from this as since the Brexit referendum, there's a widespread belief in NI from all sides that voters need to know what they're voting for, in contrast to the vague promises for that poll. Indeed, earlier this month, the former Alliance MLA Trevor Lunn called for a citizen's assembly on a border poll to take place in NI. That's not likely to happen because Stormont won't sign off on it, but we can have one this side of the border and invite a wide range of voices.

    This decade could potentially be one of massive change on these islands. Splits within unionism could see a SF First Minister for the first time, we could see SF in power south of the border, the UK census may confirm the Protestant majority in NI has officially ended, the SNP are seeking IndyRef2 in the next few years, and the Tories are reportedly after a general election in 2023 that could finish off Starmer, and leave Labour reeling again. While this is all going on, the Tories will likely continue to manufacture conflict with the EU. As you point out, the SoS in NI must call a border poll if he/she believes the majority want one. A recent Lucid Talk poll had support for reunification at 42% vs 49% against, with 9% undecided. We don't know how the above events may alter the numbers. Far better to prepare the groundwork now, than be caught on the hop in a couple of years. One thing is for sure, as long as the status quo remains, the Tories will continue to use the Irish border as a barganing chip, and thus our future will continue to be in the hands of Johnson, Frost, Raab et al.

    'It is better to walk alone in the right direction than follow the herd walking in the wrong direction.'



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,017 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    I presume that you are joking. The soft border I.e the Irish Sea border is the one that they are vehemently opposed to as it effectively cuts it off from the rest of the UK.

    The backstop is the insurance policy that there would be no hard border if no trade agreement is reached. The whole idea of a soft border was pure lies from liars like Rees mogg and borris who spouted on about electronic borders where no technology exists.

    But the complete ignorance from the entrenched unionists who will cut their nose off to spite there face is the issue without really understanding what they are looking for.



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,017 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    There has already been a return to violence and a rise in extremism. All papers are clear that a hard border will be a return to violence.

    Nobody can vote for a breach of an international agreement. Also NI already voted to remain. It was then agreed that a backstop would be there. No one voted for a hard border because you can’t vote in conflict of the GFA.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 45,535 ✭✭✭✭Mr.Nice Guy



    Those were small skirmishes, whipped up by loyalists who were pressuring vulnerable youngsters into anti-social behaviour. It hasn't acted as a deterrent to the functioning of the protocol, and ought not to act as a deterrent to good government policy.

    "Šefčovič will judge for himself the strength of opposition to the Northern Ireland protocol. When it was announced that he was to meet with academics, business and community leaders at Queen’s University Belfast, loyalists called on protesters to gather at the gates. Šefčovič said the Commission would do everything possible to minimise the disruption brought about by the protocol, which was, he reasoned, not the problem. “On the contrary,” he said, “it is the only solution we have.” While a majority in Northern Ireland voted to remain in the EU, many of those in the room are now adapting to the realities of Brexit, turning to their advantage the unique access the protocol gives the country to both EU and UK markets. The anti-protocol men marched up and down outside. There were about 25 of them. Paisley Sr got tens of thousands of people out to oppose the Anglo-Irish agreement in 1985 – it went ahead anyway." - Susan McKay.

    'It is better to walk alone in the right direction than follow the herd walking in the wrong direction.'



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,017 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    I’m going to be completely honest and say that from all of my reading on the subject I am/was convinced that Ireland would be required to have a referendum on a unites Ireland. Indeed i had a vigorous debate on the SF thread espousing that thesis.

    But according to legal academics and experts that it would not be required. I relied on the fact that a contemporaneous vote would be required on both sides of the border.

    However, it appears that it’s not a constitutional requirement or a requirement in the GFA so possibly at best rubber stamping what is already done or at worst causing an increase in tensions and entrenching views. I’m at a loss at the correct position. https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-58876721.amp



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,271 ✭✭✭fash


    They obviously knew there would be a need for a border - they, the same people who opposed the GFA - and including Sammy Wilson who in c1993 was calling for the extermination of the Catholic population in NI- , were very happy to look for a hard border in Ireland.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,794 ✭✭✭fly_agaric


    You'd have to think so (that it is a deliberate effort to poison the well). I haven't read/listened to it, but if it is (as reported) about how vital it is for UK to get rid of all EU oversight/control of NI protocol and completely rewrite it, why else would you come out with this the day before public announcement of EU proposals which (I assume) UK civil servants have been working on with the EU over the summer + Frost will already know details of??



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,026 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    Actually reading Frost's speech in full and I'm rather gobsmacked. It reads like one of Nigel Farage's rants in the European Parliament (with lots of insults against the EU thrown in).....the only part missing is the angry, shouty voice.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,794 ✭✭✭fly_agaric


    Should probably take a look at it I suppose when I get the chance although I don't really want to to be honest. It is all a depressing slow motion car crash (with Ireland as a passenger!).



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,026 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    Bombastic and arrogant, with too many insults thrown in. Who is his audience though.....Daily Express readers? It's all very weird, picking a fight with the EU for the sake of picking a fight.



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,978 ✭✭✭✭A Dub in Glasgo


    reading Tony Connelly'd thread on Twitter, the EU proposals look very accommodating which is galling considering how much the UK govt have baited them





  • Registered Users Posts: 195 ✭✭Bsharp


    A problem for Frost is only the Express and Telegraph seem to be going with the story. They've lost the Daily Mail and a few other rags along the way. Presume he was trying to generate a few more distracting headlines than that.



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,978 ✭✭✭✭A Dub in Glasgo


    This from Saturday passed me by and looks spot on. The nonsense has to stop sometime soon and I do fear where the UK govt is going with this





  • Registered Users Posts: 15,483 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    It all seems perfectly reasonable to me, and there lies plenty of responsibility on the part of the UK for close cooperation with plenty of data sharing. And of course regulations staff under the control of the EU and ECJ continues to have a say.

    Reading Connollys thread, Frosts speech actually starts to make sense.

    Frost demanded change, demanded that things be reconsidered in light of the actuality of implementation, and the EU has delivered.

    Those amendments answer many of the day to day concerns, which is not what they want. They need NIP to fail so that NI doesn't get the best of both worlds, as they people will start to ask why GB doesn't get it.

    So Frost gets his retaliation in first, basically demands the undeliverable and then has cause to tear it all up.



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,017 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    I have no real knowledge of the UK press. Apart from the sport pages and the Financial Times for work, I’m oblivious to them. But I remember the Guardians editorial on Lord Frost last March and they got it bang on. He is a caricature of a politician and borders on satire. I have never heard of anyone ripping apart an agreement that they were the chief negotiator on.

    It never ceases to amaze me that all of the main UK protagonists involved have no clue what is contained in the Good Friday Agreement. Literally oblivious. Also the constant rhetoric that the EU are not open to a solution. Senior politicians of a Weatern democratic nation advocating tearing up of international peace agreements is just abhorrent. And the ramifications of that dont bare thinking about.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,939 ✭✭✭Bigus


    According to the “what it says in the papers” commentators on sky tonight and journalists on BBC , Frost , played the bully and the EU capitulated on everything as per tomorrow’s announcement, so he’s a great lad for stomping his feet and sorting out those nasty EU weaklings.

    Katie Adler , said the EU have bigger worries over gas shortages, and this would all be kicked down the road with absolutely no trade war .

    interesting to see some very very different takes on the same story.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,026 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    Absolute nonsense of course. The EU revealed around a week ago that they would be publishing their new proposals for the Protocol tomorrow (Wednesday), long before Frost went running to his pals in the Daily Telegraph on a sabotage mission.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,026 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    This tweet is crucial though. The measures are aimed solely at NI traders and businesses, not at the rogue government / collection of spivs in Westminster.

    https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1448030532453994501



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Could a solution to this be to let the population of Northern Ireland vote to endorse the NI protocol and take it out of Westminster politics entirely?

    It needs to be taken out of being a plaything of the English nationalist element and brought back to relevance to Northern Ireland only.

    Also I don't think this is really the time for a big mess on unionism vs nationalism. It's not going to resolve that way and needs to use the NIP to preserve a sense of status quo and the rather awkward and delicate balance that keeps the rather unique scenario ticking over in a sane way.

    In the same way the GFA was endorsed by the population, I wonder if a unique status, that doesn't take screw around with NI status quo sovereignty issues or undermine the Good Friday Agreement, but that firmly places the future of NI in the hands of the people of NI, not a bunch of tabloid driven populists sitting in London who wouldn't even be able to name 4 towns in NI, never mind explain the complexities of its politics.

    Bringing in some outside observers might not be a bad idea, as happened in the run up to the GFA, maybe something the US could facilitate ?



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,017 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    The consent to the Northern Ireland Protocol is legislated as being the vote of the Northern Ireland assembly. Consent can be given if a simple majority of the Northern Ireland assembly (MLAs) vote in favour. This is unlike usual practice in the assembly, where decisions are normally subject to a mechanism called the petition of concern. This may be brought by 30 MLAs and requires the decision to obtain cross-community consent (with a specified proportion of unionists and nationals MLAs) to pass.

    UK ministers said that as the vote is on a matter which is usually in the competence of the UK government, not a devolved matter, normal assembly procedures will not apply,[3] and the regulations state that the petition of concern does not apply to the consent motion.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    The problem is that Westminster will continue to play with it as long as there's a distraction needed. This is the dead cat that's being used to distract from disastrous parliamentary reports on COVID, logistical systems failures leaving shelves empty etc etc. It's far easier to just rattle Northern Ireland and see if it can create some headlines or continue to paint the EU as some kind of evil empire.

    Whether you're nationalist or unionist, the situation in Northern Ireland is uniquely challenging and it will never be met by winner-takes-all policies. We know that. That's what the entire Good Friday Agreement and the process that led up to it was about. There were compromises. They will never be absolutely comfortable for everyone because the solution is one that exists in the grey and the in-between and in flexibility.

    I think this is somewhere where an outside entity like the US and perhaps a few others could bring a sense of multilateralism and big picture to this. It's urgent that it's sorted out as I don't think it's in anyone's interest to see Northern Ireland screwed around with.

    It's honestly sickening to think that the people in power in Britain at the moment are so cynical, dogmatic, shallow and narrow minded that they would even begin to play with this most delicate of situations. So much work went into getting Northern Ireland from what was an intolerably chaotic situation to its current stable, peaceful status quo.

    Someone needs to take the lead on this and pull it out of Brexit politics and it's unfortunately not looking like any of the players in NI itself have the vision to do that at present. There's nobody coming across like those 1990s leaders who brought about the GFA.

    The GFA had the good will of pragmatic Irish and British governments of their day and the support of the US and facilitation of the EU systems.

    Now we've a UK government that's driven by nationalistic populism and very little else and the EU and Irish Government can't really facilitate without the balance of a UK government, so in my view, it is going to need international third parties.



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,017 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    Couldn’t agree more. John Hume and Seamus Mallon were really formidable men. Indeed everyone involved from David Ervine (UVF bomber turned eloquent and progressive unionist) George Mitchell, Bill Clinton, Trimble, mo Mowlam, Gerry and Martin and even Bertie and Blair were immense.

    How difficult it must have been for Ervine to sit and talk with Gerry and Martin with the past so raw and painful. But the peace and security of Northern Ireland were put first. Sacrifices were made on both side but an agreement was the outcome. The knowledge and skill to draft a relatively short document at circa 40 pages that was workable and palatable to both sides.


    And then you look at the Charlatans, snakeoil salesmen who blag their way through each disaster to the next with the finesse of a drunk donkey. Lie after lie after lie being fed to people. Reneging on agreements that they negotiated themselves with no understanding of what they signed. All for what? Decimation of industry, agriculture, financial services, plummeting sterling and literally no agreements on trade. It’s heartbreaking that the work the 10 above put into securing peace has been ripped up with contempt and ignorance.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,889 ✭✭✭Patser


    This consensus in the UK, actually presnts Frost and Johnson with a huge problem, and again shows that the EU can play the slowly, slowly game blindingly well.


    Frost came out today all guns blazing, and set down a big red line - the ECJ. The EU response is all practical, on the ground and localised to help Northern Ireland. And it's being presented on the news as a massive win for the UK......but... Where does that leave Frost's ECJ red line?

    Does he now accept the EU 'capitulation' as described on the news - or say, 'No it's not enough! Even though it's a massive win, I want more!! And I'm willing to risk all these gains to get it, even if it ends in a disasterous trade war!'

    How can he come across as reasonable to demand more, while the EU has offered a lot.



  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,746 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    In other news

    China has banned British beef imports of cattle under 30 months of age after a case of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), or mad cow disease, in the UK last month.

    In 2018, China ended a two-decades-long ban on imports of beef from the UK, which was first introduced after the outbreak of BSE in the 1990s. In reality China has yet to restart buying beef from the UK after agreeing in 2018 to lift previous restrictions.


    China and India represented most of the possible upsides of Brexit and were supposed to offset a drop in trade with the EU.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I think part of the problem is we are assuming that we're dealing with rational actors in this - We are not.

    You're looking at Tory Party that basically absorbed the philosophy and ideology of UKIP and the Brexit Party's and has acquired a hard line English nationalism. I think even calling it British nationalism is a bit of a stretch of the concept of Britishness. It's far more narrow-minded and it's just wrapping itself in flags and nationalistic fantasies.

    There's an very anti-EU / Europhobic thread through all of this and that is just not based on facts or logic. Some of it seems to be a very thinly veiled hatred of the EU and I think we really need to acknowledge that in what we're dealing with, because I don't think we are going to get very far by placating it too much.

    It'll always be another goal post shift, another bad faith negotiation, bad faith arguments or twisted facts and catchy slogans.

    My view of it is that some of them have an agenda of undermining the EU, not only in the context of Brexit, but probably an agenda even going as far as trying do destabilise, perhaps even destroying it.

    How you deal with this, I do not know. They are not really negotiable with if they are going to continue to act in bad faith and just move goal posts, throw abuse and generally be utterly impossible to deal with.



  • Registered Users Posts: 209 ✭✭Iecrawfc


    Not to be suggesting anything but suprised that the IRA have'nt come out with a warning at least to the Tory government about trying to rip up the peace accord they signed up to. Along the lines of 'hey not that long ago we nearly wiped out your whole leadership, do you really want restart that again?'



  • Registered Users Posts: 26,057 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    The flaw in this analysis is that it completely overlooks the role played by the UK government in creating this problem. They choose to proceed with Brexit when two of the four parts of the UK (including NI) had voted against it. They chose to pursue hard Brexit when the referendum result did not require that. They negotiated but then resiled from an all-UK arrangement to avoid a hard border, insisting on going back to the drawing board and negotiating the NI Protocol instead. And, after committing themselves to the Protocol and knowing what the consequences would be, they made a series of decisions to widen the regulatory gap between GB and NI and so maximise the impact of the NI:GB border that they insisted on having.

    So no, Sue, the EU accepting leakage into the Single Market is not the only compromise that can preserve stability. The UK softening its Brexit so that it doesn't require a hard border is the other obvious and, many would say, more appropriate compromise that could be made. It's impossible to argue that Ireland and the EU have duty to compromise further than they already have - and they have compromised massively - so that the Tory party's hard Brexit won't destabilise NI but that the UK, which actually governs NI and is responsible for the place, has no duty to compromise, and no responsibility for the consequences of its unilateral choices.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 8,017 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    The announcement of the Auksus pact essentially made the UK an adversary of China. Although China was not specifically mentioned it is clear that arming Australia with Nuclear submarines was as a counter to Military assertiveness. It has been said that there will be an 18 month scoping period to see how it works in practice.

    However, it would appear to be an end to the rapidly increasing trade with the U.K. and China. Total trade in goods and services (exports plus imports) between the UK and China was £93.0 billion in the four quarters to the end of Q2 2021, an increase of 9.8% or £8.3 billion from the four quarters to the end of Q2 2020. Of this £93.0 billion:

    Total UK exports to China amounted to £25.4 billion in the four quarters to the end of Q2 2021 (a decrease of 30.0% or £10.9 billion compared to the four quarters to the end of Q2 2020);

    Total UK imports from China amounted to £67.6 billion in the four quarters to the end of Q2 2021 (an increase of 39.5% or £19.2 billion compared to the four quarters to the end of Q2 2020).

    China was the UK’s 3rd largest trading partner in the four quarters to the end of Q1 2021 accounting for 7.5% of total UK trade.1

    In 2019, the outward stock of foreign direct investment (FDI) from the UK in China was £10.7 billion accounting for 0.7% of the total UK outward FDI stock.

    In 2019, the inward stock of foreign direct investment (FDI) in the UK froTotal trade in goods and services (exports plus imports) between the UK and China was £93.0 billion in the four quarters to the end of Q2 2021, an increase of 9.8% or £8.3 billion from the four quarters to the end of Q2 2020. Of this £93.0 billion:

    • Total UK exports to China amounted to £25.4 billion in the four quarters to the end of Q2 2021 (a decrease of 30.0% or £10.9 billion compared to the four quarters to the end of Q2 2020);

    • Total UK imports from China amounted to £67.6 billion in the four quarters to the end of Q2 2021 (an increase of 39.5% or £19.2 billion compared to the four quarters to the end of Q2 2020).

    China was the UK’s 3rd largest trading partner in the four quarters to the end of Q1 2021 accounting for 7.5% of total UK trade.

    In 2019, the outward stock of foreign direct investment (FDI) from the UK in China was £10.7 billion accounting for 0.7% of the total UK outward FDI stock.

    Its a big gamble to essentially lose that in preference of an as of yet unknown deal.



Advertisement