Brexit discussion thread VII (Please read OP before posting)

LeinsterDub · 06-02-2019 11:08pm

Folkstonian wrote: »

My, my. Why so angry? Your side is winning here, remember.

No one is winning it's losers all around.

Folkstonian · 06-02-2019 11:09pm

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Your insinuation that today has caused a No Deal, is 'blame'.

Nothing caused a No Deal only those who welched on a deal.

I don’t think today has caused No Deal, at all. I do think it’s the final nail in the coffin, however. And presumably your representatives have reached a conclusion that it’s inevitable, hence the decision to change tack in the press and social media

johnnyskeleton · 06-02-2019 11:11pm

Mod note:

Deep breaths people.....

....thread will reopen shortly and people will debate in a respectful and cordial manner!

FrancieBrady · 06-02-2019 11:22pm

Folkstonian wrote: »

I don’t think today has caused No Deal, at all. I do think it’s the final nail in the coffin, however. And presumably your representatives have reached a conclusion that it’s inevitable, hence the decision to change tack in the press and social media

The dotted line will still be there up until the end. It is clear that the EU are being strong and together and saying very firmly that they expect, after having made tough concessions, that the limited time left is for the UK to sort it's problems and make some concessions of their own.

VonZan · 06-02-2019 11:26pm

downcow wrote: »

I am scared to answer questions as this is what got me in trouble before.
I am offended about how they have used the gfa and 3000 deaths up here as a red herring to protect their economy

That's complete nonsense. It might be lost on you but the backstop is about more than just the economy.

A Dub in Glasgo · 06-02-2019 11:29pm

Folkstonian wrote: »

No deal Brexit is imminent

The EU have stated for 3 months now that the WA on the table is the only agreement available within the red lines the Tories imposed... May has even said this up this last couple of weeks. It was always a choice between taking the WA, leaving with no WA or revoking Article 50. The EU have probably now said to the UK 'your time is running out and we are preparing for no deal if you do not accept the only deal on the table'

Infini · 06-02-2019 11:32pm

RobMc59 wrote: »

It's difficult watching your country being humiliated on a world stage but a plus side is May's total humiliation is good for those of us who want to remain-its safe to say unless something extraordinary occurs in the next few days the deal is totally dead in the water-which leaves either a hard brexit or revoking of article 50.I would have been very hopeful of the UK remaining but perhaps the sniggering and gloating by Tusk and Taoiseach Varadkar was ill advised-that alone will enable the likes of JRM, bojo and DUP to "rally the troops" as it were and influence the ditherers sitting on the fence.

They wont be rallying much of anything to be honest unless they want to continue deluding themselves. There's a point in time when the niceties simply have to be dropped and people told EXACTLY what their level of bullshít is causing. The British Government have been at this for 2 years and now it's time for them to choose and own the problem they themselves created. Instead we get the likes of Sammy Shítstirrer treating his own voters with contempt when asked real and valid questions about food supplies and concerns by retailers saying "Send them to the Chippy". May going on endlessly with statements that have long since been proven as unworkable and ignore facts.

It should also serve as a warning to them that if they intentonally crash and cause damage to everyone that bar humanitarian issues and concerns (were not that cold) that Britain will not get anything more favourable and possibly even less favourable after a crash than before it. There's consequences for malicious and intentional damage to others.

Popeleo · 06-02-2019 11:35pm

Thanks for the reply.

I agree that option 1 would be great for NI's economy but it would leave the DUP looking rather foolish. (Not much chance of it, but it could also lead to a PM Rees-Mogg though, who is not only Catholic but comes across like he is a member of Opus Dei.)

About option 2 - that is what I don't understand. If the island of Britain is divided, in the long term, what becomes of the concept of Britishness? Especially if English nationalism rises in response to the whole sorry mess that gets them to that option.

downcow wrote: »

I wasn’t mooving on completely just from the “lie-debate”.
Well again I will be honest and take the inevitable flack.
1) we are economically fine in this situation. Indeed probably the best economic situation as best of both worlds ie NI wil be gateway into eu. We’ ll be British and Eu. Not my cultural preference and I am sure will increase the siege mentality so our Marching bands and orange order will get a new lease of life and we’ll be fine.
2 if Scotland goes then borders will be even more messy. I don’t see that have any impact on our desire to remain in UK. One thing I have learnt on this thread is that southerners and maybe nationalists have a very different perspective from me of what Britishness means. Deep in our sycy is the right of people to choose and if Scotland wanted to go independent they would do that with my blessing and I’d want us to have a very special neighbourly relationship based on our history. I don’t have the prejudice to English people that many nationalists do. I like engaging with them. Like to see their football team do well etc etc. So I have no concerns about that scenario

briany · 06-02-2019 11:42pm

Infini wrote: »

They wont be rallying much of anything to be honest unless they want to continue deluding themselves. There's a point in time when the niceties simply have to be dropped and people told EXACTLY what their level of bullshít is causing.

You're not going to shake sense into Brexiteers with hard talk any more than you could put out a house fire by dousing it in petrol. Brexit's been fed by so much anger in the first place. Throwing a bit more at it just intensifies the feeling, if it does anything.

Meanwhile, most Remainers agree that there's a special place in hell for those who pied-piper'd the British public into voting for it, so it's preaching to the choir, there.

kuro68k · 06-02-2019 11:55pm

Tusk seems to have given up on any hope that the UK will do the sensible thing and cancel.

Capt'n Midnight · 07-02-2019 12:03am

More drip, drip bad financial news. Another bank got court approval to move money out of the UK.

UBS Clear to Move $36.5 Billion of Assets to Germany Over Brexit

Meanwhile Labour are tilting at windmills:rolleyes:

A Labour government would create a new regulator with the power to break up tech firms if they did not curb harmful content, he said in a speech.

He admitted this would not be easy because they are global companies.

prawnsambo · 07-02-2019 12:05am

Folkstonian wrote: »

I don’t think today has caused No Deal, at all. I do think it’s the final nail in the coffin, however. And presumably your representatives have reached a conclusion that it’s inevitable, hence the decision to change tack in the press and social media

I'm not convinced that this hasn't been orchestrated to send a message to the waverers in the HoC. And I think it's been timed for this moment when May is not in Westminster and ostensibly doing the rounds to 'get a better deal'. A very strong statement to isolate the ERG types (who are all frothing about it) and make it clear that there is no negotiation and the EU is quite prepared to take a crash out.

May has been ramping up the pressure by running down the clock and now the EU is throwing ice cod water on Westminster. No more diplomatic speak, just a hard line and a hard exit unless the HoC either take the deal or fall off the cliff. And the comment about Corbyn is equally pointed. That's telling Labour that his unicorns are no more viable than Tory ones.

briany · 07-02-2019 12:07am

kuro68k wrote: »

Tusk seems to have given up on any hope that the UK will do the sensible thing and cancel.

He may well have done, but we have to remember that the UK and EU would still have to do business in the future, even if a no-deal Brexit takes place. It's not the complete end of the dialog between the parties, and it's probably best for all concerned to keep 'unprofessional' language to a minimum if there are going to be future talks sorting out some kind of trading relationship.

07-02-2019 12:33am

briany wrote: »

He may well have done, but we have to remember that the UK and EU would still have to do business in the future, even if a no-deal Brexit takes place. It's not the complete end of the dialog between the parties, and it's probably best for all concerned to keep 'unprofessional' language to a minimum if there are going to be future talks sorting out some kind of trading relationship.

The language to be used is the language needed right now. After the 29th March all the sweet talking can begin but UK need to be told that no border is part of future trade deals too

Russman · 07-02-2019 12:33am

LeinsterDub wrote: »

No one is winning it's losers all around.

This ^^^^ exactly.
There are no winners in this (well apart from maybe a few ERG types). It’s shocking to me that some politicians are more upset about something someone said than trying to be a little bit constructive and find a way out of the mess. Between the likes of Sammy’s rant, May’s seemingly endless statements of nothing and Davies’ “they need us more than we need them”, it’s like all reality and perspective has left the building and to heck (almost said the other H word !!) with ordinary peoples lives and livelihoods. Emotion is driving the debate now and pride can be a terrible thing.

Hurrache · 07-02-2019 12:39am

Watching the Sky Press Preview and surprisingly few papers lead with the Tusk story with only the Telegraph misquoting him. Most of them don't seem to have the story on the front page.

briany · 07-02-2019 12:40am

Peter Bone was on Channel 4 news earlier complaining about the insensitivity of Tusk's language.

Let's let that one sink in.

Imreoir2 · 07-02-2019 12:43am

downcow wrote: »

I am honestly stunned. I think I have been completely honest. I have watched again and here is my best honest attempt at quoting him.

“I’ve been wondering, what a special place in hell looks like for those who promoted brexit without even a sketch of a plan”

Many many many of my friends promoted brexit. So please tell me how I am misunderstanding this. And he clearly read it from a prepare statement. As someone said to me on here earlier, wake up and smell the coffee.

Your friends promoted Brexit without even a sketch of a plan to deliver it safely? If that is what they did, then they deserve all the crticisim they get.

BorneTobyWilde · 07-02-2019 12:44am

Funny how Ireland and EU refuse to budge on the back stop, saying it's there to prevent a hard border, but in not budging and excepting an alternative proposal it will be them that are responsible for an absolute hard border. UK seem right in this case, for EU to say we will never negotiate is simple wrong. You should always compromise.

robindch · 07-02-2019 12:47am

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Two years and still we don't know what the UK want.

Almost three years on and the UK doesn't know what the UK wants.

Or more precisely, the UK is riven with anti-EU factions, each one of which has a preferred outcome supported by reasoning which ranges from the plausible to the clinically insane. Each faction agrees that every other faction's outcome is rubbish, and is prepared to vote down every other faction's preferred outcome.

Unfortunately, like a Mexican standoff, no one outcome commands genuine support in Cabinet, and no outcomes have actual majority support in Parliament or the country.

A Dub in Glasgo · 07-02-2019 12:48am

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Funny how Ireland and EU refuse to budge on the back stop, saying it's there to prevent a hard border, but in not budging and excepting an alternative proposal it will be them that are responsible for an absolute hard border. UK seem right in this case, for EU to say we will never negotiate is simple wrong. You should always compromise.

1. No deal = hard border
2. WA with no backstop = hard border
3. WA with time limited backstop = hard border
4. WA with backstop = open border

I am picking number 4, take your pick

FrancieBrady · 07-02-2019 12:49am

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Funny how Ireland and EU refuse to budge on the back stop, saying it's there to prevent a hard border, but in not budging and excepting an alternative proposal it will be them that are responsible for an absolute hard border. UK seem right in this case, for EU to say we will never negotiate is simple wrong. You should always compromise.

Inform yourself - the 'compromises' have already been made. There is nothing more to negotiate because the UK have not put anything realistic or credible on the table.

robindch · 07-02-2019 12:51am

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Funny how Ireland and EU refuse to budge on the back stop, saying it's there to prevent a hard border, but in not budging and excepting an alternative proposal it will be them that are responsible for an absolute hard border.

Firstly, there is no "alternative arrangement".

Secondly, threatening a return to a hard border and a consequent heightened risk of a return to terrorism amounts to negotiating under threat and - given the games-playing of the current incumbents - the unfortunately logical thing to do is to call their bluff.

The backstop, of course, neutralizes a secondary threat to refuse to come to an Trade Agreement during the period of the Withdrawal Agreement. And, being games-players, the Tories and the DUP are furious that their games-playing has been found out for what it is.

Imreoir2 · 07-02-2019 1:04am

downcow wrote: »

Nonsense. Irish pm has said a time bounded backstop is not a backstop.

So unless and until doesn’t meant that it is indefinite.
Are you seriously telling me I can’t be permanent because if that is the case I can support it.

The Backstop is event limited and not time limited. The event that limits the backstop is the adoption of agreed arangements between the EU and UK that keep the border open. According to Brexiteers, achieveing this is the essence of simplicity and if they are honest on this point one has to wonder why they are so opposed to the backstop.

Time limiting the backstop makes a nonsense of the concept of having a backstop. If the need for the backstop does not go away after x number of months, then what happens if the backstop goes away after x number of months? A hard border is what happens.

McGiver · 07-02-2019 1:07am

And after Tusk, the European Council President's offensive, the European Commission President Juncker strikes as well along with Varadkar in their Joint Statement. Very simple, consise, straight to the point language - European one at that, ironically in English.

This is all part of a coordinated diplomatic effort, that is quite obvious. Actually, it is very clever and sends a clear message to the UK that no more fuzziness and backtracking will be tolerated.

The Withdrawal Agreement and the Political Declaration have been negotiated in good faith and have been agreed by all 27 Leaders of the European Union Member States as well as by the United Kingdom Government.

As we have said on many occasions, the Withdrawal Agreement is the best and only deal possible. It is not open for renegotiation.

The backstop is an integral part of the Withdrawal Agreement. While we hope the backstop will not need to be used, it is a necessary legal guarantee to protect peace and to ensure there will be no return to a hard border on the island of Ireland, while protecting the integrity of our Single Market and the Customs Union.

The Withdrawal Agreement, including the backstop, is a balanced compromise, representing a good outcome for citizens and businesses on all sides, including in Northern Ireland.

The backstop is not a bilateral issue, but a European one. Ireland's border is also the border of the European Union and its market is part of the Single Market. We will stay united on this matter.

We will continue to seek agreement on the orderly withdrawal of the United Kingdom but we will also step up our preparation for a no-deal scenario. In this context, programmes that provide support for cross-border peace and reconciliation in the border counties of Ireland and Northern Ireland will be continued and strengthened. The Commission stands ready to support Ireland in finding solutions answering the specific challenges that Ireland and Irish citizens, farmers and businesses will face. We will work closely together to this end over the coming weeks.

We will continue to remind the Government of the United Kingdom of its responsibilities under the Good Friday Agreement, with or without a deal.

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_STATEMENT-19-884_en.htm

I would not hesitate calling this is a diplomatic victory of the Republic over the UK (and 'I ain't no Irish lad'). The Republic has a complete, total and full support of the EU27 and the UK are defeated.

Those who speculate that Ireland will be thrown under the bus by the EU26 are terribly mistaken.

Folkstonian · 07-02-2019 1:10am

robindch wrote: »

Firstly, there is no "alternative arrangement".

Secondly, threatening a return to a hard border and a consequent heightened risk of a return to terrorism amounts to negotiating under threat and - given the games-playing of the current incumbents - the unfortunately logical thing to do is to call their bluff.

The backstop, of course, neutralizes a secondary threat to refuse to come to an Trade Agreement during the period of the Withdrawal Agreement. And, being games-players, the Tories and the DUP are furious that their games-playing has been found out for what it is.

The backstop negotiated by Theresa May allows the European Union to contain Britain in an uncomfortable state of limbo in perpetuity until the British government agrees on a future trade agreement that gives Europe absolutely everything it desires.

As with the agreement on sequencing for the withdrawal agreement, it would wipe out any negotiating power that Britain has. The French would have to be given fishing rights, the Spanish would have to be given joint sovereignty over Gibraltar, the Germans would demand Britain adhered to European regulation on financial services etc.

I can absolutely see why the limbo status of the backstop as agreed to by May has been met with such concern in parliament.

Im sure everyone in the commons understands the importance of a frictionless border for Irish society but there must be genuine worries that Europe will use it as to extract every little concession they could in the future relationship talks

I’m not blaming Europe of course, they strove for the best deal they could get and probably couldn’t believe how much May was willing to give up without a fight.

Hurrache · 07-02-2019 1:20am

A wise poster earlier commented on how nothing good can come if rushing through Brexit related laws and SIs, which is currently happening. Here's such one

A little-noticed government regulation laid before parliament on Tuesday confirms that the UK will revoke the current legislation that allows holidaymakers and business people to use their smartphones in the EU at no extra cost.

The draft ‘statutory instrument’, which has been tabled as part of a raft of no-deal preparations, means that from March 29 phone users will be liable for surcharges when they travel on the continent.

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/brits-eu-mobile-phone-roaming-no-deal-brexit-government_uk_5c5b185be4b09293b20ab335

McGiver · 07-02-2019 1:26am

Folkstonian wrote: »

The backstop negotiated by Theresa May allows the European Union to contain Britain in an uncomfortable state of limbo in perpetuity until the British government agrees on a future trade agreement that gives Europe absolutely everything it desires.

1. May negotiated the backstop to be UK wide. Originally it was NI only. I am sure you are aware of that.

2. The backstop is agreed on the basis of "unless and until", not in perpetuity. It stops being effective when certain conditions are met - unless and until other solution preventing a regulatory divergence, and hence a need for the border on the island of Ireland, is implemented by the UK.

If you feel the backstop is uncomfortable then you likely admit that UK in fact does not and cannot ever come up with any other solution to prevent border on the island of Ireland as de facto (although not de iure) stipulated by the GFA. And the reason being that such solution simply does not exist. (Well, actually it does - NI staying in the SM & CU

)

"Backstop-free Brexit" is a technical impossibility given UK's obligations under the GFA, existence of a UK overseas territory otherwise called 'Northern Ireland' which shares a border with a EU country called the Republic of Ireland, and of course the HMG's red lines. Unless HMG changes its red lines Brexit is impossible without the backstop.

Imreoir2 · 07-02-2019 1:28am

Folkstonian wrote: »

The backstop negotiated by Theresa May allows the European Union to contain Britain in an uncomfortable state of limbo in perpetuity until the British government agrees on a future trade agreement that gives Europe absolutely everything it desires.

Yes, the other option is economic ruin in a few weeks time, Brexit is really noting but upside, isnt it?

Bit cynical · 07-02-2019 1:39am

McGiver wrote: »

If you feel the backstop is uncomfortable then you likely admit that UK in fact does not and cannot ever come up with any other solution to prevent border on the island of Ireland as de facto (although not de iure) stipulated by the GFA. And the reason being that such solution simply does not exist. (Well, actually it does - NI staying in the SM & CU

I think some partial solution will be found in the event of no deal probably involving electronic methods and cooperation between the two governments. This will take some of the strain off the GFA.

Brexit discussion thread VII (Please read OP before posting)

Comments