Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

ancapailldorcha · 13-03-2019 12:48am #1

This is the eighth incarnation of our Brexit discussion thread.

As we are approaching the critical end of March 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

blanch152 · 13-03-2019 11:31pm

A good day for Ireland.

- Malthouse option killed.

- UK plans for no-deal Brexit exposed as foolish.

- No-deal Brexit voted down convincingly

- May's deal, soft Brexit and withdrawal of Article 50 still on the table

Duane Dibbley · 13-03-2019 11:32pm

Sardonicat wrote: »

With a hard border?

If there is no deal agreed on the 29th and EU countries press the eject button then yes there will need to be a border.

We have all known this for years

maccored · 13-03-2019 11:39pm

Duane Dibbley wrote: »

If there is no deal agreed on the 29th and EU countries press the eject button then yes there will need to be a border.

We have all known this for years

Feared it for years, more like. Who gives a toss about the GFA, eh?

briany · 13-03-2019 11:45pm

Duane Dibbley wrote: »

The EU has been looking after Ireland’s interests. We had along with 26 other EU states , nearly 3 years to prepare for Brexit. What makes you think Ireland will prepare during the extension I’d we were incompetent not to start preparing before.

Kicking the can down the road is not a solution.

If the UK don’t have a sound plan by the 29th then move on as an EU27.

Well, the other 26 can move on because they're relatively insulated. We, in Ireland, will actually have to deal with this proper frontier that has sprung up and has to be enforced, causing disruption to business and people and communities, and diminishing cross-community trust.

All I'm saying is, if nothing else, a few extra months to steel ourselves against that chaos, to bolster ongoing preparations, would be a good thing.

Not to forget that in the UK, May is beginning to say that Brexit is being lost due to the intractability of parliament, and cross-bench movements are coalescing to stop Brexit altogether. It might be annoying to have to listen to the UK bellyache for another two years, say, but that would be 2 years well spent if the UK stayed in the EU by the end of it.

Sardonicat · 13-03-2019 11:47pm

Duane Dibbley wrote: »

Sardonicat wrote: »

With a hard border?

If there is no deal agreed on the 29th and EU countries press the eject button then yes there will need to be a border.

We have all known this for years

We do know it. But why would anyone want it and the consequences that come with it?

Duane Dibbley · 13-03-2019 11:51pm

Sardonicat wrote: »

We do know it. But why would anyone want it and the consequences that come with it?

It’s a fact of leaving the EU and the Customs Union.The UK and EU knew this from day 1. Actions have consequences.

Duane Dibbley · 13-03-2019 11:58pm

briany wrote: »

Well, the other 26 can move on because they're relatively insulated. We, in Ireland, will actually have to deal with this proper frontier that has sprung up and has to be enforced, causing disruption to business and people and communities, and diminishing cross-community trust.

All I'm saying is, if nothing else, a few extra months to steel ourselves against that chaos, to bolster ongoing preparations, would be a good thing.

Not to forget that in the UK, May is beginning to say that Brexit is being lost due to the intractability of parliament, and cross-bench movements are coalescing to stop Brexit altogether. It might be annoying to have to listen to the UK bellyache for another two years, say, but that would be 2 years well spent if the UK stayed in the EU by the end of it.

I would agree that there should be some type of NoDeal implementation period after the 29th. We have had nearly 3 years to prepare and if we haven’t then that is the incompetence of our Govenment.

I don’t agree that an extension is agreed only to watch the UK going around in circles.

In that case, All pissed off EU countries can trigger A50s knowing there are no deadlines and keep threats to get what they want from Brussels.

Shelga · 14-03-2019 12:04am

Voxpop on Newsnight, they’ve gone to the strongly Leave voting area of Port Talbot, what a surprise!

Sardonicat · 14-03-2019 12:06am

Duane Dibbley wrote: »

Sardonicat wrote: »

We do know it. But why would anyone want it and the consequences that come with it?

It’s a fact of leaving the EU and the Customs Union.The UK and EU knew this from day 1. Actions have consequences.

I'm not disputing the facts. I'm fully aware of them. I'm wondering why ANYONE who lives anywhere on this island would want this to happen. Why should Ireland suffer the consequences of the UK's actions?

FrancieBrady · 14-03-2019 12:09am

Sardonicat wrote: »

I'm not disputing the facts. I'm fully aware of them. I'm wondering why ANYONE who lives anywhere on this island would want this to happen. Why should Ireland suffer the consequences of the UK's actions?

We will suffer them anyway. The 'backstop mitigates the effects of Brexit (for NI too)
What else could we have done?

prawnsambo · 14-03-2019 12:10am

Sardonicat wrote: »

We do know it. But why would anyone want it and the consequences that come with it?

Nobody wants it. The UK tried to hold it hostage in the negotiations but we and the EU saw that coming a mile off and set the sequencing so that the backstop had to be agreed before anything else. And they still kept trying up to this morning with their tariff announcements and 'open border' nonsense. Which Michael Gove managed to blow a hole in this afternoon by admitting that it 'might be' illegal.

Duane Dibbley · 14-03-2019 12:14am

Sardonicat wrote: »

I'm not disputing the facts. I'm fully aware of them. I'm wondering why ANYONE who lives anywhere on this island would want this to happen. Why should Ireland suffer the consequences of the UK's actions?

I don’t think anyone wants it to happen but it’s a fact when one side is in the EU and One side is removed against there will. (NI voted remain)

It will be for NI to decide what they want to do if there is a no deal brexit.

Or the Republic to decide on EU membership in the event of a no deal.

Mr.Nice Guy · 14-03-2019 12:15am

BBC love bringing on extremist commentators with no grasp of the details. Lionel Shriver on Newsnight now. Ruth Dudley Edwards on BBC Talkback earlier. Fury over facts. Ratings over reason.

Infini · 14-03-2019 12:18am

blanch152 wrote: »

A good day for Ireland.

- Malthouse option killed.

- UK plans for no-deal Brexit exposed as foolish.

- No-deal Brexit voted down convincingly

- May's deal, soft Brexit and withdrawal of Article 50 still on the table

I'd be more accurate to say that no deal as a choice for parliment is dead but not a default crash no deal as of yet. It's the accidental crash out scenario if paralysis reigns.

The only options left are

Passing May's deal on a 3rd attempt but unlikely since its been defeated by significant margins and no further clarifications will be made. It's basically unpalatable at this stage and it doesnt regain any control.

Asking for an extention of A50 from Europe but this is also looking unlikely. They need a good reason for one to be granted and the EU have been clear enough: if they dont come up with a credible reason they wont allow it they'd rather be rid of them come March 29th than allow this farce to continue. They want a strait answer to be honest and its either leave, take the deal on the table at the last minute or just abandon this and they want an answer in 2 weeks or its the boot.

A complete climbdown on Brexit: Undeliverable, Unaffordable and Unworkable. They basically have to cancel by withdrawing A50 and admit defeat on the issue and go back to the people. The only ones pushing it are liar's, cheates and scammers it's not worth letting them destroy their country for a vainglorious project with no benefit.

To tell the Truth if they ever want a Brexit they can live with to be honest they need to basically lose Northern Ireland. That's the irony it's the fact they cant come to a workable arrangment and allowed THE party of headbangers into government that cost them as likely the agreement would have had a better chance of passing if NI was treated differently or if they even had a Border Poll.

branie2 · 14-03-2019 12:23am

Would a border be a disaster?

Strazdas · 14-03-2019 12:23am

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

BBC love bringing on extremist commentators with no grasp of the details. Lionel Shriver on Newsnight now. Ruth Dudley Edwards on BBC Talkback earlier. Fury over facts. Ratings over reason.

Yes, I was watching her. Some American talking about Leave voters being "betrayed" and the likes and there is no such thing as a hard or soft Brexit. It's bizarre to watch a supposedly intelligent person coming out with this populist claptrap.

Necro · 14-03-2019 12:25am

Is it wrong that I have an extremely morbid curiosity to see how a no deal Brexit would pan out? I can't help being fascinated by the lunacy of it all

Duane Dibbley · 14-03-2019 12:27am

branie2 wrote: »

Would a border be a disaster?

People have different interpretations of what a border is.

Joe_ Public · 14-03-2019 12:29am

Strazdas wrote: »

Yes, I was watching her. Some American talking about Leave voters being "betrayed" and the likes and there is no such thing as a hard or soft Brexit. It's bizarre to watch a supposedly intelligent person coming out with this populist claptrap.

I think what she said was the terms hard and soft didn’t exist during the campaign, there was only brexit and all the different nuances only arrived later. Nothing wrong with that surely. Thought it was an interesting discussion. All these people saying they’re not getting the brexit they were promised but what exactly is it anyway? Campbell was spot on, it never existed, a fantasy, a figment of people with dangerous imaginations.

Strazdas · 14-03-2019 12:29am

branie2 wrote: »

Would a border be a disaster?

A border would be very unpopular if it was imposed on any two neighbouring regions in the EU and the extra dimension of NI nationalists being Irish citizens ramps it up even further.

Mr.Nice Guy · 14-03-2019 12:34am

Strazdas wrote: »

Yes, I was watching her. Some American talking about Leave voters being "betrayed" and the likes and there is no such thing as a hard or soft Brexit. It's bizarre to watch a supposedly intelligent person coming out with this populist claptrap.

Yes, it was such a foolish point on her part. The reason there was no such talk was because Leavers deliberately ensured Brexit was all things to all people. No details were needed when vague fantasy and slogans could fill the gap. That was never going to last once fantasy collided with reality and they had to try to figure out how to put it into practice.

The Brexit-supporting Port Talbot chap typified the problem, blaming everyone from May to the Scottish Nationalists for ruining Brexit. The reporter concluded her piece saying people were angry their Brexit was being 'swept away'. It hasn't been swept away because it was never real enough to be swept away. It was a mirage and a con all along.

Sadly I don't think the penny will ever drop that their vision of Brexit could never have worked.

golfball37 · 14-03-2019 12:34am

Strazdas wrote: »

A border would be very unpopular if it was imposed on any two neighbouring regions in the EU and the extra dimension of NI nationalists being Irish citizens ramps it up even further.

But the uk will not be in the EU? Britain needs to get on with leaving as per default legal position on March 29th and we need to batten down the hatches and work smarter. Instead of blaming them for making a decision we couldn’t countenance perhaps ask why are we so in hoc and tied to the EUs fortunes?

BLIZZARD7 · 14-03-2019 12:35am

branie2 wrote: »

Would a border be a disaster?

A hard border, yes 100%. Reignition of paramilitary activity and a collapse of the GFA. An Economic nightmare for both the UK and Ireland too.

I don't think a softer border' is something easily achieved in reality , it would be unchartered territory.

Strazdas · 14-03-2019 12:36am

Joe_ Public wrote: »

I think what she said was the terms hard and soft didn’t exist during the campaign, there was only brexit and all the different nuances only arrived later. Nothing wrong with that surely. Thought it was an interesting discussion. All these people saying they’re not getting the brexit they were promised but what exactly is it anyway? Campbell was spot on, it never existed, a fantasy, a figment of people with dangerous imaginations.

People voted to "leave the EU" but nobody can agree on what happens the day after. This is where it falls down.

It would be like you announcing you were quitting your job, selling your home and moving to Mali for good. "Moving to Mali to do what?" and you reply "I don't know, I just know I'm moving to Mali on March 29th".

Strazdas · 14-03-2019 12:40am

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Yes, it was such a foolish point on her part. The reason there was no such talk was because Leavers deliberately ensured Brexit was all things to all people. No details were needed when vague fantasy and slogans could fill the gap. That was never going to last once fantasy collided with reality and they had to try to figure out how to put it into practice.

The Brexit-supporting Port Talbot chap typified the problem, blaming everyone from May to the Scottish Nationalists for ruining Brexit. The reporter concluded her piece saying people were angry their Brexit was being 'swept away'. It hasn't been swept away because it was never real enough to be swept away. It was a mirage and a con all along.

Sadly I don't think the penny will ever drop that their vision of Brexit could never have worked.

Campbell puts his finger on it when he says people voted for a vague, abstract fantasy ie. something undeliverable.

Problem is not many people in Britain can admit this.

Interesting though to hear Emily M. hint at a potential Chilcott Inquiry into Brexit.

Joe_ Public · 14-03-2019 12:43am

Strazdas wrote: »

People voted to "leave the EU" but nobody can agree on what happens the day after. This is where it falls down.

It would be like you announcing you were quitting your job, selling your home and moving to Mali for good. "Moving to Mali to do what?" and you reply "I don't know, I just know I'm moving to Mali on March 29th".

Yeah exactly, sure we know it was a vote never meant to be won in the first place, Boris sitting up late the night before writing his magnanimous but heroic losers speech, then having to cobble a new one together when the unthinkable came to pass. Whoever needed long term plans on that basis?

Strazdas · 14-03-2019 12:43am

golfball37 wrote: »

But the uk will not be in the EU? Britain needs to get on with leaving as per default legal position on March 29th and we need to batten down the hatches and work smarter. Instead of blaming them for making a decision we couldn’t countenance perhaps ask why are we so in hoc and tied to the EUs fortunes?

If the UK leaving creates a potential problem at the Irish border and may be in breach of the GFA, it might suggest that Cameron's referendum should never even have been held - he may have put something to referendum that breaches a major peace agreement.

cryptocurrency · 14-03-2019 12:45am

So article 62 of the Vienna Convention makes the withdrawal agreement worthless. If this is shown as the case you may see the ERG come on board knowing the WA is 500 pages of Andrex.

cryptocurrency · 14-03-2019 12:46am

blanch152 wrote: »

A good day for Ireland.

- Malthouse option killed.

- UK plans for no-deal Brexit exposed as foolish.

- No-deal Brexit voted down convincingly

- May's deal, soft Brexit and withdrawal of Article 50 still on the table

This article 62 talk is a game changer...they are saying the ERG have their legal people all over it now.

BonnieSituation · 14-03-2019 12:50am

cryptocurrency wrote: »

This article 62 talk is a game changer...they are saying the ERG have their legal people all over it now.

The finest legal minds in all of Christendom surely.

---

I was busy earlier so it was a pleasure to read through the last thread "as live" but what are we going to do when this all finally ends?

Keep up the good work all! Including the mods. Tonight must have been a 'mare.

theguzman · 14-03-2019 12:52am

BLIZZARD7 wrote: »

A hard border, yes 100%. Reignition of paramilitary activity and a collapse of the GFA. An Economic nightmare for both the UK and Ireland too.

I don't think a softer border' is something easily achieved in reality , it would be unchartered territory.

The Good Friday Agreement has effectively served its purpose, and is now dead; the institutions are not in effect, Stormont is suspended due to Unionists refusal to agree to an Irish Language Act, we are no closer to the Reunification of Ireland than we were 20 years ago.

It served its purpose to stop the killing at the time. I certainly welcome a Hard Border from a Nationalist point of view to remind people that they haven't gone away, the Unionists are still the same bigots they were and will always be.

Let the Economic screw be turned on them and watch the Unionist Farmers and landowners squirm as they lose subsidies and everything else. Make a United Ireland be their economic salvation and ensure that our Irish citizens in the North get treated as equal citizens.

I want to see a United Ireland and with the return of the Hard Border it will help force the UI agenda firmly onto the table, either the Unionists in the North take this onboard or there is likely to be a return to violence again. Do I condone violence, absolutely not, but equally I will not be surprised if it happens as the days of moderate Unionism, pragmatism and compromise are dead and replaced with the same bigoted politics Paisley trumpeted back in his heyday. We need less Arlene Fosters and more David Trimble like characters. The DUP ofcourse hold the reigns of power in Westminster so have a free pass on whatever they want to do.

Quin_Dub · 14-03-2019 12:56am

cryptocurrency wrote: »

So article 62 of the Vienna Convention makes the withdrawal agreement worthless

No, no it doesn't..

Article 62 covers the scenario of a very long standing international agreement becoming no longer fit for purpose due to fundamental changes in circumstances, thereby allowing a party to said agreement to leave the deal.

Given that the WA isn't the final deal and merely the mechanism by which the final deal gets done, how on earth would Article 62 even pertain to it?

blanch152 · 14-03-2019 12:58am

Infini wrote: »

I'd be more accurate to say that no deal as a choice for parliment is dead but not a default crash no deal as of yet. It's the accidental crash out scenario if paralysis reigns.

The only options left are

Passing May's deal on a 3rd attempt but unlikely since its been defeated by significant margins and no further clarifications will be made. It's basically unpalatable at this stage and it doesnt regain any control.

Asking for an extention of A50 from Europe but this is also looking unlikely. They need a good reason for one to be granted and the EU have been clear enough: if they dont come up with a credible reason they wont allow it they'd rather be rid of them come March 29th than allow this farce to continue. They want a strait answer to be honest and its either leave, take the deal on the table at the last minute or just abandon this and they want an answer in 2 weeks or its the boot.

A complete climbdown on Brexit: Undeliverable, Unaffordable and Unworkable. They basically have to cancel by withdrawing A50 and admit defeat on the issue and go back to the people. The only ones pushing it are liar's, cheates and scammers it's not worth letting them destroy their country for a vainglorious project with no benefit.

To tell the Truth if they ever want a Brexit they can live with to be honest they need to basically lose Northern Ireland. That's the irony it's the fact they cant come to a workable arrangment and allowed THE party of headbangers into government that cost them as likely the agreement would have had a better chance of passing if NI was treated differently or if they even had a Border Poll.

I wouldn't be as pessimistic as that.

It is only the ERG and the DUP who want a Brexit with a hard border, the defeat of the Malthouse option killed that option. Losing Northern Ireland isn't needed anymore.

A no-deal Brexit is a much lower possibility than it was this morning as a result.

The EU will grant an extension if it is for the purpose of a Norway plus deal, or if it is for a referendum on May's deal, or if May's deal is passed the third time.

The big losers today were the ERG and the DUP. They just don't have the numbers to push their agenda. If the ERG want to break up the Conservative Party, then they keep going down their current road. If they don't, they row back and accept May's deal. If they break up the Conservative Party, there is a majority for a soft Brexit.

BlitzKrieg · 14-03-2019 1:01am

cryptocurrency wrote: »

This article 62 talk is a game changer...they are saying the ERG have their legal people all over it now.

the same legal experts who completely misread article 24 of the Gatt treaties and tried to push it at the start of the month as the solution to brexit and it basically got laughed out because they'd actually missed the part of it stating it required that both parties agree to use article 24 and one party couldnt use unilaterally.

yeah I look forward to more insight from those legal experts. I need a good chuckle now and then.

bilston · 14-03-2019 1:03am

I think many ERG Tories will do an about turn on May's deal now. Not sure it will be enough though, but MV3 could be close. She might get it through at a 4th attempt.

cryptocurrency · 14-03-2019 1:08am

Quin_Dub wrote: »

No, no it doesn't..

Article 62 covers the scenario of a very long standing international agreement becoming no longer fit for purpose due to fundamental changes in circumstances, thereby allowing a party to said agreement to leave the deal.

Given that the WA isn't the final deal and merely the mechanism by which the final deal gets done, how on earth would Article 62 even pertain to it?

I'll wait to see what advice Cox says on it. He was asked on it twice today and was positive for it to be used as a get out option. It will gain traction tomorrow.
It will be funny if that is the case as all this has been over a worthless document.
It was mentioned the US has used it to walk from many deals.

cryptocurrency · 14-03-2019 1:10am

bilston wrote: »

I think many ERG Tories will do an about turn on May's deal now. Not sure it will be enough though, but MV3 could be close. She might get it through at a 4th attempt.

Can't see it. One of the MPs called it trecherous on LBC tonight, expect that to be news.

UK needs a general election now. The UK is about to change for ever and the EU need to be aware of that.

CelticRambler · 14-03-2019 1:11am

Strazdas wrote: »

It would be like you announcing you were quitting your job, selling your home and moving to Mali for good. "Moving to Mali to do what?" and you reply "I don't know, I just know I'm moving to Mali on March 29th".

Not sure that's a great analogy - that pretty much describes my move to France 15 years ago, and it's working out OK.

milhous wrote:

The leader of the house said that article 50 wil not be revoked as it would go against the will of the people ...

That's just one person's opinion. Ultimately, the "will of the people" is exercised by their elected representatives acting collectively. If a majority of those decide to instruct the PM to revoke Art.50, then that is effectively the will of the people.

tuxy · 14-03-2019 1:12am

bilston wrote: »

I think many ERG Tories will do an about turn on May's deal now. Not sure it will be enough though, but MV3 could be close. She might get it through at a 4th attempt.

It would be close but MV3 will not get over the line without the backing of the DUP or a number of opposition members who May has never make any attempt to communicate with thus far.

CelticRambler · 14-03-2019 1:16am

cryptocurrency wrote: »

It was mentioned the US has used it to walk from many deals.

C'mon - you know how things work here: name one of them.

briany · 14-03-2019 1:19am

tuxy wrote: »

It would be close but MV3 will not get over the line without the backing of the DUP or a number of opposition members who May has never make any attempt to communicate with thus far.

The gas thing is that May could have reached out to Labour and gotten ideas from which would have worked for her anyway, like the customs union thing. Anything for Labour to be able to say that they had input on the deal and were therefore happy with it.

blanch152 · 14-03-2019 1:21am

cryptocurrency wrote: »

This article 62 talk is a game changer...they are saying the ERG have their legal people all over it now.

That is just desperation. Can you tell me how many times Article 62 has been used before?

Can you tell me how an obscure part of the Vienna Convention can be invoked?

I can tell you one thing - the recourse to Article 62 is a sign of the increased desperation of the hard Brexiteers.

15 days to go but the options are closing in, extend to implement May's deal, extend to negotiate a Norway plus deal, revoke Article 50 or ?????

blanch152 · 14-03-2019 1:26am

cryptocurrency wrote: »

I'll wait to see what advice Cox says on it. He was asked on it twice today and was positive for it to be used as a get out option. It will gain traction tomorrow.
It will be funny if that is the case as all this has been over a worthless document.
It was mentioned the US has used it to walk from many deals.

The only get out option it has is for the ERG and the DUP to climb down off their high horses and accept May's deal. Today's votes have told them that's the best deal they are getting. If someone can issue a statement that in some legal extremis there is a unilateral clause, they will grasp that like drowning swimmers.

Blowfish · 14-03-2019 1:27am

cryptocurrency wrote: »

Quin_Dub wrote: »

No, no it doesn't..

Article 62 covers the scenario of a very long standing international agreement becoming no longer fit for purpose due to fundamental changes in circumstances, thereby allowing a party to said agreement to leave the deal.

Given that the WA isn't the final deal and merely the mechanism by which the final deal gets done, how on earth would Article 62 even pertain to it?

I'll wait to see what advice Cox says on it. He was asked on it twice today and was positive for it to be used as a get out option. It will gain traction tomorrow.
It will be funny if that is the case as all this has been over a worthless document.
It was mentioned the US has used it to walk from many deals.

It's a non runner, according to the HoC's own research: http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-8463/CBP-8463.pdf

madmaggie · 14-03-2019 1:32am

I just find the whole Brexit idea very sad. I'm originally from England, and it feels like the UK is somewhere very far away now, instead of being just next door. After all the work in recent years to establish good relations between the two countries, and to see it descend into nastiness and bitterness, what a disappointment.

BlitzKrieg · 14-03-2019 1:41am

Blowfish wrote: »

It's a non runner, according to the HoC's own research: http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-8463/CBP-8463.pdf

is anyone actually surprised?

It feels like the ERG is just googling random articles at this point.

FrancieBrady · 14-03-2019 1:49am

madmaggie wrote: »

I just find the whole Brexit idea very sad. I'm originally from England, and it feels like the UK is somewhere very far away now, instead of being just next door. After all the work in recent years to establish good relations between the two countries, and to see it descend into nastiness and bitterness, what a disappointment.

TBH and I feel for anybody reasonable or moderate - northern Irish, Scottish, Welsh or English, I have said this before, I think history will see this as part of the break-up of the UK, begining with the GFA and then the Scottish Indy Ref.

There are many who think we are playing towards an end here, but we aren't, there are years of trade negotiations if the UK succeeds in the WA, which will be far more contentious and divisive and if they don't manage to Brexit the internal conflicts will drive even more division. Either way, not very happy days ahead.

Strazdas · 14-03-2019 1:50am

madmaggie wrote: »

I just find the whole Brexit idea very sad. I'm originally from England, and it feels like the UK is somewhere very far away now, instead of being just next door. After all the work in recent years to establish good relations between the two countries, and to see it descend into nastiness and bitterness, what a disappointment.

I saw someone in one of the British papers this week describe Brexit as a front for nationalism and xenophobia - no matter how much its cheerleaders try and deny this.

20silkcut · 14-03-2019 2:15am

2 things :

Geofferey Cox has a voice like something out of a Star Wars movie.
If you close your eyes and listen you’d swear it was Darth Vader. They must be the same person.

I can’t get John bercow shouting “ order order “ out of my head.

I use it while I’m out feeding the cattle.
Shouting awwder awwder at them works a treat.

Peregrinus · 14-03-2019 2:46am

Duane Dibbley wrote: »

I don’t think anyone wants it to happen but it’s a fact when one side is in the EU and One side is removed against there will. (NI voted remain)

It will be for NI to decide what they want to do if there is a no deal brexit.

Or the Republic to decide on EU membership in the event of a no deal.

The latter will not be a difficult decision.

Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

Comments