Brexit discussion thread II

Cookie_Monster

So come April 2018 and a no deal Brexit what happens to big UK companies operating in Ireland, say Tesco for example. A massive part of Irelands consumer food supply and heavily integrated but also very UK & NI integrated supply chains, UK management etc. How do they cope/ survive and still be able to operate effectively in the Irish market?

murphaph

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

So come April 2018 and a no deal Brexit what happens to big UK companies operating in Ireland, say Tesco for example. A massive part of Irelands consumer food supply and heavily integrated but also very UK & NI integrated supply chains, UK management etc. How do they cope/ survive and still be able to operate effectively in the Irish market?

Post hard Brexit the Irish retail scene will look rather different I suspect.

First Up

Cookie_Monster wrote:

So come April 2018 and a no deal Brexit what happens to big UK companies operating in Ireland, say Tesco for example. A massive part of Irelands consumer food supply and heavily integrated but also very UK & NI integrated supply chains, UK management etc. How do they cope/ survive and still be able to operate effectively in the Irish market?

I'm not sure what people here mean by a "deal". Some seem to mean it as a continuation of Single Market conditions, others a Customs Union and some mean a Free Trade Agreement in whole or in part. Some even seem to think it means some guaranteed level of trade (which it most definitely doesn't).

I don't know what we will end up with, although I think we can rule out continued UK membership of the Single Market.

But "no deal" doesn't mean that EU-UK trade will stop. The default situation will be WTO terms.

murphaph

First Up wrote: »

I'm not sure what people here mean by a "deal". Some seem to mean it as a continuation of Single Market conditions, others a Customs Union and some mean a Free Trade Agreement in whole or in part. Some even seem to think it means some guaranteed level of trade (which it most definitely doesn't).

I don't know what we will end up with, although I think we can rule out continued UK membership of the Single Market.

But "no deal" doesn't mean that EU-UK trade will stop. The default situation will be WTO terms.

I expect the administrative effort on the side of UK firms operating in the Irish retail market will in many cases lead to these companies withdrawing from the republic altogether.

First Up

murphaph wrote: »

I expect the administrative effort on the side of UK firms operating in the Irish retail market will in many cases lead to these companies withdrawing from the republic altogether.

Anything that restricts, slows or adds cost to trade will have commercial impact. Its too soon to know what the outcome of that will be. The likes of M&S and Tesco operate in a number of EU countries so they are looking at a very big picture and some big decisions. Their Irish operations are just a part of that.

But there are bigger concerns for UK manufacturers selling into the EU or operating as part of pan-European supply chains.

solodeogloria

Good morning everyone!

flatty wrote: »

Also, the buildings soldeo uses to bolster his argument were all into the construction phase or very advanced planning stage before brexit, at which stage, as a very pessimistic developer pal of mine says, its better to finish them in hope, than abandon them in bankruptcy.

Yes, and no. You can decide to pull the plug on things if you think they won't be viable. An example, which is now under construction is when the Pinnacle was being built on Bishopsgate. The stump of the lift shaft was left unconstructed for years. The project was suspended during the recession. Now they have decided to build 22 Bishopsgate on the same site. If the investors thought that the project wasn't viable they'd cut their losses and move on. Of course they would save themselves the hundreds of millions it costs to build these towers if they believed they wouldn't be filled.

The same with the London HQ for Google under construction at Kings Cross. That is a huge building, and it is obviously being built there because Google see that they have a long term future in the UK. The same is true for Facebook. In terms of the banks in the City, the fact that a lot of them are looking for real estate to solidify their presence in London confirms a confidence that the City is going to remain a financial hub post-Brexit.

My point was basically this, the idea that the UK is going to hell in a handcart is myth. It doesn't bear any reality on the ground from what I can see. Particularly when people say that the City in particular is going to hell in a handcart considering I head to work there every day.

Is the economy subdued? Yes, due to uncertainty, but it is still growing in defiance of all the expectations people had in respect to it.

murphaph wrote: »

Britain stopped punching above its weight at the very latest by the Suez crisis. After that it was a steady decline until the IMF was called in and the UK joined the common market.

The keep calm and carry on attitude won't do anything for the sh1tstorm on Brexit day, should there be no deal granted by the EU. And it will be chaos like you've never known. The integrity of the single market is sacrosanct.

This is the type of comment that betrays where people are coming from. There is a latent Anglophobia on this thread. Britain pulls above its weight in the world in many areas from science to finance. Is Britain the same as it was when it was an empire? No! But will Britain stop being an innovative country after Brexit, I doubt it. Britain is a significant player in the world. It is actually the most significant player in European defence also.

Keep calm and carry on is the right option. Being carried away by the flutterings in the press, or the flutterings of individuals on this thread is the best way of getting a bad deal that isn't in the interests of the UK. That's why I've said that if people like you were negotiating for the UK you'd just have rolled over and given them the crown jewels and the keys to Buckingham Palace.

Sam Russell wrote: »

Sorry, but did you ever read a history book?

The causes for WW II lay with the dreadful end to WW I. The Russian Revolution that lead to Stalin. The terrible demand by the British/American side demanding crippling reparations from Germany that led to hyperinflation and total destitution, giving rise to Hitler.

WW II was the result of the rise of Hitler who demanded the unification of Austria and the the invasion of Sudetenland, which over-ran the Chezk defences and allowed German troops to invade unhindered. Poland was the invasion that triggered Britain to declare war.

Following the end of the hostilities, Russia was in control of much of Germany and a quarter of Berlin. They then started a blockade of Berlin, which was relieved by an airlift to feed and fuel Berlin that lasted just short of a year.

The 'Iron Curtain' was a real threat to Europe and had to be countered by a strong Europe that was economically strong, could feed itself, and could defend itself. The result was agreement between countries that had been enemies just a few years before - the European Coal and Steel Community, that became the EEC and then the EU. The Soviet Union was a real threat to European security until its collapse, and some see Russia under Putin being a present and real threat. I think Russia is part of Europe, and some of the former Warsaw Pact countries are now members of the EU.

The EU has been a major player for peace in Europe. Russia is still a threat, for example Ukraine, Georgia, Crimea, Chechnya are all areas where Russia is active, Currently, they are involved in military games in the Baltic.

Britain is already looking at backing the US in North Korea.

This history, although important in understanding continental Europe has no relevance in understanding modern Britain. Britain's modern history is different to that of mainland Europe. They are intertwined, but not linked.

It has no relevance for the reason I mentioned 2 months ago on this thread:

solodeogloria wrote:

However, I think the political philosophy point is important. It explains the psyche of the leave voter and also the overriding philosophy of the nation at large.

I think the reason why Cameron had to phrase the referendum as a cost benefit analysis is because he knew he had no overriding reason for Britain's continued membership of the EU. Therefore the campaign was fought on "project fear". I think that's a fair point.

Gordon Brown did slightly better at invoking the national memory of World War 2 in a video in the shelled out Coventry Cathedral. But, again, this isn't Britain's reason for joining the EU. It joined much later. It's Germany's reason for being in the EU. That's why it didn't register with the British public.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLgwtfWYdTs

This is a point worth thinking about. Political philosophy matters and it explains a lot.

As for Britain situating itself closer to America both economically and militarily I suspect that is an inevitability. It is an inevitability I'm not concerned about, in fact I think it could be a good move for the UK. Rebuilding ties with the Anglosphere would be hugely beneficial in addition to strengthening ties elsewhere.

It's worth pointing out that Ireland has a different reason for membership to the EU than Germany. It follows the EU as a social good model:

solodeogloria wrote:

Again - although I think there were clear reasons why people voted to leave, I think the problem was that the remain side didn't present positive reasons as to why Britain should have stayed. I think there hasn't been a good national narrative for why Britain should be in the EU.

Ireland's on the other hand is incredibly robust as a small nation that prospered under EU structural assistance and now sees the EU as being a force for good to do the same elsewhere. It's a rock solid reason grounded in history that is almost a moral imperative.

When you understand that the reason that gets Irish people passionate about the EU doesn't apply to the UK in the same way that's when you begin to understand Brexit. Admittedly this passion for the EU isn't something I share as an Irish person. I find it hard to be passionate about. I'm happy Ireland benefited but I'm not convinced any more that the EU is all benevolent. Even though I don't agree it is undisputably Ireland's overriding political philosophy in respect to the EU.

This political philosophy point is important because you wake up to the fact that Britain never fit in to the European project's tapestry philosophically. That's before we think about whether or not membership made sense economically for the UK.

The political philosophy point about where Britain fits into the European Union is one that hasn't be resolved for 40 years. The vast majority of Britain have little to no connection to "the European project". I'll include myself in that definition despite being Irish. I voted to remain for selfish don't rock the status quo reasons. I don't have any passion for "the European project" at all.

murphthesmurf wrote: »

Good to hear someone with common sense for a change. I'm English, moved to Ireland around 6yrs ago, all my family and friends are still there. If you think the majority of people over there are running around crying about the democratic vote you are very much mistaken. People like that fool woman in the superhero outfit yesterday are in a minority. I am from the Birmingham area, everyone I know is glad the vote went the way it did.
The biggest problem the British face is from the weak amongst them. Like the people who are trying to get those reports released, why would you intentionally weaken your own countries stance. There is a generation, even a class of people, who believe that everything should go their way. When it doesn't they have to do their very best to make it fail.
I think a lot of the people on here a hoping that it all goes horribly wrong for the British and it'll serve them right. The 'keep calm and carry on' is still very much part of the British psyche. For such a small country Britain has punched above its weight for hundreds of years. I think it'll be fine, despite the best efforts of the hipsters and millenials.

I agree that Britain has punched above its weight for hundreds of years and I think it will continue to do so.

People on this thread have constructed the narrative that Britain is falling apart, but that's nothing close to the reality on the ground. Yes, the economy is subdued due to uncertainty, but to keep calm and meticulously do the work required rather than jumping at everything that appears in the press is the right way to go about it.

There won't be a u-turn on Brexit as much as people would like it. EU membership wasn't working for the UK, and the UK's membership wasn't working for the EU. Simply put.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

ancapailldorcha

solodeogloria wrote: »

My point was basically this, the idea that the UK is going to hell in a handcart is myth. It doesn't bear any reality on the ground from what I can see. Particularly when people say that the City in particular is going to hell in a handcart considering I head to work there every day.

Of course it's a myth but then it's just a strawman that's trotted out lazily whenever someone asks to see a positive side to Brexit and understandably doesn't get an answer. I really wish you'd stop trotting out this tired, lazy strawman. I know people who voted for Brexit and they see no need for this at all.

solodeogloria wrote: »

This is the type of comment that betrays where people are coming from. There is a latent Anglophobia on this thread. Britain pulls above it's weight in the world in many areas from science to finance. Is Britain the same as it was when it was an empire? No! But will Britain stop being an innovative country after Brexit, I doubt it. Britain is a significant player in the world. It is actually the most significant player in European defence also.

The world was a much different place during the heyday of the British Empire. Isaac Newton once said that he stood on the shoulders of giants. That's more true today than ever. There was a question earlier in this thread regarding posters here living in the UK. I work in Cancer Research in London where a huge proportion of the staff is from the EU (particularly Italy for some reason) and they now have no idea if they'll be allowed to stay. Even if they are, they'll likely be excluded from EU funding. That funding is now gone because the British contribution to the EU coffers has been earmarked for the NHS or some form of handout which will take priority over scientific research.

Innovation today takes place via people in different areas both geographically and speciality working together. The EU facilitated this with standards and free movement along with investment. The British electorate have voted to throw a spanner in the works of this machine for no legitimate reason at all.

solodeogloria wrote: »

Keep calm and carry on is the right option. Being carried away by the flutterings in the press, or the flutterings of individuals on this thread is the best way of getting a bad deal that isn't in the interests of the UK. That's why I've said that if people like you were negotiating for the UK you'd just have rolled over and given them the crown jewels and the keys to Buckingham Palace.

As for Britain situating itself closer to America both economically and militarily I suspect that is an inevitability. It is an inevitability I'm not concerned about, in fact I think it could be a good move for the UK. Rebuilding ties with the Anglosphere would be hugely beneficial in addition to strengthening ties elsewhere.

Have you not seen the latest from the US? Look at the current president's business history. He's made a fortune from screwing people over and now the Atlanticists seem to think now he'll be different. May has no cards to play against him and because the British public voted for Brexit, we can't influence the EU to counter any protectionist impulses of his the likes of which the people of Northern Ireland are in for a good taste of.

I never mentioned this during the referendum but it seems that a certain group in British politics longs to replace Brussels with Washington and this was part of why the likes of Farage and Hannan are lifelong proponents of leaving the EU.

solodeogloria wrote: »

The political philosophy point about where Britain fits into the European Union is one that hasn't be resolved for 40 years. The vast majority of Britain have little to no connection to "the European project". I'll include myself in that definition despite being Irish. I voted to remain for selfish don't rock the status quo reasons. I don't have any passion for "the European project" at all.

Given your sneering comments in the last few weeks about anyone who voted to stay in being rabid Eurofederalists this doesn't surprise me. Most people who voted remain voted because they didn't want to take an unnecessary risk with a recovering economy. Most people couldn't care one whit about the European project, they just don't want to be poorer and less free. From the Ashcroft polls:

solodeogloria wrote: »

There won't be a u-turn on Brexit as much as people would like it. EU membership wasn't working for the UK, and the UK's membership wasn't working for the EU. Simply put.

This mess was barely passed on the basis of lies and deceit which you wholeheartedly supported. Once people see what a post-Brexit UK might look like, you and many others oppose giving them a choice on the final result which is frankly undemocratic. Nobody knew how things would look like once Leave one, well several people did but they were experts so.... I strongly believe that people need a say on the final deal, a view once espoused by Boris Johnson of all people. This is how referenda work in other countries. People get a crystal clear choice between two options and two sets of results. Here we got fantasy promises, lies and scaremongering (much of which from the Tory remainers who ran the Stronger In campaign).

Capt'n Midnight

I love the bit about "decisions about the UK should be taken in the UK"

Back in the '80's the UK had full control of it's financial system.
So when the Bundesbank upped interest rates the UK didn't, well at least not for another five hours.

The nice thing about being in the EU is that having a veto means you can stop the foreigners making decisions you don't like you. Now they are relying on the goodwill of those they snubbed.

Yes they are relying on commercial interests too, but that's never been #1 on the EU agenda.


It's like a bad mafia film, with one character arguing with the Don about how much money he owes, and the Don telling them that this is not just about money , it's about honour, about family. And the message isn't getting through.

Capt'n Midnight

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

So come April 2018 and a no deal Brexit what happens to big UK companies operating in Ireland, say Tesco for example. A massive part of Irelands consumer food supply and heavily integrated but also very UK & NI integrated supply chains, UK management etc. How do they cope/ survive and still be able to operate effectively in the Irish market?

Local stuff will still be local.
Stuff made in the EU will come over in sealed containers.
Stuff from outside the EU like bananas won't be affected.
Lots of "UK" brands are now made in the EU so they won't be affected either.

TBH the costs of Brexit are probably less than the "paddy tax" most of the UK retailers currently slap on stuff here compared to what they charge elsewhere on the Island.

Enzokk

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Local stuff will still be local.
Stuff made in the EU will come over in sealed containers.
Stuff from outside the EU like bananas won't be affected.
Lots of "UK" brands are now made in the EU so they won't be affected either.

TBH the costs of Brexit are probably less than the "paddy tax" most of the UK retailers currently slap on stuff here compared to what they charge elsewhere on the Island.

Those retailers that use products that is produced in the UK will either have to source elsewhere to compete with the ones that are local or import from the EU or they will have to shut shop if the import duties are too high for UK products. If there was no Aldi or Lidl I would be a little more worried about food prices in Ireland post Brexit, as I would not trust the "Irish" stores to not put up prices when it suits them for no reason.

solodeogloria

Good afternoon!

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Of course it's a myth but then it's just a strawman that's trotted out lazily whenever someone asks to see a positive side to Brexit and understandably doesn't get an answer. I really wish you'd stop trotting out this tired, lazy strawman. I know people who voted for Brexit and they see no need for this at all.

Thanks for this. My response is to people like murphaph who continually prophesy that the UK will be completely and utterly wrecked after Brexit, usually with very little basis. There's not many other ways to interpret melodramatic predictions of this nature as to say he's concluding that the UK is going to hell in a handcart.

There are many reasons to counter this.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The world was a much different place during the heyday of the British Empire. Isaac Newton once said that he stood on the shoulders of giants. That's more true today than ever. There was a question earlier in this thread regarding posters here living in the UK. I work in Cancer Research in London where a huge proportion of the staff is from the EU (particularly Italy for some reason) and they now have no idea if they'll be allowed to stay. Even if they are, they'll likely be excluded from EU funding. That funding is now gone because the British contribution to the EU coffers has been earmarked for the NHS or some form of handout which will take priority over scientific research.

Innovation today takes place via people in different areas both geographically and speciality working together. The EU facilitated this with standards and free movement along with investment. The British electorate have voted to throw a spanner in the works of this machine for no legitimate reason at all.

The point about the British empire is a bit silly. I don't support Brexit because of the British Empire. I support Brexit because I believe taking back control will be beneficial to the UK in charting its own course in the world.

I've already been through "EU funding" here:

solodeogloria wrote:

The UK gives about £13 billion to the European Union after the rebate. It receives £4.5bn for CAP and other domestic priorities. Even in the hypothetical scenario that it doesn't get the additional £8 billion (I think it will get a lot of it) the £4.5bn can be ensured. Yes, of course it is a matter for the British government for how it is spent, but the idea that Britain is going to lose out without "EU funds" is a fallacy. It will be able to spend the same money.

On innovation. Britain innovates with a wide range of countries both commercially and in areas such as scientific research. There's no reason to think this would end. Third countries such as Canada collaborate in European science programmes today.

The UK has also struck a science research agreement with the United States in recent months.

The idea that scientific co-operation will end after Brexit is simply unfounded fearmongering.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Given your sneering comments in the last few weeks about anyone who voted to stay in being rabid Eurofederalists this doesn't surprise me. Most people who voted remain voted because they didn't want to take an unnecessary risk with a recovering economy. Most people couldn't care one whit about the European project, they just don't want to be poorer and less free. From the Ashcroft polls:

No, I haven't. Euro-federalism is a term that I use to describe those commitment to further integration within the European Union at the expense of national sovereignty. I concede that not all remainers fall into this category, but the vast majority do.

I was one of those remainers who voted for this reason. I was wrong. I wasn't voting for the status quo. A chart of three points doesn't fully sum up all of the reasons behind Brexit. It is overly simplistic and it only notes the number one reason why people voted to leave or stay.

You're missing the point - if most people "don't care one whit about the European project" that is an issue. If the UK is going to be a part of the European Union, the UK should have a reason to care about it in the same way as Ireland and Germany have a reason to care about it.

Without this reason in place, I think there's no good argument for rejoining the European Union from the standpoint of British political philosophy. If the proponents of European Union membership can't resolve the problem that has ravaged 40 years of British involvement in the European Union, and the problem that led to Brexit (Disconnection from decisions made in Brussels is the manifestation of this) then there's no point in rejoining because Britain will probably leave again.

My point is that people like you need to try much harder if you're going to convince people like me to support rejoining the European Union. The lazy project fear option won't be there next time.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

This mess was barely passed on the basis of lies and deceit which you wholeheartedly supported. Once people see what a post-Brexit UK might look like, you and many others oppose giving them a choice on the final result which is frankly undemocratic. Nobody knew how things would look like once Leave one, well several people did but they were experts so.... I strongly believe that people need a say on the final deal, a view once espoused by Boris Johnson of all people. This is how referenda work in other countries. People get a crystal clear choice between two options and two sets of results. Here we got fantasy promises, lies and scaremongering (much of which from the Tory remainers who ran the Stronger In campaign).

Although I think your accusation is unfair and untrue I'll bite - what lies do I support?

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

steddyeddy

blanch152 wrote: »

Article 1?

http://www.wesleyjohnston.com/users/ireland/today/good_friday/full_text.html

"1. We, the participants in the multi-party negotiations, believe that the agreement we have negotiated offers a truly historic opportunity for a new beginning."


Nope, not Article 1.

Later on it says:

"affirm that whatever choice is freely exercised by a majority of the people of Northern Ireland, the power of the sovereign government with jurisdiction there shall be exercised with rigorous impartiality on behalf of all the people in the diversity of their identities and traditions and shall be founded on the principles of full respect for, and equality of, civil, political, social and cultural rights, of freedom from discrimination for all citizens, and of parity of esteem and of just and equal treatment for the identity, ethos and aspirations of both communities;"

All that says is that the power of the sovereign government with jurisdiction there shall be exercised with rigorous impartiality etc......

That does not mean the sovereign government cannot have a view on the future status of Northern Ireland.

So arranging a 1 billion poind deal with one side of the divide is being rigorously impartial. It would be utter stupidity to suggest so.

"The power of the sovereign government with jurisdiction there shall be exercised with rigorous impartiality etc......"

steddyeddy

blanch152 wrote: »

There are two types of emotional responses to the Brexit issues.

Some of us are sad that the UK has done this to itself, and are somewhat angry that they have placed the economy of this country in peril.

Others of us are in high glee at the disaster the UK has inflicted on itself and are imagining all sorts of united Irelands arising out of the disaster.

I'm now option three. Wishing Brexit is a complete diasaster so the UK will cop on and eventually rejoin.

Fratton Fred

steddyeddy wrote: »

So arranging a 1 billion poind deal with one side of the divide is being rigorously impartial. It would be utter stupidity to suggest so.

"The power of the sovereign government with jurisdiction there shall be exercised with rigorous impartiality etc......"

So the new inter change inBelfast that this money will pay for can only be used by unionists?

Yes, that seems very unfair.

Sam Russell

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Local stuff will still be local.
Stuff made in the EU will come over in sealed containers.
Stuff from outside the EU like bananas won't be affected.
Lots of "UK" brands are now made in the EU so they won't be affected either.

TBH the costs of Brexit are probably less than the "paddy tax" most of the UK retailers currently slap on stuff here compared to what they charge elsewhere on the Island.

Just checking items on M&S UK site with Irish site.

Same item on UK is £75 compared with €99 in Ireland. Now taking account of the VAT difference and the currency (£0.89=€1) the £75 should equate to €86.38, a price difference of €12.7 or price gouge of 12.5%. Now I assume M&S make a satisfactory profit at £75 in the UK but need to make an extra 12.5% in Ireland.

I suspect that the UK large companies will be restructuring their Irish business post-Brexit.

ancapailldorcha

solodeogloria wrote: »

The point about the British empire is a bit silly. I don't support Brexit because of the British Empire. I support Brexit because I believe taking back control will be beneficial to the UK in charting it's own course in the world.

Em... You brought up the British Empire and now you think that doing so is silly?

solodeogloria wrote: »

I've already been through "EU funding" here:

You ignored my point about the NHS. Then there are farming subsidies and propping up the parts of the UK which require it like Northern Ireland, Cornwall, etc...

solodeogloria wrote: »

On innovation. Britain innovates with a wide range of countries both commercially and in areas such as scientific research. There's no reason to think this would end. Third countries such as Canada collaborate in European science programmes today.

The UK has also struck a science research agreement with the United States in recent months.

The idea that scientific co-operation will end after Brexit is simply unfounded fearmongering.

A shame. You've actually substantiated your argument with decent links and then you have to trot out another strawman. This is why I find this situation so frustrating. You rarely defend your points so when you do, you fire off a strawman when you ironically have no need. I suppose you can't help it.

An anecdote but one I feel is relevant; I used to work with someone who specialises in trying to find novel therapies for Tuberculosis. Every unit of funding for TB research in the UK comes from an EU-wide body aimed at curing TB. He didn't get a single penny from the UK.

solodeogloria wrote: »

I concede that not all remainers fall into this category, but the vast majority do.

I eagerly await proof of this assertion.

solodeogloria wrote: »

You're missing the point - if most people "don't care one whit about the European project" that is an issue. If the UK is going to be a part of the European Union, the UK should have a reason to care about it in the same way as Ireland and Germany have a reason to care about it.

It did. It made the country wealthier and a better place to do business in. The problem was that the people who pointed this out were scientists, economists and businesspeople who are of course experts and therefore wrong all of the time.

solodeogloria wrote: »

Without this reason in place, I think there's no good argument for rejoining the European Union from the standpoint of British political philosophy. If the proponents of European Union membership can't resolve the problem that has ravaged 40 years of British involvement in the European Union, and the problem that led to Brexit (Disconnection from decisions made in Brussels is the manifestation of this) then there's no point in rejoining because Britain will probably leave again.

Disconnection? We live in a country with an unelected head of state where the top positions are disproportionately held by graduates of a small number of institutions. Then there's the House of Lords and Whitehall. Finally, look at the fact that the last government won 37% of the vote. Labour won 40% this year but have a minority. If anything, I would argue that the EU is more democratic. The people of Walloon were able to stall a trade deal because it didn't suit them.

solodeogloria wrote: »

My point is that people like you need to try much harder if you're going to convince people like me to support rejoining the European Union. The lazy project fear option won't be there next time.

Why would I try to convince you? You just dismiss and ignore any argument with a strawman. Remember, "The sky won't fall in?" You're behind this to the hilt now it seems regardless of the consequences. Out of curiosity, is there anything that would change your mind about this situation? Anything at all?

solodeogloria wrote: »

Although I think your accusation is unfair and untrue I'll bite - what lies do I support?

When I addressed the issues like the NHS bus, all you could do was shift the goalposts to try to argue that the remain side was worse with vague terms like "Scaremongering". If you oppose giving people a final say on the Brexit deal then you support a Brexit based on the lies and scaremongering around Immigration, regulation, Muslims, etc...

murphaph

solodeogloria wrote: »

This is the type of comment that betrays where people are coming from. There is a latent Anglophobia on this thread. Britain pulls above it's weight in the world in many areas from science to finance. Is Britain the same as it was when it was an empire? No! But will Britain stop being an innovative country after Brexit, I doubt it. Britain is a significant player in the world. It is actually the most significant player in European defence also.

Keep calm and carry on is the right option. Being carried away by the flutterings in the press, or the flutterings of individuals on this thread is the best way of getting a bad deal that isn't in the interests of the UK. That's why I've said that if people like you were negotiating for the UK you'd just have rolled over and given them the crown jewels and the keys to Buckingham Palace.

First of all, the UK is much more than England, so being thoroughly disappointed with the UK means being thoroughly disappointed with anyone who voted Brexit in England, NI, Scotland or Wales! They all counted! It's simply not possible to discuss Brexit and its causes without referencing how Brits see their country in 2017. I'm afraid far too many still think the UK is something really special and deserving. They think their country is inherently better than most, if not all other EU countries. They are simply wrong. The UK is an ok place, better than Ireland in many respects, but it's an average place in the EU. Outside the EU it will be eaten alive by the big economies and trading blocks. There will be no mercy shown. It's not Maggie and Ronny any more. Trump will extract every ounce of flesh he can from a deal, to show the yokels back home how tough he is. The EU itself is distracted with Catalonia and the ongoing migrant crisis. The timing could not be worse for the UK. It's a low priority and falling lower.

By the way, I make no pretence here. I am bitterly disappointed with the course the UK has chosen. No doubt about it.

Keep calm and carry on is simply moronic. It's like putting on your dinner jacket and smoking a pipe as the Titanic sinks, except the ship has enough life boats this time!

If I was in a position of responsibility in the UK I would tell the truth about how damaging Brexit will be! Why not release the reports on the likely effects? It is parliament's decision, not David Davis' decision to make.

FrancieBrady

Fratton Fred wrote: »

So the new inter change inBelfast that this money will pay for can only be used by unionists?

Yes, that seems very unfair.

If you refuse to consider the least damaging and favoured by everyone else option for a border - because your partner may leave an arrangement, then you are being partial to one side.

steddyeddy

Fratton Fred wrote: »

So the new inter change inBelfast that this money will pay for can only be used by unionists?

Yes, that seems very unfair.

Yes Fred. Forming an alliance with a loyalist government based on a money deal is unfair. It makes them biased.

Fratton Fred

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If you refuse to consider the least damaging and favoured by everyone else option for a border - because your partner may leave an arrangement, then you are being partial to one side.

Who says it is least damaging and favored by everyone?

FrancieBrady

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Who says it is least damaging and favored by everyone?

Those who favour it, obviously.

And I am not aware of anyone else against it except the DUP.

steddyeddy

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If you refuse to consider the least damaging and favoured by everyone else option for a border - because your partner may leave an arrangement, then you are being partial to one side.

Yes exactly. The sea border is being blocked by the DUP and May is listening.

steddyeddy

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Who says it is least damaging and favored by everyone?

Who says staying in the single market is least damaging? Anyone but Brexiters.

Fratton Fred

steddyeddy wrote: »

Yes Fred. Forming an alliance with a loyalist government based on a money deal is unfair. It makes them biased.

This is just clutching at straws Eddy, there is no obligation on the British government to be impartial, only to act impartially.

A deal based on advancing money th is to be used in projects agreed by Stormont is acting impartially.

Sinn Fein ****ed up big time with their Martin McGuinness resignation stunt, at the same time as the DUP pulled a bit of a blinder.

That’s what’s really pissing people off, not the Tory/DUP deal.

FrancieBrady

Fratton Fred wrote: »

This is just clutching at straws Eddy, there is no obligation on the British government to be impartial, only to act impartially.

A deal based on advancing money th is to be used in projects agreed by Stormont is acting impartially.

Sinn Fein ****ed up big time with their Martin McGuinness resignation stunt, at the same time as the DUP pulled a bit of a blinder.

That’s what’s really pissing people off, not the Tory/DUP deal.

It is far too early to say that it was a 'blinder'.

May may have tied her hands here. If it comes down to a deal and the sticking point is the Irish border then that 'blinder' becomes a massive hinder for the UK.

And there isn't any 'money' yet.

swampgas

murphaph wrote: »

Keep calm and carry on is simply moronic. It's like putting on your dinner jacket and smoking a pipe as the Titanic sinks, except the ship has enough life boats this time!

This attitude that Brexit must continue, regardless of the damage it might cause, reminds me of the Charge of the Light Brigade. A clearly suicidal attack glorified and put on a pedestal.

From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charge_of_the_Light_Brigade
"The events are best remembered as the subject of Alfred, Lord Tennyson's narrative poem "The Charge of the Light Brigade" (1854), published just six weeks after the event. Its lines emphasise the valour of the cavalry in bravely carrying out their orders, regardless of the obvious outcome."

Enzokk

Fratton Fred wrote: »

This is just clutching at straws Eddy, there is no obligation on the British government to be impartial, only to act impartially.

A deal based on advancing money th is to be used in projects agreed by Stormont is acting impartially.

Sinn Fein ****ed up big time with their Martin McGuinness resignation stunt, at the same time as the DUP pulled a bit of a blinder.

That’s what’s really pissing people off, not the Tory/DUP deal.

How do you act impartially? Surely you are either impartial or not. Its a bit like saying you only have to act innocently but you don't have to be. Surely if you aren't breaking rules you wouldn't need to act. So are you saying the Conservatives should be allowed to be partial to the DUP as long as they act impartial?

steddyeddy

Fratton Fred wrote: »

This is just clutching at straws Eddy, there is no obligation on the British government to be impartial, only to act impartially.

A deal based on advancing money th is to be used in projects agreed by Stormont is acting impartially.

Sinn Fein ****ed up big time with their Martin McGuinness resignation stunt, at the same time as the DUP pulled a bit of a blinder.

That’s what’s really pissing people off, not the Tory/DUP deal.

Hmm not quite Fred.

Here's James O'Brien question Theresa Villiers, ex secretary of state for the North and deluded Brexit supporter how the Tories can be impartial.

She couldn't answer.

https://youtu.be/7PlNoqVFb0U

FrancieBrady

steddyeddy wrote: »

Hmm not quite Fred.

Here's James O'Brien question Theresa Villiers, ex secretary of state for the North and deluded Brexit supporter how the Tories can be impartial.

She couldn't answer.

https://youtu.be/7PlNoqVFb0U

Theresa discovering the meaning of 'indefensible'. O'Brien saying it as it is, a bung for votes.

A Little Pony

Calina wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

They know it's going to be a no deal but still trying to come across as if a deal is possible when we know the EU doesn't want a deal.

The EU wants an orderly exit. The UK appears to think an exit arrangement and a trade deal are the same thing.

This is why there will be no deal

Good. Get out ASAP is fine by me. No issue whatsoever with that.

A Little Pony

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

British nationalism is certainly not some sort of minority in the UK as I described it, Brexiteers exist all over the UK.

Unlike the six counties, no country in Britain has in place a guarantee that they will have automatic membership of the EU if they vote to end UK jurisdiction.

Your British nationalism blinded you to the risk Brexit poses to the six counties' constitutional position. You'd better hope the north thrives post-Brexit or you could well be living in a united Ireland down the line.

I just don't get why unionists aren't absolutely furious with the DUP for pushing for Brexit which may well unravel their place within their beloved (if unrequited) union with Britain.

I love England and the history of England, If I could I would seek out English citizenship.

steddyeddy

A Little Pony wrote: »

I love England and the history of England, If I could I would seek out English citizenship.

As opposed to British?

First Up

A Little Pony wrote:

I love England and the history of England, If I could I would seek out English citizenship.

Maybe you could swop with one of the British folk getting Irish citizenship.

steddyeddy

Well at least priorities are in order. Nice 100 million yacht for the queen as the economy dive bombs.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/voices/liam-fox-royal-yacht-brexit-austerity-royal-family-the-queen-expensive-a8000386.html%3Famp

demfad

Acording to an attendee at Leo Varadker's address to Derry Chamber of Commerce yesterday evening, NI has been offered a one time deal by the EU, but they must ask for it. Exceptions will be on offer to NI....

steddyeddy

demfad wrote: »

Acording to an attendee at Leo Varadker's address to Derry Chamber of Commerce yesterday evening, NI has been offered a one time deal by the EU, but they must ask for it. Exceptions will be on offer to NI....

That's a good thing.

Capt'n Midnight

Enzokk wrote: »

Those retailers that use products that is produced in the UK will either have to source elsewhere to compete with the ones that are local or import from the EU or they will have to shut shop if the import duties are too high for UK products. If there was no Aldi or Lidl I would be a little more worried about food prices in Ireland post Brexit, as I would not trust the "Irish" stores to not put up prices when it suits them for no reason.

I forgot to mention the fall in sterling means that UK goods should be cheaper. So overall UK most imports shouldn't be more expensive.

Tariffs may affect some things, though, but even it just means that some people will buy different brands or pay a premium for the UK ones.

murphaph

demfad wrote: »

Acording to an attendee at Leo Varadker's address to Derry Chamber of Commerce yesterday evening, NI has been offered a one time deal by the EU, but they must ask for it. Exceptions will be on offer to NI....

Now would be just about the right time for all parties to cut the crap and get back to Stormont if this is true. This needs debating in public. I strongly suspect the UK government will allow NI just about any special status within the single market, if they can consider that issue dealt with. It's the hardest issue to deal with in reality but the least politically sensitive in GB.

I personally don't see this going anywhere though. There's no way the DUP will sanction it. I don't even believe it is in NI's economic interest, though depending on the ratios of trade and their respective tariffs, i might be, just about (eg if NI exports little food to GB but lots of high value manufactured goods with lower tariffs and the opposite to the EU)

If the EU has offered such, it's certainly "bold and imaginative"

murphaph

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

I forgot to mention the fall in sterling means that UK goods should be cheaper. So overall UK most imports shouldn't be more expensive.

Tariffs may affect some things, though, but even it just means that some people will buy different brands or pay a premium for the UK ones.

This isn't a simple thing to calculate. Say you buy a frozen lasagne from a UK manufacturer. Sure, Sterling is weak but the UK manufacturer had to import the lasagne sheets and tomatoes etc. from the EU, paying hefty tariffs in the process. The supply chains are so integrated these days I suspect a lot of products would simply stop being manufactured or manufactured elsewhere.

Leaving the SM and CU is just completely bonkers on every level.

murphaph

A Little Pony wrote: »

Good. Get out ASAP is fine by me. No issue whatsoever with that.

Even if a family member couldn't get radiotherapy because the UK dropped out of Euratom overnight and that isotope they need has just run out? You behave as if walking out the door and slamming it behind you has no consequences or only minor ones. The consequences of walking out tomorrow would be catastrophic for the UK and damaging for the EU, especially Ireland, but absolutely catastrophic for the UK.

The UK could not even import food unless it dropped ALL tariffs on imports from ALL countries as there are no UK quotas deposited at the WTO. British farming would be destroyed in a few weeks by cheap imports.

flutered

murphaph wrote: »

Now would be just about the right time for all parties to cut the crap and get back to Stormont if this is true. This needs debating in public. I strongly suspect the UK government will allow NI just about any special status within the single market, if they can consider that issue dealt with. It's the hardest issue to deal with in reality but the least politically sensitive in GB.

I personally don't see this going anywhere though. There's no way the DUP will sanction it. I don't even believe it is in NI's economic interest, though depending on the ratios of trade and their respective tariffs, i might be, just about (eg if NI exports little food to GB but lots of high value manufactured goods with lower tariffs and the opposite to the EU)

If the EU has offered such, it's certainly "bold and imaginative"

the dup has today rejected powersharing, according to breakingnews.ie

flutered

murphaph wrote: »

Even if a family member couldn't get radiotherapy because the UK dropped out of Euratom overnight and that isotope they need has just run out? You behave as if walking out the door and slamming it behind you has no consequences or only minor ones. The consequences of walking out tomorrow would be catastrophic for the UK and damaging for the EU, especially Ireland, but absolutely catastrophic for the UK.

The UK could not even import food unless it dropped ALL tariffs on imports from ALL countries as there are no UK quotas deposited at the WTO. British farming would be destroyed in a few weeks by cheap imports.

there are none so blind as theose that cannot see

FrancieBrady

murphaph wrote: »

Even if a family member couldn't get radiotherapy because the UK dropped out of Euratom overnight and that isotope they need has just run out? You behave as if walking out the door and slamming it behind you has no consequences or only minor ones. The consequences of walking out tomorrow would be catastrophic for the UK and damaging for the EU, especially Ireland, but absolutely catastrophic for the UK.

The UK could not even import food unless it dropped ALL tariffs on imports from ALL countries as there are no UK quotas deposited at the WTO. British farming would be destroyed in a few weeks by cheap imports.

As far as I can see and understand everything is being sacrificed for a feeling of control. Because that is all it is - a feeling.

carrickbally

The UK proposal that it join NAFTA as is highlighted in the Daily Telegraph ignores the risks involved.

At present Trump has declared an aircraft factory in Canada subject to high levels of tariffs even though both countries are in NAFTA.

carrickbally

The basic facts of Brexit get lost in the details.

The fact is that the EU is a union of nearly thirty democracies each of which signed a treaty to cooperate in matters of mutual interest.

That level of cooperation between independent countries, which includes vetoes in matters of vital national interest, is unique in the world.

It better than the past when imperial governments and totalitarian dictators reduced Europe to ruins in rows over which of them would be top dog.

We should all remind ourselves how much better it is being in the EU than it was when this country was governed as a colony from London.

The same power base in London has currently declared economic war on us through Brexit.

We should, therefore, remind the rest of the EU that we will use our treaty approved veto in relation to this if we have to.

flutered

Fratton Fred wrote: »

So the new inter change inBelfast that this money will pay for can only be used by unionists?

Yes, that seems very unfair.

this money has not been recieved as yet, or has there been a date set for its arrival

Enzokk

flutered wrote: »

the dup has today rejected powersharing, according to breakingnews.ie

Seems like talks have stalled.

DUP rules out swift return of powersharing Executive

So there is nobody talking for the people of Northern Ireland at the moment. The party that has the voice of the government is not the party that has the power, the DUP. Is is any wonder the DUP doesn't want a return to power sharing in Belfast? They can delay and the voice falls to the UK parliament, where they have the Conservatives by the balls. What incentive do they have to compromise?

This is why the deal with the DUP is bonkers. There is zero incentive to share power in Belfast when they can control London. And people still talks about the UK government remaining impartial? If they have to have direct rule in Belfast how would that work? The DUP is basically in power. The UK government will have direct rule from London where they rely in the DUP. Do I have that right?

FrancieBrady

Enzokk wrote: »

So there is nobody talking for the people of Northern Ireland at the moment.

I think that is a bit of misnomer on the issue of Brexit to be honest.

The views of each party on Brexit are well known.

Fratton Fred

flutered wrote: »

this money has not been recieved as yet, or has there been a date set for its arrival

There’s no Stormont to spend it

Capt'n Midnight

murphaph wrote: »

This isn't a simple thing to calculate. Say you buy a frozen lasagne from a UK manufacturer. Sure, Sterling is weak but the UK manufacturer had to import the lasagne sheets and tomatoes etc. from the EU, paying hefty tariffs in the process. The supply chains are so integrated these days I suspect a lot of products would simply stop being manufactured or manufactured elsewhere.

Leaving the SM and CU is just completely bonkers on every level.

Like I said , choose a different (EU) brand or pay a premium for the UK one.

What you describe is a low tech product that could be made anywhere. All of the large multinationals have alternative factorys.

All of the supermarkets would switch supplier in a heartbeat if they could get the same quality for their own-brands at a cheaper price.

This is more of a problem for the UK factory than their multi-national owners or the supermarkets.


Of course expect some price gouging using Brexit as an excuse to squeeze a bit of extra profit from confusion, just like when VAT rates change or when the Euro came in.