Brexit discussion thread III

flutered

may is to adress the house of commons on brexit on monday according to the speaker, will she again fudge, or will it be a copy of her speech on friday, which again could be a fudge

Capt'n Midnight

trellheim wrote: »

the UK has no written constitution, unless we are counting Magna Carta

Parliament is sovereign so in reality Magna Carta is just advisory.

Nody

flutered wrote: »

may is to adress the house of commons on brexit on monday according to the speaker, will she again fudge, or will it be a copy of her speech on friday, which again could be a fudge

It's May; fudge with her three basket solution which EU rejected already is what I expect to hear. Add in a bit about how NI will never leave the union, EU needs UK more than UK needs EU and how there are a great set of TDs ready to be signed out there and you got the gist of the speech I'd guess. I hope she proves me wrong but so far at every turn she's failed to impress in actually delivering details on how things will be done that have even a snow ball chance in hell of being implemented.

MrPudding

Skedaddle wrote: »

I'm sure the hardliners will go absolutely crazy though. Hopefully this is the start of a return to sanity in Britain.

I fear it won't be. it will be character assassination now. As pointed out above, JRM has already started it. It will be interesting to see the headlines tomorrow. As LeinsterDub says, Major Traitor will be the headline on at least one of the pro-brexit rags.

For their to be a return to sanity there has to be a path back. Usually, that path would be rationality, but as rationality is playing no part in the brexit TM is trying to deliver, speeches like this, however good (and i think it was excellent) will not even register with those pushing brexit.

I think this will only get better by getting considerably worse first. The government needs to collapse, then we might get some sanity back.

MrP

Professor Moriarty

flutered wrote: »

may is to adress the house of commons on brexit on monday according to the speaker, will she again fudge, or will it be a copy of her speech on friday, which again could be a fudge

It will be 100% fudge. No ifs, buts or maybes.

Sam Russell

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

It will be 100% fudge. No ifs, buts or maybes.

I think Major's speech is a case of the fudge hitting the fan.

We shall see.

[He was always considered as '[I]the only man to run away from the circus to become an accountant[/I]!']

Professor Moriarty

Sam Russell wrote: »

I think Major's speech is a case of the fudge hitting the fan.

We shall see.

[He was always considered as '[I]the only man to run away from the circus to become an accountant[/I]!']

I always liked Major. Far better politician than he was given credit for. Of course, his intervention today may well be a principled intervention but it may also be some payback directed at the Eurosceptic "bastards".

As an aside, I remember him saying that, throughout his tenure as PM, he judged people based on how they treated the waiter.

CrabRevolution

flutered wrote: »

may is to adress the house of commons on brexit on monday according to the speaker, will she again fudge, or will it be a copy of her speech on friday, which again could be a fudge

It'll be the same old same old: "We're only reasonably asking the EU to tear up its constitutional foundations and give up its very reason for existing, in order to accommodate us and our arbitrary red lines"

CelticRambler

Leroy42 wrote: »

In addition, whilst having a border with NI will effect our trade, having to go through custom checks to sell to UK will effectively remove them from their biggest market. They would be mad to agree to that.

Not a problem! I heard someone say only this morning that the technology already exists - it'll be just like crossing from Camden to Westminster! :pac:

In the light of today's EU publication (and the nonsensical rebuttals by the Tories & Co.) I remain of the opinion that the outcome will be Special Status for NI & whatever suits the remainder of the UK. Apart from the considerations of cross-border trade, there is also the matter of a population of Irish citizens by right of birth, who until now have had their human rights defended by the ECHR, being denied access to platform even though they have not moved home.

I am, however, surprised that Gibraltar is (again) being ignored - because whateve works for NI is going to work equally well for the Rock.

trellheim

Dont forget ; the spaniards have a veto on the treaty with regard to Gibraltar's status. ( Surprised same regarding Akrotiri )

LeinsterDub

CelticRambler wrote: »

I am, however, surprised that Gibraltar is (again) being ignored - because whateve works for NI is going to work equally well for the Rock.

The Spanish may be happy to have punitive border checks with the Rock a modern day siege if you will.

Nody

CelticRambler wrote: »

I am, however, surprised that Gibraltar is (again) being ignored - because whateve works for NI is going to work equally well for the Rock.

I think there's a big fatal flaw in your thought process here; you assume Spain wants Gibraltar to get a special deal like NI. If anything Spain will happily sit back and ensure nothing special is done for Gibraltar to force the reunion to happen instead simply due to economics. Gibraltar's special status in EU was a core pillar for their prosperity after all; now with UK crashing out all Spain has to do is wait and then offer Gibraltar to become a part of Spain with the same deal instead. It's already called out in the deal that Spain has veto powers for anything specific for Gibraltar and they have already been dicks about it before with passport controls etc. The only thing for Spain is of course the benefits of the people working in Gibraltar but living in Spain but honestly I can't see that add up to enough compared to a chance to add Gibraltar back into Spain (politically and nationally that would be a way bigger win for the ruling party at the time).

Water John

I see the Foreign Ministry is being asked in Parliament, (allowed by Bercow, another traitor to the Brexit cause) to answer questions about the letter to TM on the NI/ROI border. Johnson, being the coward, that he is, is sending an underling.

Indestructable

Did anyone hear JRM on Sky News just now? God, he is infuriating. He reckons the Irish economy will be crippled if a border is installed and Irish agriculture will be ruined if tariffs are introduced.

murphaph

Indestructable wrote: »

Did anyone hear JRM on Sky News just now? God, he is infuriating. He reckons the Irish economy will be crippled if a border is installed and Irish agriculture will be ruined if tariffs are introduced.

That's our problem. I really despise that imbecile.

PeadarCo

Indestructable wrote:

Did anyone hear JRM on Sky News just now? God, he is infuriating. He reckons the Irish economy will be crippled if a border is installed and Irish agriculture will be ruined if tariffs are introduced.

Ireland will be hurt by a hard border. But what Brexiters don't understand is that if we have to choose between a hard border or leaving the EU/break up of EU. We will opt for a hard border. The costs of which is lower than the alternative. Its the same for every other member state. The costs of undermining the fundamentals of the EU/giving the UK what it wants are far higher the costs to each state of the UK leaving the EU.

Skedaddle

To be quite honest, it's upper class types like that that make me feel very glad that we declared a republic.

For all of its faults, stumbles and teething problems, at least we have some kind of an aspiration for a modern society and aren't harking after some bygone era of stratified social classes and imperial nonsense.

Imagine if Ireland were still part of the UK! We'd still be listening to a load of pompous drivel from the Earl of Athlone or whatever.

Professor Moriarty

murphaph wrote: »

That's our problem. I really despise that imbecile.

Never forget that the Tory party's official name is the Conservative and Unionist Party. Briseann an dúchas trí shúile an chait.

Tigerandahalf

What is likely to happen if there is no agreement?
It seems some treaty/constitution element is going to be broken no matter what the outcome.

I can see May's point that NI is part of the UK and can't be separated or it will breach its constitution.

Then if there is a hard border the Good Friday agreement is breached.

It seems the latter is just a treaty/agreement though and wouldn't take precedence over the UK constitution or is that wrong?

Could there be a legal challenge launched if things don't end in some agreement?

Sam Russell

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

What is likely to happen if there is no agreement?
It seems some treaty/constitution element is going to be broken no matter what the outcome.

I can see May's point that NI is part of the UK and can't be separated or it will breach its constitution.

Then if there is a hard border the Good Friday agreement is breached.

It seems the latter is just a treaty/agreement though and wouldn't take precedence over the UK constitution or is that wrong?

Could there be a legal challenge launched if things don't end in some agreement?

Parliament in the UK is sovereign so no constitution would be broken if an act of parliament is duly passed. That was the problem raised by Gina Millar - no parliament vote was to be taken to allow Brexit but one was needed, but the Supreme Court ruled she was right and the Gov was wrong. Why is this different?

On the other hand, the GFA is an international agreement, registered with the UN and cannot be altered by a vote of parliament (on its own) and would require the EU and the Irish Gov to agree - which they would not.

Legal challenges can be made by anyone - the measure is whether they succeed.

Angry bird

Close attention will be paid by other countries who the hard brexiters are hoping to get fantastic deals with as to what their word is worth. Of course they'll continue on as they have done to date of navel gazing, infighting and blaming the EU.

murphaph

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

What is likely to happen if there is no agreement?
It seems some treaty/constitution element is going to be broken no matter what the outcome.

I can see May's point that NI is part of the UK and can't be separated or it will breach its constitution.

Then if there is a hard border the Good Friday agreement is breached.

It seems the latter is just a treaty/agreement though and wouldn't take precedence over the UK constitution or is that wrong?

Could there be a legal challenge launched if things don't end in some agreement?

There won't need to be a legal challenge. The UK getting no FTA from the EU for shafting an EU member state will be encouragement enough for the UK. But they may well need to taste the reality before they believe they aren't something special.

trellheim

From Hansard today ; slightly cut down.

Jeremy Corbyn
From a Government who have cut the nurse training bursary, who do not seem to understand that it takes eight years to train a doctor, and are completely oblivious, apparently, to the fact that there are 100,000 vacancies in the NHS now—[Interruption.] I suggest that some Members get a life and go and visit a hospital to see just how hard those people work in order to cover for the vacancies that are there. Surely we need to give immediate, real assurance to EU nationals that they have a future in this country.

Just three months ago, the Foreign Secretary told the House with regard to Northern Ireland:

“There can be no hard border. That would be unthinkable”.—[Official Report, 21 November 2017; Vol. 631, c. 848.]

That is what he said. Yet in a leaked letter to the Prime Minister, he wrote:

“even if a hard border is reintroduced, we would expect to see 95% + of goods pass”.

[Interruption.] He is shouting at the moment—he is obviously mixing up the border with the Camden-Islington border. Can the Prime Minister confirm that she will not renege on commitments made in phase 1 to keep an open border in Ireland?

https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2018-02-28/debates/1F0CE924-51C5-4698-B16B-0CD495082B12/Engagements

Ian Blackford
Of course, the emphasis was on “equal”. We are faced with a power grab by Westminster, and it is no surprise that the Scottish and Welsh Governments are putting forward continuity Bills to stop it. The Foreign Secretary’s leaked letter on the Irish border shows that he cannot get to grips with one of the most fundamental issues of Brexit. The Foreign Secretary compared crossing the Irish border to going between Camden and Westminster. Frankly, you could not make this stuff up, Mr Speaker. The UK Government are prepared to put in jeopardy the Good Friday agreement. Does the Prime Minister agree with her bumbling Foreign Secretary, who is making the United Kingdom a laughing stock?

Note the shift from GFA to Belfast Agreement

The Prime Minister
First, this Government are absolutely committed to the Belfast agreement. Indeed, we made sure that that commitment was included in the joint report that we agreed with the European Union last December, so that commitment to the Belfast agreement stands. We are committed to the Belfast agreement and to the institutions under that agreement.

David Simpson (Upper Bann) (DUP)
Q2. I ask the Prime Minister to reinforce her earlier comments, given the imminent publication by the EU of the draft legal text arising from December’s joint report. Will she confirm that she will never agree to any trade borders between Northern Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom? [904064]

The Prime Minister
We continue to stand behind all the commitments that we made in December, and my negotiating team will work with the Commission to agree how they should be translated into legal form in the withdrawal agreement. The hon. Gentleman is right: the draft legal text that the Commission has published would, if implemented, undermine the UK common market and threaten the constitutional integrity of the UK by creating a customs and regulatory border down the Irish sea, and no UK Prime Minister could ever agree to it. I will be making it crystal clear to President Juncker and others that we will never do so. We are committed to ensuring that we see no hard border between Northern Ireland and Ireland, but the December text also made it clear that there should continue to be trade between Northern Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom, as there is today.

joeysoap

Ok, can the Eu not inform the UK that we’re back to phase 1 and we cannot proceed to phase two until we finalise phase 1?

An Claidheamh

Indestructable wrote: »

Did anyone hear JRM on Sky News just now? God, he is infuriating. He reckons the Irish economy will be crippled if a border is installed and Irish agriculture will be ruined if tariffs are introduced.

Of course it's really the North which will be crippled if the border returns, won't make much difference to the Irish economy.

Also, it's the choice of the British to put up tariffs in which case they won't be able to feed themselves.

.......but these are thick Brexiteers we're talking about.... sigh

Nate--IRL--

joeysoap wrote: »

Ok, can the Eu not inform the UK that we’re back to phase 1 and we cannot proceed to phase two until we finalise phase 1?

That's exactly what this draft document is for IMO.

Nate

J Mysterio

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

May says no UK Governmnet can agree to this, but this is just the agreement from Phase 1 properly written down.

If she wants to have no internal UK border, then the whole UK stays in the SM with NI. Simples.

I know it's a bit of a... weird comparison... But TM saying that in Westminster today reminded me of the pressure of the treaty negotations of 1921. Of course the context is a different but there are some almost eerie parallels.

This has almost come full circle in a weird way.

I'm almost waiting for the people of NI to demand a vote and that to seal the deal.

Tigerandahalf

If any agreement is made I presume it would have to be put before the people or inevitably an election so that the government would have a mandate to proceed.

If nothing is agreed before the cutoff date would the EU be forced to then create a border in NI, especially if the UK dragged its heels on the matter. Effectively the EU would have to ensure checks on goods entering its union?

pixelburp

An Claidheamh wrote: »

Of course it's really the North which will be crippled if the border returns, won't make much difference to the Irish economy.

Also, it's the choice of the British to put up tariffs in which case they won't be able to feed themselves.

.......but these are thick Brexiteers we're talking about.... sigh

I'd have said that a hard border would very definitely affect the Republic, specifically the border counties whose economy relies around the notion of a porous, 'soft' threshold. Given whole roads and land criscross the 2 countries it's hard to see how a hard brexit wouldn't affect the rural north west & east to an adverse degree.

Sam Russell

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

If any agreement is made I presume it would have to be put before the people or inevitably an election so that the government would have a mandate to proceed.

If nothing is agreed before the cutoff date would the EU be forced to then create a border in NI, especially if the UK dragged its heels on the matter. Effectively the EU would have to ensure checks on goods entering its union?

They would put a border between the UK and the EU in Calais, Rotterdam, Zeebrugge, etc. as well as the Irish border and its 300 crossing points. As there is next to no infrastructure in any of these places that is designed to cope with the UK going cold turkey, then queues of goods will be inevitable from day one of Brexit. It will be economic war of no small proportion, and hopefully unthinkable.

The Irish border will be the least of their worries.

Leroy42

pixelburp wrote: »

I'd have said that a hard border would very definitely affect the Republic, specifically the border counties whose economy relies around the notion of a porous, 'soft' threshold. Given whole roads and land criscross the 2 countries it's hard to see how a hard brexit wouldn't affect the rural north west & east to an adverse degree.

Nobody is arguing that it wouldn't, it is just that there is nothing we can do about it. This is all, 100%, down to the UK. For the likes of JRM to come claiming that Leo should be worried is total hypocrisy. He isn't the slightest bit worried about the UK and he certainly does not give a hoot about NI.

The issue is not whether ROI want a hard border, we don't, as we know that it will impact us economically not just with trade to NI but also the UK. The real issue is that we are being forced, through the actions of the UK, to decide which of the UK or EU do we go with.

And it really is a no brainer. Just as they feel that they want to take back control, they are asking us to join them in a 2 country union of which they are the dominate player and already shown themselves to be totally unconcerned about what effects us.

Nody

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

If any agreement is made I presume it would have to be put before the people or inevitably an election so that the government would have a mandate to proceed.

If nothing is agreed before the cutoff date would the EU be forced to then create a border in NI, especially if the UK dragged its heels on the matter. Effectively the EU would have to ensure checks on goods entering its union?

And UK would on what enters UK as well even if they appear to be to stupid to realize it. WTO works under a clause called "Most Favoured Nation" which basically means all WTO members have to give the best deal they give to anyone to all other countries (bar trade deals as they work as an exception on specific products/rules etc.). Hence if UK lets anything come in via it's NI border because "EU is safe" then any other WTO country in the world has the right to demand the same rules to apply to them as well; i.e. no customs checks, no vet checks no nothing exactly like they allow over the NI border. Hence UK will need to patrol and check the NI border as well even if they keep claiming that "they will not man no NI border".

Professor Moriarty

Sam Russell wrote: »

They would put a border between the UK and the EU in Calais, Rotterdam, Zeebrugge, etc. as well as the Irish border and its 300 crossing points. As there is next to no infrastructure in any of these places that is designed to cope with the UK going cold turkey, then queues of goods will be inevitable from day one of Brexit. It will be economic war of no small proportion, and hopefully unthinkable.

The Irish border will be the least of their worries.

They could build a wall. A big, beautiful wall and get Ireland to pay for it. Stranger things have been suggested.

Sam Russell

Sam Russell wrote: »

Parliament in the UK is sovereign so no constitution would be broken if an act of parliament is duly passed. That was the problem raised by Gina Millar - no parliament vote was to be taken to allow Brexit but one was needed, but the Supreme Court ruled she was right and the Gov was wrong. Why is this different?

On the other hand, the GFA is an international agreement, registered with the UN and cannot be altered by a vote of parliament (on its own) and would require the EU and the Irish Gov to agree - which they would not.

Legal challenges can be made by anyone - the measure is whether they succeed.

Which part of the GFA is being broken?

Tigerandahalf

Nody wrote: »

Hence UK will need to patrol and check the NI border as well even if they keep claiming that "they will not man no NI border".

So if no deal we would have to wait and see who would force the border checks issue first.

Is there any possibility that ROI would accept some border checks at its own ports/airports in order to avoid a NI border yet have checks to stop goods entering/leaving the UK (via NI)?

Leroy42

Aegir wrote: »

Which part of the GFA is being broken?

No you are right, it all just a ruse by the EU.

Not sure why May would have signed up to keeping NI border free, she must just love NI/ROI border.

This is a real issue. Both the UK and the EU acknowledge it as such.

Leroy42

Leroy42 wrote: »

No you are right, it all just a ruse by the EU.

Not sure why May would have signed up to keeping NI border free, she must just love NI/ROI border.

This is a real issue. Both the UK and the EU acknowledge it as such.

The UK and EU acknowledge that they don’t want a hard border and for good reason, but this talk about breaking an international held st the UN blah blah is nonsense, is it not?

CelticRambler

Indestructable wrote: »

Did anyone hear JRM on Sky News just now? God, he is infuriating. He reckons the Irish economy will be crippled if a border is installed and Irish agriculture will be ruined if tariffs are introduced.

I heard him. What struck me most was him trotting out that line again "we're not going to put up border controls; if the EU want to do it, it's their business; don't blame us for any trouble that causes."

He really doesn't understand the UK's obligations under WTO rules, does he?

If anything, the Brexiteer approach to the UK-Ireland border highlights their lack of understanding of where the UK is in the world these days. Ably assisted by their DUP bedfellows, they're focusing on Ireland as the problem country that's always been a thorn in England's side, rather than an example of just some of the UK versus the Outside World complications that they're going to have to face in 13 months' time.

CelticRambler

CelticRambler wrote: »

I heard him. What struck me most was him trotting out that line again "we're not going to put up border controls; if the EU want to do it, it's their business; don't blame us for any trouble that causes."

He really doesn't understand the UK's obligations under WTO rules, does he?

If anything, the Brexiteer approach to the UK-Ireland border highlights their lack of understanding of where the UK is in the world these days. Ably assisted by their DUP bedfellows, they're focusing on Ireland as the problem country that's always been a thorn in England's side, rather than an example of just some of the UK versus the Outside World complications that they're going to have to face in 13 months' time.

Are they though, or is it a convenient noise under which other contentious issues can be hidden?

Leroy42

Aegir wrote: »

The UK and EU acknowledge that they don’t want a hard border and for good reason, but this talk about breaking an international held st the UN blah blah is nonsense, is it not?

So you think the UK is happy to have a hard border with the EU in every other part of the kingdom, but for no reason they have a soft spot for NI?

Because that is what your question is asking us to believe is your position.

FrancieBrady

Aegir wrote: »

The UK and EU acknowledge that they don’t want a hard border and for good reason, but this talk about breaking an international held st the UN blah blah is nonsense, is it not?

Have a read. It is scary what could happen.

http://eamonnmallie.com/2017/12/brexit-v-good-friday-agreement-duncan-morrow/

listermint

Aegir wrote: »

Which part of the GFA is being broken?

The part where the Tories interfered with being non partisan by going into government with the most divisive political party of the last few decades.

Nody

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

So if no deal we would have to wait and see who would force the border checks issue first.

Ireland would enforce it directly; they have already drafted the plans for how to start. UK being UK will take a while to catch up to the point but after they lose a few billions in tax revenues I'm sure they will realize the benefits of it as well.

Is there any possibility that ROI would accept some border checks at its own ports/airports in order to avoid a NI border yet have checks to stop goods entering/leaving the UK (via NI)?

Why in the seven hells would Ireland do that? 86% of the goods go outside UK so why inflict that on 86% of the volume instead of the 14%? This is before the issues of quality, sourcing of materials etc. comes into play which would drive up the controls on everything leaving Ireland as if it was a third party country because Ireland has no control on what's coming in through the NI border.

Leroy42

Leroy42 wrote: »

So you think the UK is happy to have a hard border with the EU in every other part of the kingdom, but for no reason they have a soft spot for NI?

Because that is what your question is asking us to believe is your position.

No, I was questioning what part of the GFA was being broken by having a harder border between NI and the RoI.

listermint

listermint wrote: »

The part where the Tories interfered with being non partisan by going into government with the most divisive political party of the last few decades.

Where is the word partisan in the GFA?

Tropheus

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/925453/Brexit-news-latest-update-UK-EU-Norther-Ireland-border-European-Union-video

'We could RUIN them' Jacob Rees-Mogg issues STERN warning to Ireland over EU border threat?

Who's "we". His friends Gussie Fink-Nottle and Tuppy Glossop?

ancapailldorcha

Skedaddle wrote: »

For all of its faults, stumbles and teething problems, at least we have some kind of an aspiration for a modern society and aren't harking after some bygone era of stratified social classes and imperial nonsense.

I think that this is unduly harsh for two reasons.

Firstly, 48% chose to remain. Had EU citizens been allowed a vote, they almost certainly would have voted remain by a sizeable majority.

Secondly, look at how the Leave vote was geographically distributed. Most cities voted remain, including London. It was places like Wales which have been neglected by Westminster and, sometimes their own assemblies which voted remain. I have no idea how I would convince a waiter at a Wetherspoons in Stoke-on-Trent on a zero-hours contract to vote remain. I did my research and came to the conclusion that voting remain was the way to go. But then, I work in scientific research which is heavily reliant on the EU for both labour and funding. The Conservatives have no interest in making these communities any better. They've eschewed this for ideologically-driven austerity measures. Sure, losses in tax revenue will hit these areas but it's hard to see things getting better for them if Remain had won the 52% prize.

And yes, your imperialists and gung-ho up-the-empire types are there but you're talking about Etonians from rural Surrey and Sussex, altogether highly unrepresentative segments of the population. I find it highly unlikely that leavers in Sunderland thought they were going to resurrect the Empire by voting Leave. Moreso, they probably saw a chance to stick it to the man. I'm not saying that this was the right thing for them to do but decades of laissex-faire capitalism have been a boon to London and the southeast while these areas have largely suffered though to be fair, some regeneration has taken place. I think George Osborne's idea of a Northern Powerhouse was well overdue. A shame that his party staked so much on such an unpredictable plebiscite.

ancapailldorcha

Aegir wrote: »

Where is the word partisan in the GFA?

I think the point is that the GFA is being undermined as opposed to being visibly violated.

LeinsterDub

Aegir wrote: »

Where is the word partisan in the GFA?

The letter of the law maybe not be breached but the spirit surely is.

Infini

Tropheus wrote: »

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/925453/Brexit-news-latest-update-UK-EU-Norther-Ireland-border-European-Union-video

'We could RUIN them' Jacob Rees-Mogg issues STERN warning to Ireland over EU border threat?

Who's "we". His friends Gussie Fink-Nottle and Tuppy Glossop?

And WHO has the veto to crash YOUR economy Sir Dumbus Assus? Do I detect a hint of tranquil panic there? ^_^