Brexit discussion thread III

EdgeCase

This is the fundamental problem though. Brexit is a complex mess of jingoism, xenophobia and all sorts of other nasty stuff dressed up as a rational argument that blames the EU for everything. There's nothing rational about it and you're not likely to get any kind of sane agreement, at least from the people who are running the show in the UK at present.

From what I can see of this, there's not all that much difference between the current UK Government and political establishment and the politics of the the likes of Marine Le Pen. The only difference is that, for some reason, one is somehow deemed to be socially acceptable now and the other is still very much beyond the pale of normal politics.

From what I can see of it, the UK has lowered its political standards, desensitised itself towards vicious, racist politics and deemed all of this stuff somehow acceptable because it's being presented by people with posh accents in nice suits.

I really never thought British politics could sink quite this low.

Call me Al

Hurrache wrote: »

The comments section, and I thought those that accompany articles in TheJournal.ie where bad. So many blinkers.


Kilclooney I think deleted that original tweet, (or my tweeting skills are just poor) and tried to row back with the "some of my best friends are Indians" type post, and then second tweet in his 'apology' he tweets

https://twitter.com/KilclooneyJohn/status/991097644889137157
https://twitter.com/KilclooneyJohn/status/991184202476412928

The natives, what what.

Gotta hand it to him though, he's united those across the divide in condemnation of him.

That ugly brain of his really is a vestige of times past. The "glory days" of the old colonial times. Oh how he must regret that he was born in the 20th century.

EdgeCase

The problem is that it's not just some obscure Northern Irish lord that comes out with this kind of stuff. Back in 2016, the current UK Foreign Secretary came out with racial slurs against Obama:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-suggests-part-kenyan-obama-may-have-an-ancestral-dislike-of-britain-a6995826.html

Unfortunately, it seems to be embedded in a particular political culture that's dominant in the UK at the moment.

There's a tolerance of this kind of stuff developing that is very, very toxic.

Tropheus

EdgeCase wrote: »

There's a tolerance of this kind of stuff developing that is very, very toxic.

Very true and I wonder how much Brexit is a symptom of this rather than the cause? There is no doubt that UK politics and society is broken and it could take significant turmoil and time before we see it on the straight and narrow again.

Once Brexit is put to bed (when and how are the big questions), it's likely this turmoil will continue. Social unrest is very possible as we've seen in pockets of British society in the past.

It's not nice seeing are closest neighbour tearing itself apart.

EdgeCase

You were seeing massive underlying social problems with the London Riots a few years ago and all of that was sort of swept under the carpet and assumed to have been a "few ruffians" and all totally forgotten about.

I mean we've even seen an MP assassinated by a right wing nut and there's been relatively little reflection on what that was all about and all the stirring up of more and more toxic identity politics and xenophobia has continued.

There's a lot more wrong than just Brexit.

Professor Moriarty

Hurrache wrote: »

The comments section, and I thought those that accompany articles in TheJournal.ie where bad. So many blinkers.


Kilclooney I think deleted that original tweet, (or my tweeting skills are just poor) and tried to row back with the "some of my best friends are Indians" type post, and then second tweet in his 'apology' he tweets

https://twitter.com/KilclooneyJohn/status/991097644889137157
https://twitter.com/KilclooneyJohn/status/991184202476412928

The natives, what what.

Gotta hand it to him though, he's united those across the divide in condemnation of him.

Two can play at that game. Ironically, he himself could be described as not native Irish considering he comes from planters stock.

EdgeCase

I wouldn't stoop so low as to engage an elderly troll in a game of 19th century identity politics.

An Ciarraioch

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I was wondering who this idiot was so I looked him up: he's the racist formerly known as John Taylor.

Around so long that he was a minister in the one-party Stormont regime.

An Ciarraioch

An interesting take that the EU's Border stance has united Unionists behind Brexit - though the obvious counter would be to state that the DUP can best preserve the Union by keeping the whole UK in the Single Market:

https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/analysis-eus-irish-border-stance-driving-liberal-and-hardline-unionists-together/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

Leroy42

Maybe someone can help me understand this.

As I understand it, the December agreement means that the UK have accepted that any deal will avoid a hard border, and that failing that regulatory alignment across the island of Ireland and customs checks between Northern Ireland and GB.

So in effect haven't the UK already tied one hand behind their backs on this one? The only alternative is a hard brexit itself, although the UK have already stated they are committed to avoiding a hard border and thus a hard Brexit.

So why are the Uk continuing to insist that a solution needs to come from the EU, when clearly the agreement places that in the hands of the UK, and even more than that the EU must agree to said solution or else we default to the alignment scenario.

Why did May come out and say she could never agree to it (I think she said no PM could) when she had already agreed to it previously?

EdgeCase

Because their position is utterly duplicitous and their word is meaningless?

Make promises with fingers crossed, eat cake, have cake. If anyone dares to hold you to your word, throw cake and rant and rave about evil empires and jingositic nonsense.

There's a point where reality will hit and it will likely be a market based reality when people finally wake up to how deluded, directionless, dangerous and economically illiterate this who policy is.

J Mysterio

It can't be understood Leroy, that's the problem. They don't know what they are doing. They can't even agree amongst themselves.

Despite the vote being announced (five years ago) in January 2013, the date set for it (over 2 years ago) in February 2016 and the vote held in June 2016 (just about two years ago).

They don't know what they are doing still, and they are destroying the UK for generations.

J Mysterio

I note in the Boris article linked to above that he states the US 'would never consider joining something like the EU'. As if the US and UK are actually comparable. The UK has a population of 64 million, the US is 325 million. Its people like Boris who are the problem, they dont realise that the UK is just another European country now, no longer one of the worlds global powers with huge swathes of territory and... Empire.

The UK isnt particularly special in anything, has no manufacturing base, no significant raw materials and relies on London's financial services. Once the London loses passporting etc, that will be less significant too, with huge implications for the economy more generally. Add the hit to trade with EU countries and you have a ready made deep recession with no quick fix, save... joining the EU.

EdgeCase

Meanwhile, Sterling is floundering again against the Euro:

https://www.bloomberg.com/quote/EURGBP:CUR back at €1.00 = £0.883

Leroy42

The funny thing is that the US is the model on which the EU is based. A union or 'states' each able to work within the confines of the overall.

They love the US so much, but fail to see that it is by being united that has given them the overall power.

Sure California and other states are large enough in their own rights to command quite a presence globally, but being within the US gives them far more power.

Of course the EU is not looking for a direct model, but from the highest point the combined efforts and aligned strategy of 28 members is far more powerful than 28 individuals

J Mysterio

EdgeCase wrote: »

Meanwhile, Sterling is floundering again against the Euro:

https://www.bloomberg.com/quote/EURGBP:CUR back at €1.00 = £0.883

It shouldnt be that high against the Euro, needs significant adjustment. Should be at parity at least, if not worse.

An Ciarraioch

EdgeCase wrote: »

Meanwhile, Sterling is floundering again against the Euro:

https://www.bloomberg.com/quote/EURGBP:CUR back at €1.00 = £0.883

Presumably the recent rise was based on a customs deal being priced in?

EdgeCase

They can't even do proper UK federal democracy because the English establishment isn't capable of trusting UK countries and English regions really running their own affairs.

For some reason maintaining the pretence of Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish independence in sport is fine but, try suggesting creating a properly federal UK ... You're immediately laughed out of it as that would involve treating all parts of the UK equally, not just having England and "some other inferior places, with funny accents, that we could hardly be bothered mentioning.". Even the North of England and non home counties regions have been treated abysmally over the years. There's an utter unwillingness to modernise or really share power. It's still arranged to function as English establishment and then subordinate places.

I don't think that aspect of English / British mentality (and it isn't everyone in criticising here just that narrow segment) can actually accept being just equal to other members. They always want exceptionalism and a notion that they're superior and special.

An Claidheamh

Ruth Dudley-Edwards: "My fellow Irish compatriots". Now I know they're desperate! She's a dyed in the wool loyalist nut.


On another note, can anybody tell me why the Irish media ignore racial slurs when they emanate from unionists? Or indeed the British media?


Fine Gael are now seeing what Sinn Féin and the SDLP have always had to put up with.
Although, Taylor's views show just how much previous Taoisigh have been bending over for unionists.
Fine Gael and their supporters are almost afraid to criticise any group other than Sinn Féin.

However, it was heartening to see some moderate unionists come out and reprimand that clown.

EdgeCase

Largely I would say it's a case of grimacing and biting one's tongue to avoid upsetting them in the interests of keeping things calm.

You're not going to be able to have a rational debate. It just turns into weird religious and ethnic identity politics and endless ranting and raving about it.

Sam Russell

EdgeCase wrote: »

They can't even do proper UK federal democracy because the English establishment isn't capable of trusting UK countries and English regions really running their own affairs.

For some reason maintaining the pretence of Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish independence in sport is fine but, try suggesting creating a properly federal UK ... You're immediately laughed out of it as that would involve treating all parts of the UK equally, not just having England and "some other inferior places, with funny accents, that we could hardly be bothered mentioning."

This is all tied up in the West Lothian Question.

Basically, how can the MP for West Lothian vote on parliamentary bills that only affect England? In this, the English MPs consider themselves the devolved government for England and English matters should only be decided by English MPs.

Now if there were to be an assembly for England, either as a single region or multiple regions, it would not be at the Palace of Westminster, it would be somewhere else - like the Greater London Council was a regional assembly for a time.

This is just arrogance of the English MP's side. They have no respect for the regional assemblies.

EdgeCase

I personally don't see there being any possibility of a real agreement with this lot. There could be an agreement with the UK, but not this government or this particular aspect of British/English nationalism crossed with the DUP.

My view of it is the EU should walk away and leave them in a serious crisis. They don't want an agreement they want everything their way, without any compromise in some kind of weird one-way deal where they get market access because they feel that they should have it.

The EU has behaved politely and utterly rationally the whole way through this. The Brexiteers have been the ones with redlines and ranting and raving.

Zubeneschamali

Leroy42 wrote: »

As I understand it, the December agreement means that the UK have accepted that any deal will avoid a hard border, and that failing that regulatory alignment across the island of Ireland and customs checks between Northern Ireland and GB.

Not quite. The agreement only says the first bit, alignment across Ireland and no hard border.

The bit about a border in the Irish sea is one way of doing this if May takes Britain out of the SM and CU. Another way to do it is just keep that level of alignment for the whole UK. This breaks some of May's red lines, but the EU don't care about those.

The only alternative is a hard brexit

...and although various loud people pretend it is not so, a hard Brexit would be so catastrophic that it is impossible in practice. The closer the dates get with no preparation, the more catastrophic it would be.

Think 30 mile traffic jams to the ports, flights grounded, shops with no food on the shelves, queues up and down the street for bread patrolled by riot police:

3rd world scenes in London. They'd be begging to get back in the SM in a week.

Hurrache

An Claidheamh wrote: »

On another note, can anybody tell me why the Irish media ignore racial slurs when they emanate from unionists? Or indeed the British media?

They don't, I've heard it on a couple of news items this morning and the Irish Times had it on their front page. However the man is a nobody so shouldn't get any more attention.

An Ciarraioch

The funny thing is, there have been debates about creating a "civic unionism" in NI going all the way back to Terence O'Neill, but neither of the major parties have grasped the nettle in the same manner as has occurred in Scotland or Wales in recent decades, when like Alliance, they could simply engage in debates in Ireland and the UK, all the while maintaining their positions. That's not to excuse the nationalist parties, however, who seem content to let Leo do the heavy lifting for the softest of Brexits.

Hurrache

So leaving the Customs Union and Single Market apparently were qualified as being part of voting Yes for Brexit
https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/991349517663555584

But their idea, put forward by many, of them not putting anything up as part of the Irish border somewhat contradicts the following. Even in the Telegraph linked to this morning there were many people pushing the idea of f the EU and Ireland, we're not putting up anything, do they not realise that they then won't have control of their border?
https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/991349590812250112
https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/991350422504968192

Leroy42

And NI is where Brexit met reality.

If they even had thought about beforehand (which I doubt many voters did and have to conclude that not many politicians did either) they certainly seemed to be of the view that it was a small stumbling block that could be gotten over as part of the negotiations.

What they didn't seem to plan for is the stanch that not only Ireland (which if they had any idea about NI beforehand, they might well have expected) but also of the EU have taken.

Basically (at least up to this point) the EU have put NI front and centre and that there will be no deal without a proper working deal on NI.

So, Davies is right when he says that taking back control involves taking control of the borders, and that would involve NI. They appear to have thought that that was a simple matter, why would it be any different than Kent etc.

But now they are faced with a dilemma. Either continue on with the 'take back control' idea, and thus a border with NI and thus no deal, or stay in CU and SM (or versions of them) and in a way give up on Brexit.

From their POV, it really is a tough one. One thing that I am pretty certain, at least in the short term, is that Option C (sea border) is not a runner.

Zubeneschamali

Leroy42 wrote: »

They appear to have thought that that was a simple matter, why would it be any different than Kent etc.

NI has a long and porous land border, so it has one kind of problem, but the amount of trade crossing it is small.

Kent has a whole different problem, which they have not even started to address, to do with he volume of traffic going through it. They simply cannot stop and inspect every truck no matter what they say, so incoming trucks will not be checked.

Meanwhile, the EU, if there is no deal, CAN simply stop all trucks at their side, and turn away ferries. The EU won't starve if trade grinds to a halt. The UK will.

Water John

If the UK growth rate goes negative, in the next quarter, that might trigger, financial pressure.
The fact that the UK will be the worst performing country in the EU, will be obvious to all, and not deniable.

Gerry T

Water John wrote: »

If the UK growth rate goes negative, in the next quarter, that might trigger, financial pressure.
The fact that the UK will be the worst performing country in the EU, will be obvious to all, and not deniable.

May not be deniable but will most likely be ignored.
They trot out the facts that suits their agenda, maybe we all do that but I've heard a lot about their very low unemployment rates, maybe someone needs to explain to them that low unemployment is not a great indicator for future economic performance. Sounds like they may need to open those borders to get some people in to fuel their economy !!

First Up

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Meanwhile, the EU, if there is no deal, CAN simply stop all trucks at their side, and turn away ferries. The EU won't starve if trade grinds to a halt. The UK will.

This is simply wrong, and you have been called on it before.

"No deal" does NOT mean a trade embargo. The default position is trade continue under WTO MFN rules. Tariffs and long delays yes but nobody will be stopping trucks or turning away ferries.

Water John

Gerry T, disagree with you. A negative growth stat, along with a big media focus on, will it be followed by a second one, thus triggering an official recession standing, leaves them naked and undeniable.

ambro25

Gerry T wrote: »

<...>
They trot out the facts that suits their agenda, maybe we all do that but I've heard a lot about their very low unemployment rates, maybe someone needs to explain to them that low unemployment is not a great indicator for future economic performance. Sounds like they may need to open those borders to get some people in to fuel their economy !!

What they need explaining, is that low unemployment brought about by ZHCs/McJobs is a worthless indicator indeed, which goes a long way to explain their record low productivity, stagnant growth and receding purchasing power of the past decade. A crash-out on WTO MFN terms is not going to solve that any time soon, under any stretches of the imagination.

(topically, I see in today's news that McDo employees in the UK are striking over the said exploitative contracts)

Water John

I always thought McD employees were all standard wage. No, their not. It is up to the individual franchisee TMK.
One Cork franchisee pays less than the others, for example.
Sorry for the side track.

Gerry T

Water John wrote: »

Gerry T, disagree with you. A negative growth stat, along with a big media focus on, will it be followed by a second one, thus triggering an official recession standing, leaves them naked and undeniable.

I was a bit tongue and cheek pointing out how the UK boasts about its full employment rate and at the same time closing its borders and turfing out people living there decades :rolleyes:

I wouldn't disagree with what you say, but it really depends on what direction the UK takes. There's a real possibility of a crash out with no extension next march. But I think at the 99th hour, which will be Sept/Oct time, I see the UK fudging things, promising all sorts and staying in the CU and CM. The Govt will spin all sorts of crap, blaming the bullying EU. But Markets may see the stability of staying in favourably and prevent a recession. I think you need 6 month's of continuous GDP falling to call it a recession, the UK may avoid this.

The alternative is the empire does crash out and we get the opportunity to witness history in the writing as the UK could very easily separate into its constituent countries.

Sam Russell

First Up wrote: »

This is simply wrong, and you have been called on it before.

"No deal" does NOT mean a trade embargo. The default position is trade continue under WTO MFN rules. Tariffs and long delays yes but nobody will be stopping trucks or turning away ferries.

Will the NO DEAL mean that the UK refuses to pay the divorce money? That may make a bad situation much worse.

Well, if there is a NO DEAL, then all exports will need a customs declaration and most exporters have never done one in twenty years. All trucks inspected means traffic chaos on the M2, and probablt the M25. Imports will also be delayed unless the UK just waves them through - which could cause trouble with WTO, but in the immediate Brexit, that is trouble for later.

Will the French, Dutch and Belgians live with that? Will the EU live with that?

And what about Openskies? How will that work? Will airports be stuck with planes on the ground, not going anywhere?

What about truck driving licences?

And then what about all those illegals trying to get into the UK - will they board these lorries being waved through?


Lots of trouble and chaos.

BonnieSituation

Gerry T wrote: »

I was a bit tongue and cheek pointing out how the UK boasts about its full employment rate and at the same time closing its borders and turfing out people living there decades :rolleyes:

I wouldn't disagree with what you say, but it really depends on what direction the UK takes. There's a real possibility of a crash out with no extension next march. But I think at the 99th hour, which will be Sept/Oct time, I see the UK fudging things, promising all sorts and staying in the CU and CM. The Govt will spin all sorts of crap, blaming the bullying EU. But Markets may see the stability of staying in favourably and prevent a recession. I think you need 6 month's of continuous GDP falling to call it a recession, the UK may avoid this.

The alternative is the empire does crash out and we get the opportunity to witness history in the writing as the UK could very easily separate into its constituent countries.

You only need 2 consecutive quarters of GDP shrinkage to be in recession. 6 in a row is a depression really...

flutered

Water John wrote: »

If the UK growth rate goes negative, in the next quarter, that might trigger, financial pressure.
The fact that the UK will be the worst performing country in the EU, will be obvious to all, and not deniable.

on a few uk fourms i have visited today, that is not considered a problem, this should give one the thinking of the brexiteers

BonnieSituation

BonnieSituation wrote: »

You only need 2 consecutive quarters of GDP shrinkage to be in recession. 6 in a row is a depression really...

Six months is two quarters.

Capt'n Midnight

Cherry picking again
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-43964990

Senior sources have told me that Philip Hammond sees advantages in the proposal that would mean the UK could set its own tariffs but would also be obliged to mirror European Union customs rules.
...
The arrangement would mean the UK collecting tariffs on behalf of the EU for any goods coming to the UK that were subsequently destined for any other union member state.

Businesses would claim back any tariff rebates from the government if the goods stayed in the UK.

Although technically difficult - some say impossible - officials believe such a partnership could "solve" the Irish border question as there would be no hard customs border between the UK and the EU.

The other plan is maxfac and relies on technology and honesty. At one point 40% of the fuel used in NI was dodgy. It's actually impressive in a way

BonnieSituation

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Six months is two quarters.

I read it as 6 quarters, not 6 months. My bad. Either way... They're getting both.

EdgeCase

That sounds like yet another convoluted mess of a proposal, designed entirely to ensure the UK has its cake eats its cake.

They essentially keep rebranding and rewording proposals - last time it was "Managed Divergence ™"

First Up

Sam Russell wrote: »

First Up wrote: »

This is simply wrong, and you have been called on it before.

"No deal" does NOT mean a trade embargo. The default position is trade continue under WTO MFN rules. Tariffs and long delays yes but nobody will be stopping trucks or turning away ferries.

Will the NO DEAL mean that the UK refuses to pay the divorce money? That may make a bad situation much worse.

Well, if there is a NO DEAL, then all exports will need a customs declaration and most exporters have never done one in twenty years. All trucks inspected means traffic chaos on the M2, and probablt the M25. Imports will also be delayed unless the UK just waves them through - which could cause trouble with WTO, but in the immediate Brexit, that is trouble for later.

Will the French, Dutch and Belgians live with that? Will the EU live with that?

And what about Openskies? How will that work? Will airports be stuck with planes on the ground, not going anywhere?

What about truck driving licences?

And then what about all those illegals trying to get into the UK - will they board these lorries being waved through?


Lots of trouble and chaos.

Yes, all that is possible but there won't be a blockade.

Sand

It is the have cake, and eat it that invites derision. If they had any convictions on Brexit, they'd accept a loss the benefits of single market access as being a price worth paying for their priority: absolute sovereignty and control of their borders. But they don't have any convictions. They have two opposed goals and lack the courage to choose one and follow it.

As stated already, Brexit is a symptom of the problem. There is going to be absolute turmoil in the UK for the next couple of decades as the same voting bloc that supported Brexit continues their rebellion against their own ruling class which has disappointed them for decades. And I am less and less convinced that the UK will ever re-join the EU. Their planned future is embracing a British identity which is global, not European. And the EU is a European project.

Capt'n Midnight

EdgeCase wrote: »

I wouldn't stoop so low as to engage an elderly troll in a game of 19th century identity politics.

EdgeCase wrote: »

Largely I would say it's a case of grimacing and biting one's tongue to avoid upsetting them in the interests of keeping things calm.

You're not going to be able to have a rational debate. It just turns into weird religious and ethnic identity politics and endless ranting and raving about it.

Ah good old whataboutery.

How does that saying go "drag you down to their level and beat you with experience"




http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-43968095

Leo Varadkar has said he thought a tweet by a House of Lords peer calling him a "typical Indian" was from a parody account.

Leo is the openly gay son of an immigrant, he was raised as a catholic and he's supporting the abortion referendum. From a conservative unionist viewpoint he's pretty much damned to hell and back.

And on top of that he's head of state of the republic that wants to overrun them. Ulster says NO! has been a knee jerk reaction for so long.

Zubeneschamali

I didn't say the EU would stop trade. They will stop and inspect every load entering the single market, and no-one has the staff or space to inspect all cross channel traffic.

The yards will fill and then ferries will not bring more. Export trade will slow to a crawl from the UK and trucks pile up on the motorways.

The same would happen with imports but the UK needs them to feed people so they'll have to let them in unchecked and risk the wto penalties.

Sam Russell

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I didn't say the EU would stop trade. They will stop and inspect every load entering the single market, and no-one has the staff or space to inspect all cross channel traffic.

The yards will fill and then ferries will not bring more. Export trade will slow to a crawl from the UK and trucks pile up on the motorways.

The same would happen with imports but the UK needs them to feed people so they'll have to let them in unchecked and risk the wto penalties.

That is my reading.

The NI/Irish border will be irrelevant, and all we need is a few portacabins on the major crossings with a Customs inspection with a few roving enforcers. The Dover situation will be extreme and will take the flac.

If the trucks cannot go to France and block the motorways, then they will run out of trucks going the other way.

Enzokk

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Cherry picking again
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-43964990

The other plan is maxfac and relies on technology and honesty. At one point 40% of the fuel used in NI was dodgy. It's actually impressive in a way

I assume the people that say the UK proposals are impossible are the only ones that count, the EU. I know there was a story about the EU forensically shutting down the UK borders proposals, but I am not sure if that was stretching the truth. If that didn't happen, you can be sure it will be the case if/when the UK takes these proposals to the EU.

So the UK doesn't want much from the EU. They want a customs partnership, not a custom union, that will mean the UK will mirror the EU regulations and tariffs, but they will be able to negotiate their own trade deals.

A couple of questions, what happens when the USA demands chlorinated chicken as a carrot for a trade deal? Will they accept which means a border, or will they forego a trade deal with the US? Also, it doesn't sort out the problem of a border between NI and the EU. Only the UK remaining in the single market will mean no infrastructure at the border.

It does seem to me that there seems to be a one step forward, two steps back approach to the negotiations at the moment. The UK seems to accept what is facing them, only to backtrack a few days later and to want their cake and eat it again. I would hope this is for local consumption only and the negotiators is actually working towards a proper deal, while the kids are outside the room playing their own games.

Sand

Enzokk wrote: »

It does seem to me that there seems to be a one step forward, two steps back approach to the negotiations at the moment. The UK seems to accept what is facing them, only to backtrack a few days later and to want their cake and eat it again. I would hope this is for local consumption only and the negotiators is actually working towards a proper deal, while the kids are outside the room playing their own games.

There does not seem to be any grounds to be optimistic on this point. The British are not able to prioritise between their two opposed goals. The prospect of a no-deal Brexit (without a transition period) is increasing.

This is not necessarily the worst outcome for Ireland. Its better to have a terrible outcome for a year or two until a viable UK government is formed, rather than a bad outcome for decades.

First Up

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I didn't say the EU would stop trade. They will stop and inspect every load entering the single market, and no-one has the staff or space to inspect all cross channel traffic.

The yards will fill and then ferries will not bring more. Export trade will slow to a crawl from the UK and trucks pile up on the motorways.

The same would happen with imports but the UK needs them to feed people so they'll have to let them in unchecked and risk the wto penalties.

You said if there was no deal, ferries would be turned away. If you just meant long queues you should have said so.