Brexit discussion thread III

J Mysterio

At the end of the day, it's quite simple.

The UK decided to leave the EU amd triggered article 50.

Despite them leaving the EU, they want to retain the benefits of being an EU member - trading arrangements, customs, EU programmes - not possible.

The UK needs to accept the responsibility for their actions, their choice.

The UK also have to accept responsibility for NI and the border, as they created that mess also. The EU have offered a very generous solution for this. The UK wont accept it because they are propped up in government by a NI party. They already agreed to the solution.

The EU are willing to look at a bespoke solution for the UK, but YM has set forth so many red lines, that it is impossible to do this.

So... The UK basically need to face down the DUP, or have a hard Brexit.

J Mysterio

EdgeCase wrote: »

From the EU perspective, they're basically prepared to make a special arrangement for Northern Ireland. It's a small place with very unusual circumstances.

It's of limited impact on the EU internal market, its being stable is very important to an EU member (Ireland) and the EU has no desire to see brexit undermining the peace settlement and status quo.

The DUP are rejecting what could be mana from heaven economic status for NI, placing it as some kind of special status that has huge advantages in terms of being potentially within both markets, albeit with some kind of balancing controls.

The EU isn't going to allow the entire UK to do what was propsped as a special arrangement for a fragile region as it would have serious implications for the internal market.

So, really the DUP are preventing brexit as the only other option will be remaining in the EU for most things.

Damnit, you basically said what I meant to as I was tapping away on my phone :pac:

First Up

keane2097 wrote: »

First Up wrote: »

It isn't a time limit. Its the date by when they "expect" all the trade issues with the EU to be sorted. A date was put in to appease the hard-line Brexiteers and they can decide if that's enough for them or not.

And then later they inevitably claim it was a hard deadline regardless of whether an alternative has been agreed.

They won't because the legal text will be clear that anything agreed is permanent - or "all weather" as Barnier has described it.

Clare in Exile

In an ideal world the British Govt could sell this as the DUP dragging the whole of the UK into a hard Brexit due to their intransigence, but since May has stated that no British Govt could agree to a border in the Irish Sea we are stuck where we are.

Norn Iron is being handed a golden ticket by being offered special status (a foot in both markets), but the DUP seem unwilling to accept that gift. It may be something that comes back to bite them on the ass as the people of NI are hit by the realities of a hard Brexit...

LuckyLloyd

Leroy42 wrote: »

Why would that be? Surely the backstop is effectively staying in the EU in all but name? Doesn't it make sense from an EU POV for the whole UK to stay in rather than just NI?

The EU want a definitive withdrawal agreement. It is not in their interest to have Brexit uncertainty rumble on long term.

Snickers Man

briany wrote: »

This is spiel by people like Farage, and massively hypocritical. There's no way the whole Brexit movement wouldn't have been crying bloody murder for a second referendum in the event of a 52-48 loss.

Here's what Farage himself told the Mirror in May 2016

Indeed. Go back to the original guru of Britan alone, the man whose malign legacy many Brexiteers continue to cherish today: Enoch Powell. What did he say back in 1975, the night that Britain voted overwhelmingly to stay IN the then Common Market?

"I'm always in favour of a question being reopened as important as this. It has been re-opened and now we have a provisional result that takes us on to the next stage."
Why do you say a provisional result?
"Oh I'm relying on the government's official statement.....'our continued membership will depend on the continuing assent of parliament' ..and since parliament will be continuously re-elected by the electorate, this is an ongoing debate."
Are you suggesting that from now on, you and others who feel like you should continue a parliamentary struggle to get Britain out?
"But of course!"

In other words, referendums are all very well but the parliament is the true sovereign under the British system and if Parliament changes its mind, then what they say goes.
See for yourselves!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4OWslOroaw

Peregrinus

judeboy101 wrote: »

No but if he is happy and coveney&co thing what may released constitutes "significant progress" I would not be confident that FG will stand up to EU. Remember when edna came back with our "special case" status for EU re the banks. ?

This doesn't make any sense. Because Davis is happy with this document, you think the EU is going to put pressure on Ireland? Why? Do you think Davis dictates the EU's position now?

This document, remember, was hammered out within the British government, in a ding-dong battle between its various factions. The EU had nothing to do with it. When Davis says he's happy, he means he's happy that the UK now has something to put to the EU on this point. When Coveney says it represents "signficant progress", he doesn't mean that it represents significant progress in the UK's negotiations with the EU; he means it represents significant progress in the Tory party's argument with itself. They are finally getting to a point where they are ready to put a position, or at least half a position, to the EU.

That's signficant progress in the sense that it make dialogue more possible than it is when the UK doesn't know what it wants. Ireland and the EU have been telling the UK for months that they need to put some text on the table, and now they have. But I wouldn't be reading anything more than that into Coveney's comment.

It has already been widely noted that the Tories are tearing themselves apart in a battle over different options, all of which have already been rejected by the EU, and for good reason. Davis is quite stupid, but he is not so stupid as not to know this. His happiness has nothing to do with an expectation that the EU will accept the UK's draft text.

The view they take of this in Brussels is that the UK is not working out its bottom line here; they are working out their opening position, from which they will then negotiate with the EU. In those negotiations, as in all the EU/UK Brexit negotiations to date, the UK will move a lot further from its opening position than the EU will, because the EU has in every respect the greater bargaining power.

If you think that, because Davis is happy, the EU will therefore fall over backwards, accept the document without question, and then beat Ireland about the head and neck with a broken bottle until we accept it too, I think you are completely wrong. The fact that the UK has finally picked a position, or at least half a position, to put to the EU does not mean that the EU is going to accept the UK's position, no matter how glowing the terms that Davis uses to describe it.

Zubeneschamali

flatty wrote: »

I'm stuck in the UK as my wife refuses to move back. ...
I still think Scotland is the most interesting player in this

If I was in your shoes, I think plan A is stick it out, plan B is scope out the return to Ireland in case the worst actually happens, but maybe plan C is head for the newly independent Scotland?

Havockk

J Mysterio wrote: »

May has given her full support and backing to Johnson after latest comments. How can this man be backed? He is the Foreign Secretary - he represents the UK around the world. It has been gaffe after gaffe, insulting people around the world and not understanding diplomacy in the least. He is a buffoon of the highest order. He is also constantly undermining her, suggesting yesterday that Trump would do better even. She should fire him, but she doesnt have the guts.

She knows she cant. I would doubt if she fired the shaved baboon she would last 3 days before she would be ousted.

Peregrinus

Leroy42 wrote: »

Why would that be? Surely the backstop is effectively staying in the EU in all but name? Doesn't it make sense from an EU POV for the whole UK to stay in rather than just NI?

No, the backstop isn't staying in the EU in all but name. It's staying in the Customs Union, and staying in some aspects of the Single Market but, crucially, not accepting Freedom of Movement (and probably not accepting ECJ jurisdiction). That's exactly the kind of cherry-picking that the UK was confidently assuming it would get in the months after the referendum, and that the EU has always strongly held out against.

The EU is prepared to compromise and allow this degree of cherry-picking in Northern Ireland only, because NI is a small and contained area, the openness of the border is of considerable political significance, and the threat to the integrity of the Single Market is manageable. But allowing the whole UK to have this status would be a completely different matter.

If the UK were to propose a backstop of remaining in the CU and remaining fully in the Single Market, the EU have signalled that they would be very receptive to that.

Sam Russell

One thing that appears to have been missed is that Barnier said that there are already checks on the ferries to NI for phytosanitary and agriculture purposes.

EdgeCase

Bear in mind that there have been similar proposals to impose security checks and border-in-the-sea type serious going back quite a few years before Brexit too.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/jan/15/uk-irish-republic-border-passports

There were also immigration controls between the two islands from 1939 until 1952.

Leonard Hofstadter

Not sure if this has already been reported, but Barnier has said that the EU won't be 'bullied' by the Brexiteers (to use his word).

I don't think we need to be worried about the EU throwing us under the bus at all, and Varadkar said yesterday that a time limited backstop is not acceptable to us. After all, backstop means backstop.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-michel-barnier-negotiations-stopgap-eu-withdrawal-a8389501.html

Strazdas

J Mysterio wrote: »

At the end of the day, it's quite simple.

The UK decided to leave the EU amd triggered article 50.

Despite them leaving the EU, they want to retain the benefits of being an EU member - trading arrangements, customs, EU programmes - not possible.

The UK needs to accept the responsibility for their actions, their choice.

The UK also have to accept responsibility for NI and the border, as they created that mess also. The EU have offered a very generous solution for this. The UK wont accept it because they are propped up in government by a NI party. They already agreed to the solution.

The EU are willing to look at a bespoke solution for the UK, but YM has set forth so many red lines, that it is impossible to do this.

So... The UK basically need to face down the DUP, or have a hard Brexit.

An unspoken part of this is that the British government is incapable of telling the 17m voters they made an idiotic decision and voted for a disaster. Sooner than do this, they have to come up with nonsense about 'democracy' and 'the will of the people' and try to find ways to stay in the Single Market without informing the public what a calamitous decision they made.

An Ciarraioch

Strazdas wrote: »

J Mysterio wrote: »

At the end of the day, it's quite simple.

The UK decided to leave the EU amd triggered article 50.

Despite them leaving the EU, they want to retain the benefits of being an EU member - trading arrangements, customs, EU programmes - not possible.

The UK needs to accept the responsibility for their actions, their choice.

The UK also have to accept responsibility for NI and the border, as they created that mess also. The EU have offered a very generous solution for this. The UK wont accept it because they are propped up in government by a NI party. They already agreed to the solution.

The EU are willing to look at a bespoke solution for the UK, but YM has set forth so many red lines, that it is impossible to do this.

So... The UK basically need to face down the DUP, or have a hard Brexit.

An unspoken part of this is that the British government is incapable of telling the 17m voters they made an idiotic decision and voted for a disaster. Sooner than do this, they have to come up with nonsense about 'democracy' and 'the will of the people' and try to find ways to stay in the Single Market without informing the public what a calamitous decision they made.

And right on cue - a Bloomberg article claiming May is considering keeping NI aligned to the Single Market, while rUK only stays in the Customs Union. Of course, you're already ahead of me here, but the logical follow-on is Arlene giving out, and May promptly says to the Brexiteers that the whole UK has to stay in the SM in order "to preserve the Union":

https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2018-06-08/u-k-said-to-mull-keeping-n-ireland-in-single-market-rules?__twitter_impression=true

J Mysterio

Strazdas wrote: »

An unspoken part of this is that the British government is incapable of telling the 17m voters they made an idiotic decision and voted for a disaster. Sooner than do this, they have to come up with nonsense about 'democracy' and 'the will of the people' and try to find ways to stay in the Single Market without informing the public what a calamitous decision they made.

Think the Tories would rather burn the place down then admit to chasing unicorns.

McGiver

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

That's true. But they had a chance to change that system as recently as 2011 and opted not to.

Nope, the reform was only a cosmetic change, it would have been another form of majority system, not a PR system. I think if truly PR was on the table it would passed.

oscarBravo

McGiver wrote: »

Nope, the reform was only a cosmetic change, it would have been another form of majority system, not a PR system. I think if truly PR was on the table it would passed.

I think the STV aspect is arguably more important than the PR aspect. FPTP is an abomination before man and dog.

Sam Russell

McGiver wrote: »

Nope, the reform was only a cosmetic change, it would have been another form of majority system, not a PR system. I think if truly PR was on the table it would passed.

The 'reform' was for an alternative vote. That is the voter chooses their first choice and the second choice. STV was considered too complex.

How can 'Put the candidates in the order os your choice' be complex? You just put them in the order of your choice, whatever that is.

It was deliberately designed to fail.

An Ciarraioch

Sam Russell wrote: »

McGiver wrote: »

Nope, the reform was only a cosmetic change, it would have been another form of majority system, not a PR system. I think if truly PR was on the table it would passed.

The 'reform' was for an alternative vote. That is the voter chooses their first choice and the second choice. STV was considered too complex.

How can 'Put the candidates in the order os your choice' be complex? You just put them in the order of your choice, whatever that is.

It was deliberately designed to fail.

It was calculated that Blair would have won an even larger landslide in '97 under AV than using FPTP:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/lessons-from-the-past-why-tories-oppose-av-2220663.html

BonnieSituation

Sam Russell wrote: »

One thing that appears to have been missed is that Barnier said that there are already checks on the ferries to NI for phytosanitary and agriculture purposes.

Missed by who? HMG?

They know full well things are different, but the paper thin majority with the DUPers changes matters.

We'll get there eventually.

Unionism isn't known for for consensus and pragmatism.

Sam Russell

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Sam Russell wrote: »

The 'reform' was for an alternative vote. That is the voter chooses their first choice and the second choice. STV was considered too complex.

How can 'Put the candidates in the order os your choice' be complex? You just put them in the order of your choice, whatever that is.

It was deliberately designed to fail.

Missed by who? HMG?

They know full well things are different, but the paper thin majority with the DUPers changes matters.

We'll get there eventually.

Unionism isn't known for for consensus and pragmatism.

It was missed by those reporting - like the BBC and RTE. Perhaps they did not notice because he was talking in French.

BonnieSituation

McGiver wrote: »

Nope, the reform was only a cosmetic change, it would have been another form of majority system, not a PR system. I think if truly PR was on the table it would passed.

That's nonsense. PR wasn't an option and even if it was it would never have passed because apparently it was "too confusing"!
Do you remember the AV campaign?

Before it even got to referendum, which was part of the coalition deal with the Lib Dems, PR-STV was roundly criticised and criticised. AV was the only show in town from then on.

"If it's such a good system, why is it only used in 3 countries, NZ, Malta and ROI?"

That was the crap that was consistently discussed.

On top of that you had Labour and the Cons against AV.

AV isn't perfect and I wouldn't inflict it upon any nation but when the alternative is FPTP then it's a no-brainer.

BonnieSituation

Sam Russell wrote: »

It was missed by those reporting - like the BBC and RTE. Perhaps they did not notice because he was talking in French.

The BBC don't give a crap.

RTÉ probably aren't reporting on it given they likely have mentioned that dozens of times and take it for granted.

Like us, they know what's what.

Nothing Barnier said today was new.

EdgeCase

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Unionism isn't known for for consensus and pragmatism.

Well, an aspect of political unionism / loyalism isn't. I just hope the Northern Irish electorate holds them responsible for the aftermath and don't just sheepishly follow the tabloids and blame "Brussels" for the border.

They're being presented with a unique opportunity to pretty much preserve the status quo and possibly create a huge advantage for the Northern Irish economy, as the only place that does get its cake and eat it.

Although, cake is quite controversial amongst some aspects of those who support the DUP...

Water John

Well NI could have a sort 2 in 1 Ref. Join ROI and stay in EU or remain in UK and leave EU.

McGiver

prinzeugen wrote: »

But yet the British is the problem? Go read some books about the slave trade.. The Brits are the good guys in this.

You can't be serious. Liverpool was at one stage the richest city in the Empire and that solely due to the slave trade.

EdgeCase

McGiver wrote: »

You can't be serious. Liverpool was at one stage the richest city in the Empire and that solely due to the slave trade.

Shhhh! You're upsetting people who like to imagine that the British Empire brought civilisation to the world, and did so entirely through lovely golf outings and garden parties and that membership was entirely voluntary.

Clare in Exile

I feel that Unionism needs to show some flexibility on this issue. This truly is a situation where NI can have the best of both worlds. As mentioned previously, there are already checks in some situations for items moving from Great Britain to NI. Also, NI has no problem being separate from the rest of the UK when it comes to issues such as abortion.

The GFA clearly states that the constitutional position of NI can only change with the consent of the majority of people there - having the border moved to the Irish Sea does not change that.

I accept that ideologically for some Unionists it is a difficult proposition, but the advantages for NI were they to be given special status surely outweigh any Unionist fears?

As so often in Irish history it's a case of "what if?". What if May had won a convincing majority in the last election, would she have conceded to giving NI special status? More than likely, given the headache Brexit has become.

Alas, circumstances have brought us to where we are today. I feel that the EU and Ireland are playing a good game so far, the British on the other hand are walking and talking themselves into knots. It really has been men against boys thus far...

BlitzKrieg

BonnieSituation wrote: »

That's nonsense. PR wasn't an option and even if it was it would never have passed because apparently it was "too confusing"!
Do you remember the AV campaign?

Yes I remember, I also remember aside from confusing the other two scare tactics was the classic "Coalition" and "UKIP" fears that was hung over people. In the UK they have some serious political fear of having coalitions, it's seen as some sort of failure of politics when they are forced to have one.

The UKIP one drove me up the wall because I seriously doubt ukip would have been the 2nd choice for anyone's vote, someone willing to vote ukip is much more likely the vote ukip first, tory second then someone voting tory first to pick ukip second.

But the biggest annoyance was how much a of beautiful political stitch up it was by the tories on the lib dems, getting them to trade away some of their core campaign promises for this referendum, putting them front and centre to take the blame for those broken promises (specifically to young people like student fees etc) all for this referendum and they saddle them with AV as the only option and sink it in the campaign. It was a masterful bit of evil politcal wrangling.


So colour me surprised when none of that wrangling happened in the Brexit campaign. Whatever evil genius they had for the AV referendum was either a Brexiteer themselves or had been murdered by the lib dems since the av vote cause Cameron really had brexit backfire on him.

Enzokk

Do you remember the tweet from Nadine Dorries about David Davis and his SAS training and him being able to take people out? This article column from Marina Hyde sheds some light on that training he has.

Incidentally, when I was writing this newspaper’s Diary column – some time in the early cretaceous period – I solicited reminiscences of Davis’s time in the SAS (territorial). A couple of his former brothers-in-arms got in touch with memories of TA 21-SAS (V). I had two favourite anecdotes. The first was when Davis was required to coordinate an ambush, and opted to position his men on either side of the road so that – had the exercise been real – the soldiers would have opened fire on each other. The Sun Tzu of DExEU, there. The second story saw Davis charged with managing an “escape and evasion” mission. “It was supposed to last five days,” recalled one of his men. “But he accidentally led us through a choke point – a kind of bottleneck where trackers always wait – and got us captured inside 36 hours. So we were put in a truck, blindfolded, driven around, and dropped at night on an undisclosed remote hill to start all over again.” I mean … the jokes are too easy, aren’t they?

Keep calm – the Top Guns of Brexit have got our backs

CelticRambler

Clare in Exile wrote: »

The GFA clearly states that the constitutional position of NI can only change with the consent of the majority of people there - having the border moved to the Irish Sea does not change that.

I accept that ideologically for some Unionists it is a difficult proposition, but the advantages for NI were they to be given special status surely outweigh any Unionist fears?

Not forgetting that, according to JRM, IDS, BJ & Co., a border between NI and RoI would be no more of an inconvenience than between one London Borough and another; between NI & Britain would be less challenging, and as it would require nothing more than a mobile phone and a Oyster Card to implement (I believe the Brexit spin, honest! :rolleyes: ), the DUP would hardly even notice there was a border in the sea ...

Water John

When it came to Agriculture, Ian Paisley Snr. had no problem with a border down the Irish Sea.

Sam Russell

Water John wrote: »

When it came to Agriculture, Ian Paisley Snr. had no problem with a border down the Irish Sea.

As he is known to have said: 'We are Brirish but our cows are Irish!'. Of course it helps if that is financially advantageous.

Sam Russell

Au pairs are no longer going to the UK according to the Guardian.

Au pair shortage sparks childcare crisis for families

75% slump in applications blamed on Brexit and fallout from terrorist attacks

McGiver

Seth Brundle wrote: »

I believe that they have this fanciful notion that they are being oppressed by anonymous EU bureaucrats and that power is being removed from Westminster.

Yes and this one is a good example. And that would be on the smarter end of the electorate.
https://youtu.be/QwK1MCTltSA

McGiver

EdgeCase wrote: »

The DUP are rejecting what could be mana from heaven economic status for NI, placing it as some kind of special status that has huge advantages in terms of being potentially within both markets, albeit with some kind of balancing controls.

Apart from their bigotry, I think they don't want to allow the dual status as that could diminish them in long run as the Irish/Catholics/Nationalists get majority due to demographics and pragmatic/liberal/soft Unionists lean to the EU side of things more than broken Brexit England-Wales.

EdgeCase

I think the DUP's assumption that there's a large Northern Ireland vote that's akin to the US Bible Belt is what will destroy them. It's a small bubble that largely exists in a narrow area of Northern Ireland and is perhaps getting an inflated view of itself because it's affirming itself with a reflection that's actually largely an online American bubble, not reality in Northern Ireland.

If you look at where they are on social policies, notably things like gay marriage and abortion, and where the opinion polls in Northern Ireland show the population to be, the two are a million miles apart. Whereas that's not the case in the US in the areas where GOP support is strong.

I could see the DUP dragging Northern Ireland into a mess and then ending up totally irrelevant as people just turn away from them, realising quite how toxic their politics is. There's a far more pragmatic and moderate and non-religious aspect of unionism that should be much more represented in NI, but isn't because of stupid identity politics that has allowed this kind of extremism into the mainstream.

An Ciarraioch

Indeed, Mike Nesbitt and Doug Beattie appear to be two prime examples within the UUP, but because the liberal Protestant is split between them and Alliance, it allows the DUP to play the "split vote means an SF First Minister" card.

Seth Brundle

Saw this just now from Love Island which may reflect the British governments misunderstanding of the potential outcome of Brexit...

Student Georgia Steel, 20, kicked off the conversation by quizzing the group about their views on Brexit - before Liverpool model Hayley Hughes, 21, admitted she had no idea what it was.

Ms Steel, from York, explained it meant the UK 'leaving the European Union', but Ms Hughes still looked baffled by the idea.

In the hilarious segment, Ms Hughes then asked if Britain leaving the European Union would result in the loss of trees.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-5823421/Love-Island-Fans-mock-Hayley-left-baffled-Brexit.html

Water John

I wouldn't mock her. If the UK Cabinet admitted it, hadn't a clue what Brexit meant, that would be a breath of fresh air.

An Ciarraioch

Guardian monthly poll suggests public opinion is moving towards the Single Market - 38% favour remaining in it, rather than FoM restrictions, while 34% think the opposite. There's little appetite for a second referendum (48% against, 38% for), while only 41% of Leavers favour the Tory approach to negotiations:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jun/09/fewer-leave-voters-back-tories-handling-of-brexit-poll

KingNerolives

No way that love Island comment is real

Enzokk

KingNerolives wrote: »

No way that love Island comment is real

Be prepared to be amazed,

'Love Island': The Contestants Attempted To Discuss Brexit And It Was Quite Something

After Samira Mightly claimed it meant we were “won’t be part of Europe” and Georgia attempted to make some comment about trade deals, Hayley replied: “So does that mean we won’t have any trees?”

“That’s got nothing to do with it, babe. That’s weather,” Georgia told her.

As Kendall Rae-Knight tried to be the sensible voice in the conversation explaining the difference between being in Europe and being in the EU, Georgia then said: “Doesn’t it mean it would be harder to like, go to like, Spain and stuff?”


“So it would be harder to go on holidays?” Hayley responded. “Oh I love my holidays.”

https://twitter.com/gullyburrows/status/1005187613270167552

An Ciarraioch

Sunday Times lead tomorrow concerns links between Arron Banks and Russian officials:

https://mobile.twitter.com/ShippersUnbound/status/1005498543740727301

joeysoap

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Sunday Times lead tomorrow concerns links between Arron Banks and Russian officials:

https://mobile.twitter.com/ShippersUnbound/status/1005498543740727301

And the ST supported Brexit. Time ( pun) to climb out of the cesspool?

ancapailldorcha

So, in a rather interesting turn of events, Geordie Greig who edited the curiously Remain-backing Mail on Sunday is to take over as editor of it's larger sister, the Daily Mail:

Geordie Greig is to be the new editor of the Daily Mail, putting a staunch remainer in charge of one of the most pro-Brexit newspapers in the country.

The current Mail on Sunday boss will replace Paul Dacre, 69, who is stepping down in November.

Source.

Not sure what to make of this. Dacre will be around for a while yet. It remains to be seen whether not he'll either be able to pivot his newspaper's stance or even be willing to in the event that he's a "Let's get on with it" sort of Remainer.

Anthracite

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Sunday Times lead tomorrow concerns links between Arron Banks and Russian officials:

https://mobile.twitter.com/ShippersUnbound/status/1005498543740727301

In fairness, there's a trail of sulfur a mile long behind Banks' wife. She's about the most obvious Russian agent since Rosa Klebb. Weren't there already questions about whether Banks was really wealthy enough to fund his Brexit movement?

murphaph

I'm wondering could we all be overtaken by events. Trump seems fairly unconcerned about the prospect of an actual trade war. It may not be Ireland that ends up being the spanner in the Brexit works but the Donald. It may be enough to scare parliament into siding with the UK's friends of 44 years. The EU is surely a more reliable partner than the United States under this president.

I don't think that the current make up of the Government (or indeed parliament!) could realistically volte face.

The UK would need a huge swing in opinion polls for that to change, and I just can't see it happening.

The UK is ambling down a path over confidently, tearing up the paving behind them as they go.