Brexit discussion thread III

brickster69

danganabu wrote: »

breatheme wrote: »

The deadlines are enshrined in Article 50. The UK has triggered said article with no plan or positions and only started half-baking them way into after the negotiating period started. Then May decided to trigger a GE after triggering said article. They knew what they were getting into before triggering Article 50 with no plan. They knew they were delayed and needed to do a lot of work but they said, "hey, you know what sounds like a great idea right now? A GE," instead of "hey, you know what sounds like a great idea right now? Actually figuring out how to calculate the exit bill and how to solve the border issue." The deadline shouldn't be extended because this has been all their fault.

Besides that, I really don't want the UK to get MEPs in the next election, a lot of EU Citizens probably feel the same way.

Article 50 (3) allows for the two years to be extended;

3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.

brickster69 wrote: »

Maybe that is part of the problem. We consider the UK border our border, not an EU border.

The very nature of a border would mean that there are two entities involved, in this case the UK and the EU.

The Border is between the UK and ROI, what has it to do with the EU, they are not a country.  The way you sound is that ROI has no border, it is the EU's border.

BoatMad

kowtow wrote: »

The beauty of the sort of wording adopted by the EU is that - in Humpty Dumpty's immortal phrase - to some extent it "means whatever you choose it to mean, neither more nor less".

If the UK wants regulatory equivalence for some goods, on a mutual basis, with the EU recognizing the UK authorities judgement and vice versa, for the purposes of free trade, then what is wrong with that ?

From the point of view of the UK, it has gained it's independence from the EU, and is simply acting as a Sovereign nation can - mutual recognition as part of a limited agreement. I can understand why Europhiles might think it a pointless move, economically irrational (or whatever) and that - one assumes - is why nobody here is ever likely to want Ireland to leave the EU.

From the point of view of Europe, the equivalence is assured, and officials in Brussels can run around pretending that the UK has somehow voted to become "a protectorate of the EU". So be it, if the wording gives him sufficient justification to express things that way then everybody is happy.

Although if the EU sees the UK as a 'protectorate' after Brexit we might reasonably wonder how it sees Ireland.

The fact remains , that regulatory alignment and no doubt the ECJ to over see it ( the devil will aways be in the detail ) will in effect limit the UK

IT would be better to remain in the SM and influence the process , then adopt what is in essence the " norway " solution

As the channel; islands would point out the EU and CU are entirely different

BoatMad

ambro25 wrote: »

As a long-time resident of these UK shores, who lived through the whole sorry referendum-and-aftermath 'management' episode, and still does (...but only until sometime-in-Feb-2018 ) I very much doubt that I'm afraid.

I genuinely still can't see Corbyn making No.10, notwithstanding May's record to date. The Tories are proving themselves far too adept at dividing and, well, if no conquering, then at least still steering. And as a result of same, the population is as divided as it's ever been on the topic.

And even then, in the background to a new GE, tic-toc-tic-toc-tic-toc-...

A mechanism exists under article 50 to extend the deadline, the only people holding a clock to this are the Tories

danganabu

brickster69 wrote: »

The Border is between the UK and ROI, what has it to do with the EU, they are not a country.  The way you sound is that ROI has no border, it is the EU's border.

I dont think you understand the EU tbh, I dont mean that in a deragatory way btw. And yes I sound it like that Ireland has no border and it's the EU's border, because that is exaclty what it is!

BoatMad

I genuinely still can't see Corbyn making No.10, notwithstanding May's record to date. The Tories are proving themselves far too adept at dividing and, well, if no conquering, then at least still steering. And as a result of same, the population is as divided as it's ever been on the topic.

No but a SNP/labour coalition ( and even could bring SF in ) would be entirely possible

Bar_Prop

Every time someone mentions JC making it to No.10 I'm reminded of Chris Mullin's  A Very British Coup.

It's not as if the Labour Party speak as one on Brexit issues anyway.

ambro25

brickster69 wrote: »

The Border is between the UK and ROI, what has it to do with the EU, they are not a country.  The way you sound is that ROI has no border, it is the EU's border.

The border would be between the UK as a third party country (because of Theresa May's red lines: no customs union, no single market, no ECJ <etc.>) and the Republic of Ireland still as an EU member state.

Accordingly, the border indeed would be "between the EU and the UK", no differently than, e.g. currently between Finland (an EU member state) and Russia (another third party country), or -for seaborne freight for instance- between the Netherlands (an EU member state) and China or the US (other third party countries).

I mean no offence, but the above is fairly elementary stuff in this thread, so perhaps read at least the last few pages of the previous thread? Friendly suggestion, not meant as a dig.

BoatMad

The Border is between the UK and ROI, what has it to do with the EU, they are not a country. The way you sound is that ROI has no border, it is the EU's border.

The agreements that form the EU that Ireland has signed upto ( and the UK is currently still signed upto ) , make the Border in effect a EU border after brexit

There would be no issue if the issue was solely between the two countries solely but its not.

farmchoice

brickster69 wrote: »

The Border is between the UK and ROI, what has it to do with the EU, they are not a country. The way you sound is that ROI has no border, it is the EU's border.

i dont know if you are being serious but on the assumption you are,

the republic of Ireland is a member of the EU. the UK is not negotiating anything with the republic of Ireland it is negotiating with the EU.

when it came to the Border with the ROI the Irish politicians took the lead because we know the most about it, and it affects us the most, also we are a signatory to the good friday agreement.

the UK will at no point will negotiate with any of the countries in the EU individually, it will only ever be dealing with the EU.

ambro25

BoatMad wrote: »

A mechanism exists under article 50 to extend the deadline, the only people holding a clock to this are the Tories

I'm very aware that the mechanism exists, but I can't see it being successfully invoked today, no more than I could when I was discussing it before the referendum itself. Especially not after how the UK has approached the whole exercise since June 2016.

There's just no way the 27 would agree to it unanimously, without a few first extracting pounds of flesh from the UK, especially when they've held all the aces all along and the UK is lying wounded and leaking fast.

BoatMad

ambro25 wrote: »

I'm very aware that the mechanism exists, but I can't see it being successfully invoked today, no more than I could when I was discussing it before the referendum itself. Especially not after how the UK has approached the whole exercise since June 2016.

There's just no way the 27 would agree to it unanimously, without a few first extracting pounds of flesh from the UK, especially when they've held all the aces all along and the UK is lying wounded and leaking fast.

I dont agree, there is no skin of the EU to extend the deadline , and it would benefit all to remove arbitrarily deadlines

brickster69

danganabu wrote: »

brickster69 wrote: »

The Border is between the UK and ROI, what has it to do with the EU, they are not a country.  The way you sound is that ROI has no border, it is the EU's border.

I dont think you understand the EU tbh, I dont mean that in a deragatory way btw. And yes I sound it like that Ireland has no border and it's the EU's border, because that is exaclty what it is!

Wow, this is interesting. Please do not think i am being confrontational, but it is an eye opener. It's good to get other peoples views on things. Presumably though the bit in between the borders still belong to you guys though. 
Please say yes !

lawred2

kowtow wrote: »

Enzokk wrote: »

So it seems that once again we are on a path of either EU lite or no deal. There is no middle ground for the UK in this and those pretending that there is I would call deluded.

https://twitter.com/DanielBoffey/status/938047748603043840


Either the UK allows NI to be part of the EU if they want to keep their red lines or all of them follow the same regulations. Its amazing how there was so much hope yesterday of a breakthrough that seemed to be perfect for everyone, except one party in NI.

The beauty of the sort of wording adopted by the EU is that - in Humpty Dumpty's immortal phrase - to some extent it "means whatever you choose it to mean, neither more nor less".

If the UK wants regulatory equivalence for some goods, on a mutual basis, with the EU recognizing the UK authorities judgement and vice versa, for the purposes of free trade, then what is wrong with that ?

From the point of view of the UK, it has gained it's independence from the EU, and is simply acting as a Sovereign nation can - mutual recognition as part of a limited agreement. I can understand why Europhiles might think it a pointless move, economically irrational (or whatever) and that - one assumes - is why nobody here is ever likely to want Ireland to leave the EU.

From the point of view of Europe, the equivalence is assured, and officials in Brussels can run around pretending that the UK has somehow voted to become "a protectorate of the EU". So be it, if the wording gives him sufficient justification to express things that way then everybody is happy.

Although if the EU sees the UK as a 'protectorate' after Brexit we might reasonably wonder how it sees Ireland.

The UK was always sovereign and independent. It was a willing member of a club with rules and expectations.

It is not gaining Independence from anyone or anything.

BoatMad

lawred2 wrote: »

The UK was always sovereign and independent. It was a willing member of a club with rules and expectations.

It is not gaining Independence from anyone or anything.

+1, despite many claims during the referendum to the opposite

Itssoeasy

So Arlene foster is saying she wasn't shown the text of the brexit deal in advance of Teresa May talks with the EU. My question is on what basis should she or any of the DUP have been shown it ? She is not first minister of NI and her party are not in coalition with the Conservative party in Britain. They are in a supply and confidence agreement with them. Also they have the same right as any of the other parties in NI.

Blowfish

somefeen wrote: »

Its becoming more and more obvious that the DUP aren't interested in a good deal for anyone, even themselves. Theyre more concerned with blind ideology and stirring up some anti Irish sentiment, probably to get more of the bigot vote next time around.

It's all they know sadly. I don't think they've quite realised yet that the unique beast that is NI politics will only work in NI, outside, the overly aggressive rhetoric just looks faintly ridiculous.

farmchoice

brickster69 wrote: »

Wow, this is interesting. Please do not think i am being confrontational, but it is an eye opener. It's good to get other peoples views on things. Presumably though the bit in between the borders still belong to you guys though.
Please say yes !

for the purposes of discussing brexit everything that is not the UK is the EU.

Bar_Prop

BoatMad wrote: »

I dont agree, there is no skin of the EU to extend the deadline , and it would benefit all to remove  arbitrarily deadlines

Having the affair settled brings stability, or at least a lack of uncertainty!

Bar_Prop

BoatMad wrote: »

I dont agree, there is no skin of the EU to extend the deadline , and it would benefit all to remove  arbitrarily deadlines

Having the affair settled brings stability, or at least a lack of uncertainty!

BoatMad

My concern is that a new form of words will be agreed with the EU that will be a watered down version , the EU will go ahead with phase 2 , and ireland will come under pressure to agreed and we will be left with very little in reality

FrancieBrady

BoatMad wrote: »

My concern is that a new form of words will be agreed with the EI that will be a watered down version , the EU will go ahead with phase 2 , and ireland will come under pressure to agreed and we will be left with very little in reality

Yes, moment number two coming up fast for Leo and Simon. The DUP are clearly marking their performances out as being the suspect ones.

Itssoeasy

BoatMad wrote: »

My concern is that a new form of words will be agreed with the EI that will be a watered down version , the EU will go ahead with phase 2 , and ireland will come under pressure to agreed and we will be left with very little in reality

The Irish government and the EU should tell the DUP to cop on. The DUP are getting a bit too big for its boots.

Leroy42

To be fair to the DUP, this really is their only shot. Once Brexit is done the likelihood is that attention may turn to why the UK is supporting NI to such an extent.

They have the good fortune to be the deciding votes (although IMO I doubt May can bring enough of her party along either way so 10 DUP vote won't matter).

Had May had any sense she would have created an all party committee to steer brexit. It went beyond normal politics. Sure Tory should have been front and centre and driving it but the attempt of May and Davies to exclude the parliament has left a serious trust deficit in the house.

The constant cry of 'we can't tell you anything as it will give away of position of strength' has been shown to be nonsense and if they care about the future of the UK, not just in terms of Brexit but overall, they should bring the other parties into the tent.

May would still be the PM and the one to sign-off but she would gain from getting a better consensus, or if not, then a no deal. No need for a joint government, no need for votes on budgets etc, that would continue on as normal. But if they want to have any chance of success during the rest of negotiations the EU will want to know that any deals agreed will be accepted once the phone calls are made.

The tories want people to believe that they can deliver great trade deals yet they cannot even agree amongst the country what they want.

Bar_Prop

Itssoeasy wrote: »

The Irish government and the EU should tell the DUP to cop on. The DUP are getting a bit too big for its boots.

Neither of them have the least influence over the DUP, in fact, the reverse.

BoatMad

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Yes, moment number two coming up fast for Leo and Simon. The DUP are clearly marking their performances out as being the suspect ones.

I think Ireland must now hold firm and veto phase 2. end of story , if we back down and move forward our leverage will be lost

we'll be subject to a lot of UK opprobrium but hey we've been there before many times

BoatMad

Bar_Prop wrote: »

Neither of them have the least influence over the DUP, in fact, the reverse.

telling anyone to " cop on" generally has the opposite effect

BoatMad

I expect this issue will now be recast as a row between the DUP and the irish Gov, and the UK will begin to divide the EU with rhetoric , " this is all a bunch of paddys engaged in a religious war" , lets move on .

Zubeneschamali

Sethanon wrote: »

I think the biggest problem with EU trade deals is having to please all 28 countries. Take the Canadian one as an example, it nearly went dead in the water due to one small region of Belgium saying no to it. That's what makes the EU trade deals take so long.

Yes, I think the eventual UK-EU deal will take longer than that relatively simple Canadian one. 2030, maybe.

jobbridge4life

BoatMad wrote: »

I expect this issue will now be recast as a row between the DUP and the irish Gov, and the UK will begin to divide the EU with rhetoric , " this is all a bunch of paddys engaged in a religious war" , lets move on .

Why on Earth would any member of the EU take the word of the UK, when the UK can't even agree to the proposal it presented to them? When their leader had to leave a lunch to talk to be told by a woman with no position in UK government, or devolved government for that matter at present, that actually 'Ulster says no'?

The UK are a laughing stock. May a joke.

swampgas

brickster69 wrote: »

Wow, this is interesting. Please do not think i am being confrontational, but it is an eye opener. It's good to get other peoples views on things. Presumably though the bit in between the borders still belong to you guys though. 

Having lived in the UK myself for years, it's clear that not many people in the UK know a whole lot about Ireland or about Irish history. That's not necessarily a criticism, it's just the way it is. On top of that not many people take much interest in the EU, and the media tends to use both for comedy value instead of taking any serious interest.

Unfortunately for the UK many people are only now discovering what Brexit means for the UK's neighbours, and finding out just how important the EU is for the UK. It's about two years too late though.

The Ireland / NI border is a special case. Have a look at the wikipedia page to get a flavour:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Ireland%E2%80%93United_Kingdom_border

Blowfish

Well, ****. Now it begins. Sinn Féin are going to hold rallys and protests in support of 'special status' for NI in the Brexit deals.

When have rallys and protests ever gone wrong up in NI, eh?

Christy42

BoatMad wrote: »

I expect this issue will now be recast as a row between the DUP and the irish Gov, and the UK will begin to divide the EU with rhetoric , " this is all a bunch of paddys engaged in a religious war" , lets move on .

Well that will fail. Badly. The EU has been lockstep with the Irish government so far and have seen the farce from the UK. There is no earthly reason for the EU to fall apart over border negotiations. The UK has shown itself to be far more divided.

Remember other countries in the EU require a stabilised border where goods can be checked for regulatory reasons. They also need the border settled and know we have a veto.

Ireland also needs to stay close to its EU allies. They can help mitigate the cost of Brexit and as an aside the UK has shown the sheer contempt it holds the Irish in in recent days. I have n nothing from them that would soften our position to them.

Edit: I should say some in the UK. However that section are loud enough to ensure that the UK can't be trusted from an Irish perspective.

kowtow

lawred2 wrote: »

The UK was always sovereign and independent. It was a willing member of a club with rules and expectations.

It is not gaining Independence from anyone or anything.

The EU requires sovereignty to be delegated in certain areas ("pooled") to an external body with supreme authority in those areas. Whether or not the EU itself can be regarded as Sovereign - it requires the irrevocable diminution of sovereignty in it's members (save, of course, for their ability to excersise Article 50 and withdraw).

You can argue that the EU is in some form an extension of traditional nation state sovereignty by way of it's (partially) democratic structures, but it lacks a self-conscious demos particularly in the UK. I would argue that this pooling of sovereignty might hold better in the UK had a referendum been held on the Lisbon treaty, as was promised at the time, but both the EU and the New Labour government sought to bring the quasi constitutional provisions of Lisbon into force without a referendum taking place. Delegans non potest etc...

It is true that Ireland has, on successive occasions, voted to cede Sovereignty to the EU - legitimately, one might argue, pooling it's sovereignty with the specific consent of it's electorate.

But the UK has not. The first referendum on the Lisbon Treaty was held in June 2016, and we are discussing it's result in this thread.

Leroy42

Kowtow, the you make it sound like sovereignty was taken from the UK by EU when it was exactly the same process as with Ireland. The difference is that our constitution requires the public to have a vote whereas UKs process is that the decision lies with the democratically elected government.

SO UK voters had plenty of opportunities. If they felt they weren't listened to it seems they prefer to blame the EU rather than themselves

solodeogloria

Good evening!

Apparently the Irish Government told the British Government not to share the text with the DUP before going forward.

I realise that it comes from Foster, but if true that muddies the water somewhat. There are two questions:
1) Why did the Irish Government want to keep this from the DUP? Surely they could have foreseen this scenario.
2) Why did Theresa May & the British negotiating team accept that?

Now of course it could be cobblers but these are interesting questions if it is true.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

jobbridge4life

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

Apparently the Irish Government told the British Government not to share the text with the DUP before going forward.

I realise that it comes from Foster, but if true that muddies the water somewhat. There are two questions:
1) Why did the Irish Government want to keep this from the DUP? Surely they could have foreseen this scenario.
2) Why did Theresa May & the British negotiating team accept that?

Now of course it could be cobblers but these are interesting questions if it is true.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Irish Government spokesperson already denied it, saying it was impossible. Irish Gov deals with EU negotiation team only, not the UK.

FrancieBrady

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

Apparently the Irish Government told the British Government not to share the text with the DUP before going forward.

I realise that it comes from Foster, but if true that muddies the water somewhat. There are two questions:
1) Why did the Irish Government want to keep this from the DUP? Surely they could have foreseen this scenario.
2) Why did Theresa May & the British negotiating team accept that?

Now of course it could be cobblers but these are interesting questions if it is true.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Heard that pussyfooting interview with her. She should have been asked to name the team member, but she was allowed to be vague.
Arlene sowing her anti Dublin nonsense again imo.

Leroy42

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

Apparently the Irish Government told the British Government not to share the text with the DUP before going forward.

I realise that it comes from Foster, but if true that muddies the water somewhat. There are two questions:
1) Why did the Irish Government want to keep this from the DUP? Surely they could have foreseen this scenario.
2) Why did Theresa May & the British negotiating team accept that?

Now of course it could be cobblers but these are interesting questions if it is true.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Solo, why are you trying so hard to paint this as a failure on the Irish part. If the Irish did ask so what? Are you really now claiming that the UK PM is so weak that Leo is now telling her what to do?

And this is the leader to take you through Brexit and beyond?

solodeogloria

Leroy42 wrote: »

Solo, why are you trying so hard to paint this as a failure on the Irish part. If the Irish did ask so what? Are you really now claiming that the UK PM is so weak that Leo is now telling her what to do?

And this is the leader to take you through Brexit and beyond?

Good evening!

I'm not trying at all. I just read this in The Guardian and had the questions pop into my mind.

The alternative is that she was told a fib by the British. That's also a very interesting possibility.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

jobbridge4life

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

I'm not trying at all. I just read this in The Guardian and had the questions pop into my mind.

The alternative is that she was told a fib by the British. That's also a very interesting possibility.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Or that she is lying.

For Forks Sake

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Yes, moment number two coming up fast for Leo and Simon. The DUP are clearly marking their performances out as being the suspect ones.

It's utterly hilarious how the DUP are pitifully trying to paint Varadkar and Coveney as some sort of up-the-ra republican freedom fighters

Bar_Prop

We nordies are told that although we voted to remain the UK as a whole voted to leave and so we must go along with that because that's democracy.
So if the EU and the UK (as a whole) had agreed on these terms, what need was there to consult a minority interest group?

That might not reflect my actual thoughts on the matter, but it seems like any UK/EU team spokesperson who was to take that line would be justified, no?

FrancieBrady

The DUP had as much right to see the document as any other party in Ireland and the UK.

How many parties got to see it before it was agreed?

And they say the Tory/DUP deal has not upset the balance of the GFA? :D

Leroy42

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

I'm not trying at all. I just read this in The Guardian and had the questions pop into my mind.

The alternative is that she was told a fib by the British. That's also a very interesting possibility.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

It has been your angle on it since the whole thing broke.

Yes maybe May has questions to answer but what about the Irish messing up the communications.

Its clear that no matter what the Irish did the DUP was never going to agree to this and it lies totally at the feet of May to have made it sound like she could make a deal when she hadn't got it signed off by the cabinet.

She is the PM. It is not the EU's or Irelands job to work out the internal working so the UK.

kowtow

Leroy42 wrote: »

Kowtow, the you make it sound like sovereignty was taken from the UK by EU when it was exactly the same process as with Ireland. The difference is that our constitution requires the public to have a vote whereas UKs process is that the decision lies with the democratically elected government.

SO UK voters had plenty of opportunities. If they felt they weren't listened to it seems they prefer to blame the EU rather than themselves

I don't mean it to sound that way - I agree with you. I wasn't in the UK at the time but if I recall it was a manifesto commitment by Labour to hold a referendum on Lisbon, which was broken when the EU - I think partly in response to democratic unrest in various nations - managed to slice and dice Lisbon enough to allow it to slip past the hurdle set by Labour in their manifesto.

I'm not suggesting that the EU set out to do this unilaterally, or even with the UK in mind, - it's simply a fact of life. Slice by slice sovereignty has been eroded during the UK membership of the EU and there has never - until now - been a referendum. It's interesting to speculate whether, had one been held in 2008 or earlier, the Brexit result might have been different (although I dare say a referendum on Brexit might not have been required at all).

But it is simply not true to say that British Sovereignty has not been diminished in favour of the EU, because it has.

steddyeddy

This is a bit controversial. Arelene Foster is telling the media that the British negotiating team told her the Irish government didn't want her to see the text on the border deal. This from the Guardian.

Now I don't think Arlene's the most trustworthy source at the best of times, but this feels like someone's telling porkies. If it were true that Irish government asked the British negotiating team to withhold the border terms then that would mean that the British government are taking orders from the Irish government. How likely is that exactly?

“Once we saw the text, we knew it was not going to be acceptable,” she told RTE’s Northern Ireland correspondent Tommy Gorman.

She told him the DUP had been asking for the text for five weeks.

She also said she had a very open conversation with May after the DUP press conference in which she said they could sign not up to anything that would mean a border in the Irish sea.

She told her “it could have been dealt with differently”.

Foster said she had been told by British negotiators that the Irish government did not want her to see the text ahead of yesterday’s crunch meeting in Brussels.

“We are told that the Irish government prevented it coming to us.

Gorman asked: “Who told you that?”

She replied: “The British negotiating team”

Odhinn

Blowfish wrote: »

Well, ****. Now it begins. Sinn Féin are going to hold rallys and protests in support of 'special status' for NI in the Brexit deals.

When have rallys and protests ever gone wrong up in NI, eh?

In fairness I can't see 'Special Status For NI In Brexit' inspiring any wanna be petrol bombers or PSNI baton charges.

steddyeddy

steddyeddy wrote: »

This is a bit controversial. Arelene Foster is telling the media that the British negotiating team told her the Irish government didn't want her to see the text on the border deal. This from the Guardian.

Now I don't thin Arlene's the most trustworthy source at the best of times, but this feels like someone's telling porkies. If it were true that Irish government asked the British negotiating team to withhold the border terms then that would mean that the British government are taking orders from the Irish government. How likely is that exactly?

whether or not this is true, I can't help thinking that her biggest problem is that Leo was poised to announce this and would have received kudos for it.

FrancieBrady

Enda (remember Enda? ) sticking his oar in. I thought both Leo and Simon were remarkably reserved in their remarks. Mind you I see the usual media heads out (Olivia O'Leary etc) giving out about an Irish person having the temerity to mention they would like to see a UI.

The last Irish prime minister before Leo Varadkar has advised that Ireland’s rhetoric regarding Brexit needs to be toned down.

In a significant intervention on Tuesday evening, Enda Kenny warned about heated language in the delicate negotiations involving Dublin, London, Belfast and Brussels.

Kenny, who was taoiseach at the time of the Brexit referendum, said:

It is important that the work being undertaken by the foreign minister Simon Coveney and Taoiseach Leo Varadkar is focussed on having an agreement on what will have to be sensitive language in order to achieve the outcome what we want here.

Blowfish

Odhinn wrote: »

In fairness I can't see 'Special Status For NI In Brexit' inspiring any wanna be petrol bombers or PSNI baton charges.

Depends, if it gets portrayed by the other side as 'trying to weaken the union', then who knows.