Brexit discussion thread III

ancapailldorcha

Name calling posts deleted.

murphaph

Berserker wrote: »

The assembly is non-existent. The First Minister title means bugger all at the moment.



Firstly, a hard border was always going to be end game with this. The EU don't really give a hoot about the RoI, we've seen this with Nice, Lisbon and the banking crisis, these talks are all about causing the UK as much grief as possible for leaving the EU and if this causes the RoI grief, so be it. Unionists don't want a hard border, they want to be part of the UK and they are. Oh, a hard border should be a financial cost and nothing more to the RoI, hardly a disaster.

Rubbish. The EU doesn't need an excuse to squeeze the UK's goolies. Ireland is an issue because amazingly enough we are a committed member state and the other member states are standing shoulder to shoulder with us on this. I hope we show the same solidarity next time one of our EU partners needs support.

Itssoeasy

Infini wrote: »

holyhead wrote: »

Once it gets up and running again though she will be. But at present you are correct.

Just so to be aware that the whole Brexit thing and the Ash for Cash scheme damaged them badly. The DUP only have ONE seat more than Sinn Fein. A banjoed brexit brought to the North by THEIR incompetency could easily see them dropped down to the 2nd largest party next time meaning they get "demoted" to DEPUTY First minister. The irony would not be lost at all.

Maybe that should be spelled out to them that while this might seem to them to be big win in London the home base could leave them in second place in the north. Jesus paisley himself would get out of the grave if that happened.

steddyeddy

devnull wrote: »

Some interesting stuff on her on Wikipedia, certainly doesn't seem to be a great lover of our country although she writes for the Sunday Independent.

She doesn't like The Wind That Shakes the Barley either.

But reviewed it before seeing it. She's not considered a respectable historian by any account.

BorneTobyWilde

So little old Ireland should back down and get walked all over even though it's all the UK doing to leave the EU.

Enzokk

devnull wrote: »

Some interesting stuff on her on Wikipedia, certainly doesn't seem to be a great lover of our country although she writes for the Sunday Independent.

She doesn't like The Wind That Shakes the Barley either.

But she hasn't seen it so how would she know? I wonder why she would be so comfortable to have a point of view of something when she hasn't watched it.

holyhead

RDE definitely seems to be Anglo Irish. Her first husband was a passionate anglophile. Nothing wrong with being Anglo Irish but it does explain her views

Berserker

murphaph wrote: »

Rubbish. The EU doesn't need an excuse to squeeze the UK's goolies. Ireland is an issue because amazingly enough we are a committed member state and the other member states are standing shoulder to shoulder with us on this. I hope we show the same solidarity next time one of our EU partners needs support.

They'll use every excuse they can to squeeze them by the goolies. The UK will do the exact same thing to the EU when they leave the EU. They other members states didn't stand shoulder to shoulder to you with the RoI when you rejected referendums, in the past. Didn't see too many of them digging the RoI out when it came to assigning the banking debt. The RoI is getting played here. This whole thing is a pantomime and a hard border is the end game.

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

So little old Ireland should back down and get walked all over even though it's all the UK doing to leave the EU.

It's exactly what it going to happen. The losers in this are going to be the RoI and NI. The UK will get out of the EU with some damage and they'll get their own back in years to come. The EU will trot off into the sunset and tell the RoI to do one, IMF style, if problems arise.

listermint

Great example of a Facebook echo chamber member in the audience there who argued there is a large appetite for ROI to referendum to exit the EU

Junkyard Tom

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Ruth Dudley Edwards

An apologist for British colonialism, a sycophant of Unionism and the British establishment, and a writer of drivel like this:

'It's time to learn to love our 'Britishness'

We've come to regret the destruction of the big houses and are gradually recognising that the despised landlord class left us a magnificent legacy.

When asked a question about referendums, just now, she goes on the attack against SF and then Labour.

Best ignored.

Infini

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

So little old Ireland should back down and get walked all over even though it's all the UK doing to leave the EU.

Some of them think that Ireland is something they can "walk all over" and telling us to "wind our necks in" and have yet to realise that the real situation is basically "Say hello to me and my 26 "little" friends!"

Itssoeasy

Berserker wrote: »

They'll use every excuse they can to squeeze them by the goolies. The UK will do the exact same thing to the EU when they leave the EU. They other members states didn't stand shoulder to shoulder to you with the RoI when you rejected referendums, in the past. Didn't see too many of them digging the RoI out when it came to assigning the banking debt. The RoI is getting played here. This whole thing is a pantomime and a hard border is the end game.



It's exactly what it going to happen. The losers in this are going to be the RoI and NI. The UK will get out of the EU with some damage and they'll get their own back in years to come. The EU will trot off into the sunset and tell the RoI to do one, IMF style, if problems arise.

Why will ROI lose for something we as a country haven't caused. We should dig our heels in if needs be.

Berserker

She is dead right about the difference between politics in the RoI and the UK. The RoI is a far more open and healthier system.

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Why will ROI lose for something we as a country haven't caused. We should dig our heels in if needs be.

The cost of manning that bloody border and the actual manning of it will be a pain. Totally agree about telling the EU or whoever makes the final call on it to f**k off and pay for it.

Samaris

Leroy42 wrote: »

TBF, Leo and Simon have all the cards in their favour. The trick was getting the EU to fully endorse that NI was a phase 1 red line issue (if that was done to them then they deserve credit for that)

That was Enda Kenny's government, and down in no small part to Kenny himself. His role ended after getting the border issue as one of the three agreements and getting the unity clause in. Varadkar carried on the plan and has taken a low-key, but insistent voice until Britain woke up to having to take the border thing seriously. After that, they just had to hold their nerves. Bringing in Coveney worked well from that front, Coveney's a respected voice in regards to the Brexit negotiations. Varadkar's had the delicate balancing act of trying to keep the best relations possible with our nearest neighbour in the face of steadily more bat**** rhetoric and tactics. So credit to them on that, but credit to Kenny for forming the plan and laying the groundwork well.

Phonehead wrote: »

I live in Canada and to be honest Brexit isn't really the big news ticket item but it does get it's few minutes on the hourly news reports.

Thanks for the account, it is interesting from Ireland to get an external glance at it. Would you mind posting a link if a Canadian paper has a story on it?

FrancieBrady

Quite incredible that the best they could come up with for southern Irish voices was Martin and RDE

Berserker

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Quite incredible that the best they could come up with for southern Irish voices was Martin and RDE

I know, it's great to see two intelligent speakers representing the RoI, isn't it! They could have chosen some knuckle-dragger who would have harped on about a UI and ruined the discussion. The whole panel did well tonight.

FrancieBrady

Berserker wrote: »

I know, it's great to see two intelligent speakers representing the RoI, isn't it! They could have chosen some knuckle-dragger who would have harped on about a UI and ruined the discussion. The whole panel did well tonight.

I would have at least expected somebody close to the decision making. You know, somebody with a relevant point of view on a 'current' affairs programme.

I have no doubt of their respective intelligences.

Nettle Soup

I am glad Leo is leading the negotiations here. Imagine if Enda was there.
It's a pity Leo wasn't Taoiseach in 2011, he might have followed through on his "not another red cent" threat.

BorneTobyWilde

By the power of grey skull, I have the power !

Berserker

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I would have at least expected somebody close to the decision making. You know, somebody with a relevant point of view on a 'current' affairs programme.

I have no doubt of their respective intelligences.

Might be the case that those close to the decision making are trying to steer clear of the media at the moment. This is a political train wreck in progress.

Nettle Soup wrote: »

I am glad Leo is leading the negotiations here. Imagine if Enda was there.
It's a pity Leo wasn't Taoiseach in 2011, he might have followed through on his "not another red cent" threat.

Are you suggesting that Leo has a pair and he would stand up to the EU? He'll roll over when the time comes, like every other Taoiseach since the RoI joined the EU/EEC.

FrancieBrady

Berserker wrote: »

Might be the case that those close to the decision making are trying to steer clear of the media at the moment. This is a political train wreck in progress.



Are you suggesting that Leo has a pair and he would stand up to the EU? He'll roll over when the time comes, like every other Taoiseach since the RoI joined the EU/EEC.

For the purposes of this negotiation, Leo is the EU.

Kermit.de.frog

Nettle Soup wrote: »

I am glad Leo is leading the negotiations here. Imagine if Enda was there.
It's a pity Leo wasn't Taoiseach in 2011, he might have followed through on his "not another red cent" threat.

This I definitely disagree with.
Leo Varadkar has been found wanting in his judgement and leadership ability.

Say what you like about Enda Kenny - I highly doubt he would have overseen the farce yesterday. He would have made sure Theresa May had all ducks in a row including DUP before taking about press conferences on an agreement that was done etc...
For all his faults he had exactly what Varadkar lacks - political experience. 

Also Varadkar needs to learn that sometimes "straight talking" is in no ones interest. There are times you need to be delicate in your language. He personally slammed Theresa May twice since yesterday. Whilst Irish people may give a wry smile - politically that's dynamite because regardless we need to work with UK government to get a deal, like it or not.

It's far harder to do that if you make personal attacks. May's party and the Tory press are not deaf.

Christy42

Berserker wrote: »

She is dead right about the difference between politics in the RoI and the UK. The RoI is a far more open and healthier system.



The cost of manning that bloody border and the actual manning of it will be a pain. Totally agree about telling the EU or whoever makes the final call on it to f**k off and pay for it.

That would be the UK then. The EU and Ireland negotiated a method of keeping it open and infighting in the UK will get it closed.

The main difference between the UK and the EU that I am seeing is that when we voted no to Lisbon/Nice the EU sat around a table and made changes to account for the no campaigns issues. Then once those changes were made it was sent back to the electorate. From the UK it is far more no and we shouldn't debate any more to the point where May is entirely hamstrung.

Even now the EU is open to suggestions on the border if any would be forthcoming-the UK is less so. Personally given the views expressed recently I am very glad we are not the smaller party any more in negotiations with the UK. That would never end well.

steddyeddy

Berserker wrote: »

They'll use every excuse they can to squeeze them by the goolies. The UK will do the exact same thing to the EU when they leave the EU. They other members states didn't stand shoulder to shoulder to you with the RoI when you rejected referendums, in the past. Didn't see too many of them digging the RoI out when it came to assigning the banking debt. The RoI is getting played here. This whole thing is a pantomime and a hard border is the end game.



It's exactly what it going to happen. The losers in this are going to be the RoI and NI. The UK will get out of the EU with some damage and they'll get their own back in years to come. The EU will trot off into the sunset and tell the RoI to do one, IMF style, if problems arise.

In fairness previous treaties were an internal EU issue. Now this is an EU vs non-EU member issue. I don't see how Ireland's getting played. So far they sought a unity clause and a stipulation about the border and got everything.

The UK have made a deal with the DUP and then had the deal rejected because the DUP didn't understand it. The whole UK will suffer for Northern Ireland.

The only party that the IMF will visit will be the UK. As it did prior to the UK joining the single market. Incidently it's exactly why the UK joined the single market. Now some people with no idea of British history will steer the UK back into those waters with the DUP cutting the brakes to ensure it all goes as badly as possible.

There are as yet undiscovered Amazonian teibes that know that the UK is looking far far stupider in this

steddyeddy

Berserker wrote: »

Might be the case that those close to the decision making are trying to steer clear of the media at the moment. This is a political train wreck in progress.



Are you suggesting that Leo has a pair and he would stand up to the EU? He'll roll over when the time comes, like every other Taoiseach since the RoI joined the EU/EEC.

Why would he stand up to the EU exactly? Are you confusing the British/Irish roles in this? For all the talk of unions the UK is leaving the union we belong to.

J Mysterio

God knows how I got here... but have been watching a Home Affairs committee meeting on Policing and Security cooperation tween the UK and EU.

http://parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/a8384c05-17d4-4d26-9388-d02755cfaead

Three experts/ witnesses are discussing the implications of Brexit. At 10:25:40 the chair blurts out "and this all has to be done by March 2018?" They all laugh and say 'yes, preferably'.

The many, many complexities of securing a successful (or actual) Brexit (current events aside) seem almost insurmountable, particularly in the given timeframe.

The experts mention at least 700 issues to be ironed out in this area alone.

She goes on to ask 'is this possible to achieve and would you expect the work to have begun on this already'. The pregnant pause in the room on that question says a lot. Even at small committee meetings like this, its evidential that nothingis prepared.

FrancieBrady

Berserker wrote: »

Might be the case that those close to the decision making are trying to steer clear of the media at the moment. This is a political train wreck in progress.



Are you suggesting that Leo has a pair and he would stand up to the EU? He'll roll over when the time comes, like every other Taoiseach since the RoI joined the EU/EEC.

By the way, the only people 'rolling over' are the UK. On everything set in front of them. And they would have rolled over Unionists and still might.
Leo and Simon are working for all on this island. You will realise that however the talks go.

steddyeddy

FrancieBrady wrote: »

By the way, the only people 'rolling over' are the UK. On everything set in front of them. And they would have rolled over Unionists and still might.
Leo and Simon are working for all on this island. You will realise that however the talks go.

Yep.

EU exit bill 50 billion then special status for NI. They didn't even tell the DUP.

FrancieBrady

Diane Dodds MEP saying the 'DUP will continue to work with the government to seek a solution.' Arlene has been dodging Theresa since yesterday!

HONKEY TONK

Is Arlene Foster that thick to think it's ROI job to give her the info for arrangements for NI?

When will it sink in that Westminster don't give a toss about NI and the DUP are being reluctantly used to prop up the Government.

It would be great to swap NI for Scotland

Kermit.de.frog

I'm beginning to wonder did Bertie Ahern make an ass of the government by going out and publicly suggesting a star trek border was the way forward?

Just wondering because it's a very common attack now of Tories to quote what he said in their arguments.

Peregrinus

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I'm beginning to wonder did Bertie Ahern make an ass of the government by going out and publicly suggesting a star trek border was the way forward?

Just wondering because it's a very common attack now of Tories to quote what he said in their arguments.

If Bertie Ahern is being quoted in support of Tory criticisms of the Irish government, it's not the Irish government that's the ass here.

Kermit.de.frog

Peregrinus wrote: »

If Bertie Ahern is being quoted in support of Tory criticisms of the Irish government, it's not the Irish government that's the ass here.

That does not matter though does it? It's being used over and over again in parliament and the tory press.

To be perfectly honest I think he should have kept his mouth shut instead of giving these people their only talking point from Ireland.

solodeogloria

Jim2007 wrote: »

As usual your understanding of the financial world lets you down! What is good about the EU cherry picking the financial services sector and leaving the high risk stuff behind with the UK taxpayer on the hook if it goes wrong? Not alone that, but if you fully appreciated the context of the article, you'd know that the intention would be to closely supervise it from the EU side to make sure all the risk remains with the UK.

A cool idea from the EU side, all the benefits with the UK tax payer on the hook if it goes wrong.

Good morning!

I don't know why you think saying that keeping clearing in London betrays a "lack of knowledge". I've been working on some of the regulatory technology work on OTC derivatives as a part of my work. The trade in these products is a hugely profitable business.

OTC derivatives are particularly targeted in the MiFID II regulation which aims to minimise dark pool trading (selling derivatives without transparency). To bring transparency to these products they need to be cleared on an exchange. If the EU27 doesn't want this business it means that it will simply have to be taken care of in London for the foreseeable future. These products will continue to be traded and they will need to be traded on an exchange according to MiFID II.

The risk highlighted in the article seems to be that the regulators fear there is too much centralised risk in a central counterparty if transactions don't clear. There's of course ways that can be regulated if it isn't already with capital restrictions. Something like CCAR under Dodd Frank except for clearing houses rather than banks with stressed scenarios would be ideal.

Enzokk wrote: »

Would you accept that the EU supervising authorities have far reaching powers of UK clearing houses if it is kept in the UK?

I support seeking MiFID II equivalence (for third countries) from the EU Commission. Meaning that financial regulation should be broadly consistent. That would be a choice on the part of the UK.

Banking regulation is already subject to quite a few international standards anyway.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

flaneur

The only thing that will resolve this is a UK general election.
The Tories basically have insufficient support and mandate to negotiate the lunch menu at the meeting, never mind any thing consequential.

Fr Tod Umptious

flaneur wrote: »

The only thing that will resolve this is a UK general election.
The Tories basically have insufficient support and mandate to negotiate the lunch menu at the meeting, never mind any thing consequential.

But all it would return is another hung parliament and as someone else said on the other thread Corbyn isn't some white knight here, he is one of the biggest eurosceptics of them all.

murphaph

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

But all it would return is another hung parliament and as someone else said on the other thread Corbyn isn't some white knight here, he is one of the biggest eurosceptics of them all.

He May be but Starmer says the price of leaving the SM and CU appears to be too high. Labour front bench are clearly indicating they would go for the softest of Brexits. They just need to formalise this position so the electorate can prevent the worst. So what if Corbyn is a spendthrift...at least there'll be something to spend if the cliff edge is avoided.

Enzokk

solodeogloria wrote: »

I don't know why you think saying that keeping clearing in London betrays a "lack of knowledge". I've been working on some of the regulatory technology work on OTC derivatives as a part of my work. The trade in these products is a hugely profitable business.

OTC derivatives are particularly targeted in the MiFID II regulation which aims to minimise dark pool trading (selling derivatives without transparency). To bring transparency to these products they need to be cleared on an exchange. If the EU27 doesn't want this business it means that it will simply have to be taken care of in London for the foreseeable future. These products will continue to be traded and they will need to be traded on an exchange according to MiFID II.

The risk highlighted in the article seems to be that the regulators fear there is too much centralised risk in a central counterparty if transactions don't clear. There's of course ways that can be regulated if it isn't already with capital restrictions. Something like CCAR under Dodd Frank except for clearing houses rather than banks with stressed scenarios would be ideal.



I support seeking MiFID II equivalence (for third countries) from the EU Commission. Meaning that financial regulation should be broadly consistent. That would be a choice on the part of the UK.

Banking regulation is already subject to quite a few international standards anyway.

You linked the article and in the article it has the following quotes,

Some actively don’t want to take on euro clearing, as the downfall of a CCP would be a huge responsibility for the national regulator overseeing the entity.

They include an appropriate adaptation period for the clearing house and its members and any measures to be taken during the adaptation period to limit costs to bank clearing members and clients.

So you didn't answer the question. Yes it seems as though the rush for moving euro clearing to the EU has slowed down, but the reasons for this is not that the EU isn't interested any longer. Its if one of these clearing houses collapses then the country where it is from will bear the cost.

Are you happy that the UK will probably have to have serious oversight from the EU if they keep the clearing houses for the euro in the UK?

Are you happy to accept the risk of a euro clearing houses collapsing and it falling entirely on the UK?

Those are two questions asked of your article you linked. They are also not two invented questions from myself and Jim2007 but they are in the article. It seems that while the EU was too quick to proclaim all clearing houses for the euro will need to move out of London, the reason for this is not because the UK cannot be replaced by another country to do this work. Its that other countries are taking their time to ensure the risk is not on the EU governments but on the banks and clients themselves.

I would think that sounds reasonable. If a clearing house in Dublin that deals with the euro collapses it shouldn't be on the teachers and nurses to bail them out.

Enzokk

murphaph wrote: »

He May be but Starmer says the price of leaving the SM and CU appears to be too high. Labour front bench are clearly indicating they would go for the softest of Brexits. They just need to formalise this position so the electorate can prevent the worst. So what if Corbyn is a spendthrift...at least there'll be something to spend if the cliff edge is avoided.

The noises from Labour in the recent past has been a lot softer towards the EU. Maybe this is to do with Jeremy Corbyn now coming to the realisation that while there are parts of the EU that he may not agree with, it has been better for the UK economy and as a result better for the workers he represent. I think this realisation will hit the UK population as well, even if it takes time. Already the govenrment of Scotland, Wales and the City of London are telling them that.

solodeogloria

Enzokk wrote: »

You linked the article and in the article it has the following quotes,

So you didn't answer the question. Yes it seems as though the rush for moving euro clearing to the EU has slowed down, but the reasons for this is not that the EU isn't interested any longer. Its if one of these clearing houses collapses then the country where it is from will bear the cost.

Are you happy that the UK will probably have to have serious oversight from the EU if they keep the clearing houses for the euro in the UK?

Are you happy to accept the risk of a euro clearing houses collapsing and it falling entirely on the UK?

Those are two questions asked of your article you linked. They are also not two invented questions from myself and Jim2007 but they are in the article. It seems that while the EU was too quick to proclaim all clearing houses for the euro will need to move out of London, the reason for this is not because the UK cannot be replaced by another country to do this work. Its that other countries are taking their time to ensure the risk is not on the EU governments but on the banks and clients themselves.

I would think that sounds reasonable. If a clearing house in Dublin that deals with the euro collapses it shouldn't be on the teachers and nurses to bail them out.

Good morning!

Firstly - just because regulators don't want to move services doesn't mean that customers in those member states won't require them.

Secondly - I already answered the point about a clearing house collapsing. There are ways that this can be regulated by introducing (if they are not already there) stress tests like in US regulations for banks on clearing houses.

Thirdly - If the UK pursues MiFID II equivalence it will probably be joining the US and other countries in doing so. This article on Bloomberg is useful into looking into how it works with some US and EU examples with stocks.

Finally - I agree with you on bailouts. That's why there's been a heck of a lot of regulation in the banking sector since 2008. The US has been much more aggressive in recent years than the EU but hopefully Trump won't remove these controls. Dodd Frank was hugely important. MiFID II will do the same for the EU and the UK as it departs.

(Edit: you ask if I'm happy for the UK to take the risk on clearing Euro denominated derivatives - it already does so I guess yes I am provided the right regulation is in place)

I answered your question very clearly in my first post. I'm quite happy to align regulation with the EU if it means continued access to EU markets.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

flaneur

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

But all it would return is another hung parliament and as someone else said on the other thread Corbyn isn't some white knight here, he is one of the biggest eurosceptics of them all.

Not necessarily. There's been a fairly substantial shift in support towards Labour.

del_c

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?

Aye, perhaps we should get some strapping Essex lads in red berets to police it?

Fr Tod Umptious

flaneur wrote: »

Not necessarily. There's been a fairly substantial shift in support towards Labour.

In the last election Labour did better than expected, the bar was very low remember.
At the beginning people, including May, thought that Labour would be a pushover.

But Labour are still a million miles away from getting anything like a strong parliamentary majority.

The antics of May this week may help Labour's cause but I still can't see them win a majority.

Zubeneschamali

Itssoeasy wrote: »

I don't think the Spanish are going to invade Gibraltar chief.

Perhaps the Argentinians would May help out by invading Gibraltar?

murphaph

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

In the last election Labour did better than expected, the bar was very low remember.
At the beginning people, including May, thought that Labour would be a pushover.

But Labour are still a million miles away from getting anything like a strong parliamentary majority.

The antics of May this week may help Labour's cause but I still can't see them win a majority.

They don't need a majority. They can form a coalition with the SNP and Lib Dems, Plaid Cymru. All these parties oppose hard Brexit.

The Tories can only form a coalition with the DUP but that seems unlikely if they can't even keep the current arrangement alive.

FrancieBrady

I wonder is Arlene dodging Theresa because she is in for a roasting for reneging on a verbal deal with Theresa.
There was a very very tetchy interview with Diane Dodds and Martina Anderson MEPs in Brussels last night were the accusation was made that Arlene was marched down the stairs by the DUP men in Stormont to make that statement.

I honestly cannot think of any other reason for May to get herself into that situation.

Zubeneschamali

Berserker wrote: »

Didn't see too many of them digging the RoI out when it came to assigning the banking debt.

What? You mean I imagined them, the ECB and the IMF giving the FF government
the biggest dig-out in Irish history? What was the EUs share of that, 30 billion? 40 billion?

Junkyard Tom

FrancieBrady wrote: »

the accusation was made that Arlene was marched down the stairs by the DUP men in Stormont to make that statement.

If you look at her body language and listen to the nervous quiver in her voice it appears that she was definitely shook by something.The DUP were probably blindsided by the soon-to-be-signed deal, got nervous about IRL believing we had a good deal, and whoever is pulling the strings in the DUP told her she had to drop the anchors on HMS Britannia.

The likes of Dodds and Campbell know that the majority of the British establishment don't give a shit about the north but Arlene is probably a little too young to have fully absorbed the 'betrayals' of the Anglo-Irish agreement, secret talks with the PIRA, and whatnot, so pressing the emergency stop button probably felt overwhelming.

Zubeneschamali

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Quite incredible that the best they could come up with for southern Irish voices was Martin and RDE

You don't book RDE to get a representative Irish voice. You book RDE to provoke a row and get lots of angry emails. Trolling, basically.

Fr Tod Umptious

murphaph wrote: »

They don't need a majority. They can form a coalition with the SNP and Lib Dems, Plaid Cymru. All these parties oppose hard Brexit.

The Tories can only form a coalition with the DUP but that seems unlikely if they can't even keep the current arrangement alive.

But then you have a dolly mixture, single issue government which is not ideal.

Obviously Brexit is a huge single issue but it's not the only issue and both Wales and Scotland will want as big a deal, if not a bigger one, than May gave the DUP.

Plus Corbyn still has his problems, within his own party and without.

This is not Tony Blair in 1997 riding in to save the UK after almost a decade of malaise.