Leo is the new king of Ireland.

oscarBravo

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Leo's job was to safeguard Ireland's interests and he claimed he had in a 'bulletproof' way.

He may have over-egged the pudding there, but he played a blinder. It's easy for the hurlers on the ditch here and elsewhere to explain to us how much better they personally would have handled the negotiations than the Department of Foreign Affairs did, but the saying "paper never refused ink" was, ironically, never more true than it is in this digital era.

And Brexit still won't be Leo's fault.

charlie14

oscarBravo wrote: »

If there's a hard Brexit, blaming it on the Brits will make perfect sense, because it's their fault.

That won't stop people trying to blame Leo, but Brexit isn't Leo's fault, no matter how much some people want it to be.

Do not confuse Brexit being their fault with Varadkar stating we had "a cast iron guarantee" or his "politically bullet proof" statements that allowed the Brits to move on to Phase 2 of talks being his.

If there is a hard Brexit he will have serious questions to answer on that imo.
Even at this stage there are some serious media rumbling on the issue.

kerry cow

The brits don't do soft and they dont like been told what to do either .so if you get your leg on their neck you need to push home because they dont do second chances either

James Brown

charlie14 wrote: »

Do not confuse Brexit being their fault with Varadkar stating we had "a cast iron guarantee" or his "politically bullet proof" statements that allowed the Brits to move on to Phase 2 of talks being his.

If there is a hard Brexit he will have serious questions to answer on that imo.
Even at this stage there are some serious media rumbling on the issue.

Was it a case of him doing the brits a favour to allow things move on or did he drop the ball in a hurry to seem competent?

charlie14

oscarBravo wrote: »

I don't know what they're unhappy about, because "accepting or rejecting the constitution wording" is precisely what the referendum is for.

They are getting the opportunity to accept or reject the present wording, Not the wording that will replace it.
That is precisely what they`re unhappy about.

oscarBravo

charlie14 wrote: »

Do not confuse Brexit being their fault with Varadkar stating we had "a cast iron guarantee" or his "politically bullet proof" statements that allowed the Brits to move on to Phase 2 of talks being his.

I'm not confusing anything. I'm replying to the rather bizarre idea that a hard Brexit will be anyone's fault but Britain's.

If there is a hard Brexit he will have serious questions to answer on that imo.
Even at this stage there are some serious media rumbling on the issue.

Serious media rumblings? Say it ain't so!

We got the assurance we needed in order to allow the talks to move to phase 2. I know some people believe we should have demanded a total capitulation signed in blood before allowing talks to proceed at all, but I'm not aware of anyone with any actual experience in negotiating international agreements who holds that view.

So, again: Leo may have over-egged the pudding. For those who are all too willing to crucify him for any trivial thing, they have a trivial thing to crucify him over. Yay.

kerry cow

I think their is or was a golden opportunity to score big time by playing poker knowing you has a full house , bluff the wallet dry but don't drop the Ace

oscarBravo

charlie14 wrote: »

They are getting the opportunity to accept or reject the present wording, Not the wording that will replace it.
That is precisely what they`re unhappy about.

You're not making a shred of sense.

There is current wording. There is proposed new wording. We will get to accept the new wording and thereby reject the old wording, or reject the new wording and thereby accept the old wording. That's how referendums work. The government proposes an amendment to the Constitution, and the electorate accepts or rejects it.

I don't get what there is to be unhappy about.

FrancieBrady

oscarBravo wrote: »

He may have over-egged the pudding there, but he played a blinder. It's easy for the hurlers on the ditch here and elsewhere to explain to us how much better they personally would have handled the negotiations than the Department of Foreign Affairs did, but the saying "paper never refused ink" was, ironically, never more true than it is in this digital era.

And Brexit still won't be Leo's fault.

I never said Brexit would be his fault, so you can drop that one straight away.

He can over egg all he wishes IF he has actually achieved what he said he achieved, which was:

Taoiseach Leo Varadkar has said the Brexit deal between the European Union and the UK, which was announced in Brussels, has achieved "what we sought to achieve".

He said the joint commitment by the EU and Britain to the retention of a free-flowing border between Ireland and the UK post-Brexit is "rock solid and cast iron".

Mr Varadkar described assurances outlined in the agreed text as "politically bulletproof".

"We have protected what we sought to protect and we achieved what we sought to achieve," he said.

oscarBravo

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I never said Brexit would be his fault, so you can drop that one straight away.

I never said you said anything whatsoever. There's something really tiresome about having to constantly repeat myself to people who are too busy reflexively arguing to bother reading what they're replying to, but yet again: I was replying to someone who said it would be hard to blame the Brits for a hard Brexit, which is an objectively ridiculous thing to say.

FrancieBrady

oscarBravo wrote: »

I never said you said anything whatsoever. There's something really tiresome about having to constantly repeat myself to people who are too busy reflexively arguing to bother reading what they're replying to, but yet again: I was replying to someone who said it would be hard to blame the Brits for a hard Brexit, which is an objectively ridiculous thing to say.

Why did you feel the need to tell me it wouldn't be his fault then?
I put a question to you which did not say Brexit would be his fault.



https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=106545709&postcount=662

charlie14

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Was it a case of him doing the brits a favour to allow things move on or did he drop the ball in a hurry to seem competent?

I doubt it was a case of doing the Brits a favour with the speed we jumped all over the first proposal that caused May such problems with the DUP.
I believe after that they didn`t want to kill the positive spin they were putting on it by looking naive, and simply carried on in the hope it would work out ok with EU backing.
Problem is by allowing the move to Phase 2 we have given away the advantage we held to have it sorted before there could be any move to Phase 2.

charlie14

oscarBravo wrote: »

You're not making a shred of sense.

There is current wording. There is proposed new wording. We will get to accept the new wording and thereby reject the old wording, or reject the new wording and thereby accept the old wording. That's how referendums work. The government proposes an amendment to the Constitution, and the electorate accepts or rejects it.

I don't get what there is to be unhappy about.

If you could stop running around the house for a minute and answer a simple question it would help.
In the upcoming referendum is the wording to replace on the ballot paper or not ?

FrancieBrady

charlie14 wrote: »

I doubt it was a case of doing the Brits a favour with the speed we jumped all over the first proposal that caused May such problems with the DUP.
I believe after that they didn`t want to kill the positive spin they were putting on it by looking naive, and simply carried on in the hope it would work out ok with EU backing.
Problem is by allowing the move to Phase 2 we have given away the advantage we held to have it sorted before there could be any move to Phase 2.

Ironically the DUP's cough may be softened by the results of this poll. It is hilarious that they now HAVE to defend the GFA (having always been against it)

http://www.lbc.co.uk/hot-topics/eu-referendum/brits-would-rather-leave-eu-than-keep-n-ireland/

charlie14

oscarBravo wrote: »

I'm not confusing anything. I'm replying to the rather bizarre idea that a hard Brexit will be anyone's fault but Britain's. Serious media rumblings? Say it ain't so!

We got the assurance we needed in order to allow the talks to move to phase 2. I know some people believe we should have demanded a total capitulation signed in blood before allowing talks to proceed at all, but I'm not aware of anyone with any actual experience in negotiating international agreements who holds that view.

So, again: Leo may have over-egged the pudding. For those who are all too willing to crucify him for any trivial thing, they have a trivial thing to crucify him over. Yay.

Actually if all other issues between the EU and Britain are resolved other than the border issue, our use of a veto would result in a hard Brexit.

What we got was a fudge.
Do you know of anyone with actual experience in negotiating international agreements that would look at the back stop as being in any way workable or even acceptable to the EU for that matter ?

charlie14

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Ironically the DUP's cough may be softened by the results of this poll. It is hilarious that they now HAVE to defend the GFA (having always been against it)

http://www.lbc.co.uk/hot-topics/eu-referendum/brits-would-rather-leave-eu-than-keep-n-ireland/

Whatever about the Brits agreeing to leave on the results of a border poll, I cannot see it happening because of Brexit.
Their would also be a demand from Scotland for the same deal
Would the EU even accept the 6 counties if the Brits did not renounce sovereignty with the situation in Spain ?

FrancieBrady

charlie14 wrote: »

Whatever about the Brits agreeing to leave on the results of a border poll, I cannot see it happening because of Brexit.
Their would also be a demand from Scotland for the same deal
Would the EU even accept the 6 counties if the Brits did not renounce sovereignty with the situation in Spain ?

TBH I wouldn't have thought so either.

But, as a Unionist, would you risk bringing down the GFA at the moment?

And if they want to avoid the proposed backstop it seems that is what will have to happen.
And there will still be no resolution to the border issue.

charlie14

FrancieBrady wrote: »

TBH I wouldn't have thought so either.

But, as a Unionist, would you risk bringing down the GFA at the moment?

And if they want to avoid the proposed backstop it seems that is what will have to happen.
And there will still be no resolution to the border issue.

From a long way back according to RTE`s man in Brussels the EU were concentrated on what the Republic was entitled to with regards to Brexit on the border issue. Much the same as the Brits have been saying.
I cannot see the EU even being in a position to accept the backstop unless British renounce sovereignty and I cannot see many British politicians even floating the idea tbh.
If they were to announce a border poll now that could do it, but the unionists being .... well unionists... they would most likely choose to starve to death rather than leave.

James Brown

It's very interesting. On a practical level, there's an argument for Britain relinquishing it's hold on the north. The only positive currently is the DUP enabling May swing a vote.
As economics trump all, the DUP might see another 'true King' in young Leo, if the price is right

FrancieBrady

charlie14 wrote: »

From a long way back according to RTE`s man in Brussels the EU were concentrated on what the Republic was entitled to with regards to Brexit on the border issue. Much the same as the Brits have been saying.
I cannot see the EU even being in a position to accept the backstop unless British renounce sovereignty and I cannot see many British politicians even floating the idea tbh.
If they were to announce a border poll now that could do it, but the unionists being .... well unionists... they would most likely choose to starve to death rather than leave.

Yeh, I think that is where we are heading. Not a border poll as such, but the people of the north being asked if they want the backstop/special status (and the Irish sea solution) or the only alternative, a hard Brexit. The DUP will have to swallow hard and allow the question be asked.

Or Leo welches and agrees to a border.

Hard to see where else it is going. It is the only reasonable and fair solution too, for democrats. Special case requires a special solution.

charlie14

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Yeh, I think that is where we are heading. Not a border poll as such, but the people of the north being asked if they want the backstop/special status (and the Irish sea solution) or the only alternative, a hard Brexit. The DUP will have to swallow hard and allow the question be asked.

Or Leo welches and agrees to a border.

Hard to see where else it is going. It is the only reasonable and fair solution too, for democrats. Special case requires a special solution.

Could the EU even accept the 6 counties in the customs union and single market if they are still part of the United Kingdom.
Would they not be required to be in a 32 county Ireland for that to be even considered. ?

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

TBH I wouldn't have thought so either.

But, as a Unionist, would you risk bringing down the GFA at the moment?

And if they want to avoid the proposed backstop it seems that is what will have to happen.
And there will still be no resolution to the border issue.

It has been explained many times on the Brexit thread that a hard Brexit does not necessarily breach the GFA.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

It has been explained many times on the Brexit thread that a hard Brexit does not necessarily breach the GFA.

It does threaten. If it didn't why have both the UK and the EU made commitments to it.
The UK commitment clearly said:

as we have made equally clear we are determined to find bespoke solutions to
Northern Ireland’s unique circumstances … not least as the only part of the UK
to share a land border with an EU member state.

As they have as yet, late in the day, not found or even outlined a 'bespoke solution' then their own fears and the fears of Ireland and the EU are real fears.

The GFA is clearly an obstacle to a solution.

charlie14

blanch152 wrote: »

It has been explained many times on the Brexit thread that a hard Brexit does not necessarily breach the GFA.

Other than Strand 1 it would negate Strands 2 and 3.

oscarBravo

charlie14 wrote: »

If you could stop running around the house for a minute and answer a simple question it would help.
In the upcoming referendum is the wording to replace on the ballot paper or not ?

Of course it is. Is this your first referendum or something?

charlie14

oscarBravo wrote: »

Of course it is. Is this your first referendum or something?

That would be a no to both.

The only proposal on the ballot paper is a yes or no to repeal and replace the 8th amendment to the constitution.
If passed, the new constitutional article would state that the Oireachtas may provide for the termination of pregnancy.

There is no wording on the referendum ballot paper as to what that provision will be.

markodaly

blanch152 wrote: »

It might be just me but I am confused by your posts. Either the sky is falling down for Leo and FG or it isn't.

Francie is like the economist who predicts a crash every year. They will be right eventually and hold themselves up as a soothsayer, but in reality people will see through it.

markodaly

charlie14 wrote: »

Do not confuse Brexit being their fault with Varadkar stating we had "a cast iron guarantee" or his "politically bullet proof" statements that allowed the Brits to move on to Phase 2 of talks being his.

If there is a hard Brexit he will have serious questions to answer on that imo.
Even at this stage there are some serious media rumbling on the issue.

Do, people even know what a Hard Brexit is?

That is when the Brits cannot agree to the terms of settlement and take themselves out of the EU unilaterally.

Leo cannot control what the UK does, he can only influence what Ireland and the EU does.

FG and Leo have no say in internal British politics.

Now I wonder if there was some sort of Irish Nationalist voice inside the UK that could actually influence outcomes there, wouldn't that be great, no?? Hmmm, **** it just blame Leo.

billy few mates

markodaly wrote: »

charlie14 wrote: »

Do not confuse Brexit being their fault with Varadkar stating we had "a cast iron guarantee" or his "politically bullet proof" statements that allowed the Brits to move on to Phase 2 of talks being his.

If there is a hard Brexit he will have serious questions to answer on that imo.
Even at this stage there are some serious media rumbling on the issue.

Do, people even know what a Hard Brexit is?

That is when the Brits cannot agree to the terms of settlement and take themselves out of the EU unilaterally.

Leo cannot control what the UK does, he can only influence what Ireland and the EU does.

FG and Leo have no say in internal British politics.

Now I wonder if there was some sort of Irish Nationalist voice inside the UK that could actually influence outcomes there, wouldn't that be great, no?? Hmmm, **** it just blame Leo.

Yes but something something don't want to get involved in foreign governments... something something look what happened to the other party that took their seats, something something tiocfaidh ar la, but not just yet. Besides, we're keeping a close eye on Leo and he's doing a great job so far...

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

Do, people even know what a Hard Brexit is?

That is when the Brits cannot agree to the terms of settlement and take themselves out of the EU unilaterally.

Leo cannot control what the UK does, he can only influence what Ireland and the EU does.

FG and Leo have no say in internal British politics.

Now I wonder if there was some sort of Irish Nationalist voice inside the UK that could actually influence outcomes there, wouldn't that be great, no?? Hmmm, **** it just blame Leo.

There is quite a strong possibility emerging that Simon and Leo have aquiesced too soon and lost the power to influence the EU.

We shall see.