Brexit discussion thread IV

An Ciarraioch

Water John wrote: »

Hope the journalist Shona Murray has done her research on her article. Journalists must take ownership of whatever they write, whether correct or not.
It seems to be not widely accepted that what she has written is correct.

It could simply be a difference in interpretation - after all, softening the diplomatic language is probable, but that doesn't equate to changing the actual substance.

WomanSkirtFan8

You guys should check this out on youtube.


#3Blokes In The Pub

There are 7 episodes all of which are well worth watching.:eek:

Water John

I have no problem using different words if someone wants a fig leaf.

First Up

Water John wrote:

I have no problem using different words if someone wants a fig leaf.

The EU has facilitated fig leaves for member states for many years. "Constructive ambiguity" is one term for it but other member states and the Commission have always been sensitive to local issues and bent as much as possible to get consensus.

The UK's problem is that having decided to leave, they no longer merit such considerations. Their difficulties are their own to solve; nobody in the EU has any reason to accomodate internal UK issues; anything we or anyone else in the EU does will be driven by their own interests.

Fig leaves are no longer available to them.

Infini

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Coveney was very quick off the mark to dismiss the Indo article:

http://twitter.com/simoncoveney/status/1040889220963987456

It fairly certain that there's no benefit or point to easing up on the border when it come's down to it. The Brit's are the one's who in reality are insisting on putting one in by leaving with no agreement. Article smelled off because it would make little sense to panic when all the problems are on the other side of the table. If one goes in it wont be the fault of the Irish government or the EU but because the Brit's walked themselves into it as every chance has been given for them to agree to something.

Leroy42

I really hope you guys are right and both Ireland and the EU are not for caving.

As I see it, this has been the UK plan all the time. They basically ran a campaign based on the fact that the EU needed them more and as such the UK would get what it wanted.

If the EU do give in, the UK has shown that it will be no more than a temporary reprieve. There are many in the UK that will stop at nothing until the UK is free of anything. Allowing the UK an opt out here will simply result in more and more abuses further down the line. Each one minor in its own right, and certainly no-one is going to put a border over any one of them, but it will simply continue.

As painful as it will be, I really cannot see any other option but a crash out at this stage. The December Agreement, the Chequers white paper, the whole process, has shown that the UK are not really serious about working with the EU in terms of the EU future, but only their own.

I do fear that the pressure of a crash out is really beginning to increase and that many EU politicians, including of course Ireland, will take the easy short term solution for their own political sakes at the cost of the long term ramifications of doing so.

brickster69

Sam Russell wrote: »

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Oh look , someone is using the €11Bn figure for NI subvention to predict up to 15% fall in living standards here on reunification.

- It's a lot less than €11Bn
- There's EU funding
- we can borrow until NI productivity approaches ours
- our economy grew 2.5% last quarter.
- the HSE and NHS are slowly converging.
- the UK could be expected to take on some of the cost for future savings

Looking at the graphic :-

1.  It all depends on the detail of the UI agreement.  Following a transition period, tax rates and social welfare would equalise - probably to Irish rates.  That would increase both headings.

2.  Vat receipts would increase by about 10% net, as Irish rates are about 10% above UK rates (20% vs 23% and 5% vs 13.5%).  The same 10% could be expected from employment taxes.

3.  Contributions to UK National Debt and  UK defence would cease.

Those figures alone add up to a difference of about £5 billion pounds per year.  Now add in the likely drop of the value of the GB£ of 10% to 20% following the crash out from the EU, and the likely continued growth of the Irish economy - even after the damage a crash out would cause, and the figures look like a possibility.  Now add in the likely contribution that the EU and UK might add into the mix, and it might get close to a zero difference.

However, until the details are hammered out, there is only speculation.  Perhaps we might get Boris, Mogg and Gove onto the case.

Think about the worst case scenario.
1. You face a hard Brexit - VAT and income tax fall for both.
2. Benefits rise for both sides.
3. You don't get any handouts?

Infini

Leroy42 wrote: »

As painful as it will be, I really cannot see any other option but a crash out at this stage. The December Agreement, the Chequers white paper, the whole process, has shown that the UK are not really serious about working with the EU in terms of the EU future, but only their own.

I do fear that the pressure of a crash out is really beginning to increase and that many EU politicians, including of course Ireland, will take the easy short term solution for their own political sakes at the cost of the long term ramifications of doing so.

The choice's given to the UK politicians should be abandon this or crash out. It would force them to decide weather this farce is more important than their country's integrity for starters.

As much as the politicians might ponder a short term solution I think they themselves know that short term pain is gonna be preferable to long term uncertainty. If everyone suffers its the UK who gets the brunt of it not the EU.

Also if the UK crashes out and forces a border where plan A was the backstop which fails because of the DUP and plan B was a soft Brexit that fails because the conservatives are too busy backstabbing one another then plan C should be to push for reunification with all the benefit's it entails while hammering the DUP for causing this with their stupidity. With any luck they'd suffer a collapse like FF did here a decade ago.

Capt'n Midnight

brickster69 wrote: »

Think about the worst case scenario.
1. You face a hard Brexit - VAT and income tax fall for both.
2. Benefits rise for both sides.
3. You don't get any handouts?

It's really simple. The NI economy is due to take a 12% hit in the event of a Hard Brexit.


So it's not like NI would automatically do better staying in the UK.
And we've worked our way out of worse before. There was 17.3% unemployment here back in 1985.


At the current rate a Hard Brexit would hold us back by one years growth. Subsidising NI might adsorb another two or three years growth. If we borrow based on NI gradually catching over the years then the negative effects ca be spread out .



Also being poorer we'd have to pay less into the EU.
And there's also a chance of a few quid from the US.

Junkyard Tom

The British will want out of Ireland too so I'd say they'd gladly pay the subvention over a number of years, reducing by perhaps 10% a year, which would give us time to harmonise the all Ireland economy.

Capt'n Midnight

Leroy42 wrote: »

I really hope you guys are right and both Ireland and the EU are not for caving.

As I see it, this has been the UK plan all the time. They basically ran a campaign based on the fact that the EU needed them more and as such the UK would get what it wanted.

The UK will still import food , computers and fancy German cars from the EU.

On the other hand Jaguar has threatened to move to Poland and the Japanese car makers won't have to pay tariffs in future.

The EU needs them more :rolleyes:



Divide is what the UK has tried over the centuries so not exactly a surprise for anyone on the EU side.

Have a read of the EU guidelines that a lot of UK politicians and journalists keep forgetting about.
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/04/29/euco-brexit-guidelines/

Sam Russell

brickster69 wrote: »

Think about the worst case scenario.
1. You face a hard Brexit - VAT and income tax fall for both.
2. Benefits rise for both sides.
3. You don't get any handouts?

If ou want worst case then you could add that troubles break out in the North. Now no-one wants that.

There is a lot of synergy that would come from a united Ireland so we should look on that to build a welcome to Unionists and Nationalists should a UI come about.

However, the whole project depends on the details of any agreement with the UK as to future relations. Currently, the UK coud not fight their way out of a paper bag, let alone agree a withdrawal agreement with the EU so what chance for a NI withrawal agreement.

If a fudge happens and there is any notion that the EU made Ireland accept it, expect an extreme turn from pro-EU to anti in Ireland.

Rjd2

https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham/brexiteer-mps-say-theyre-in-despair-after-their-challenge

ERG pretty much have given up for now.

Its not a shock really as ultimately despite the media trying to portray them as a hugely influential force (clickbait), they merely are a small enough element of the tory party who are hugely over reliant on JRM as the rest are either toxic (John Redwood etc) to the public or simply don't feel strongly enough to really attack May. The fact that Johnson is on a mission to collapse his career probably doesn't help there cause either.

Enzokk

Rjd2 wrote: »

https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham/brexiteer-mps-say-theyre-in-despair-after-their-challenge

ERG pretty much have given up for now.

Its not a shock really as ultimately despite the media trying to portray them as a hugely influential force (clickbait), they merely are a small enough element of the tory party who are hugely over reliant on JRM as the rest are either toxic (John Redwood etc) to the public or simply don't feel strongly enough to really attack May. The fact that Johnson is on a mission to collapse his career probably doesn't help there cause either.

I am more interested in the rest of the story to be honest. It should have been obvious that the ERG challenge would fail on the fact that their plans means hardship for the UK and they couldn't cover it up this time.

The latter part of the article talks about meetings and dinners the PM is holding with MP's to sell Chequers to them.

Downing Street hosted three dinners with different sets of Tory rebels this week, a routine that is now going to take up the evenings of two of her top aides for some time. Number 10 had originally planned nine of these dinners, but they will now take place every Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, with Barwell and May’s director of communications Robbie Gibb taking turns to woo colleagues.

Those who attended this week told BuzzFeed News the dinners were largely polite and informal if ultimately unconstructive, and saw MPs air their grievances with Chequers before Barwell and Gibb tried to win them round. “We’ve heard it all before and Gavin and Robbie are only changing people’s minds in their dreams,” said one MP. “But I am happy to drink their wine.”

The dinners form part of a four-pronged effort launched by Downing Street to sell Chequers. Aside from convincing sceptics in the parliamentary party, May’s team will be hosting receptions for Tory party members and association chairmen, with every cabinet minister ordered to hold two ‘membership engagement’ meetings each at Conservative party conference later this month. This is described by one MP as “Number 10 trying to prevent a slow hand clap in the auditorium during the PM’s speech”.

On Monday night, May will seek to secure the support of the public in a BBC Panorama special with Nick Robinson. May allowed the programme unprecedented access to film inside her Chequers residence, as well as letting the cameras into the Europe room in Number 10 during a meeting between the PM, her top Brexit aide Olly Robbins and Brexit secretary Dominic Raab.

Then there is the matter of convincing the EU. Number 10 insists there is still a lot of work to do to secure a deal, but in one-on-one meetings with Brexiteers Downing Street aides are adamant an agreement will be struck with no more concessions.

Their confidence has led Eurosceptics to conclude that a deal has been secretly sewn up with EU leaders. “It is a done deal,” said one former minister. “I really believe they have signed it all off with [Angela] Merkel and the ongoing negotiations are just a charade to keep her in power and get Chequers over the line, which suits the EU down to the ground”. A second MP reckoned: “They’re all sitting there in the negotiating room playing cards to pass the time”.

That level of distrust does not bode well for the next month, which will be crucial for both May and the Brexit hardliners on her own backbenches.

Maybe this is where the stories are coming from that the EU stance has changed. It may be due to the confidence shown by Downing Street in pushing Chequers. So where do we stand now, are there noises coming from the EU that we will accept Chequers or is the PM and her staff once again misguided?

murphaph

Barnier was quite clear that a single market for goods but not services (what Chequers essentially proposes) is impossible because most or many goods purchases include a good percentage of services built in. This is what happens when there's a single market.

The EU foresee a hard border between the UK and EU, as do I at this stage. The only issue left open is where that border runs in the case of Northern Ireland.

First Up

WomanSkirtFan8 wrote:

In The Pub

There are 7 episodes all of which are well worth watching.

Sorry; I gave it a try but got tired of watching them laughing at their own jokes.

What bits are worth watching?

judeboy101

Infini wrote: »

It fairly certain that there's no benefit or point to easing up on the border when it come's down to it. The Brit's are the one's who in reality are insisting on putting one in by leaving with no agreement. Article smelled off because it would make little sense to panic when all the problems are on the other side of the table. If one goes in it wont be the fault of the Irish government or the EU but because the Brit's walked themselves into it as every chance has been given for them to agree to something.

Remember lads, coveney spent years saying he was against unrestricted abortion, right up until he had his "journey". He has form changing his stance. Beware.

Rhineshark

judeboy101 wrote: »

Remember lads, coveney spent years saying he was against unrestricted abortion, right up until he had his "journey". He has form changing his stance. Beware.

That is a bit of a red herring.

Are we going to ban people from changing their minds now? Do we really want to encourage that sort of dogmatic-I-am-never-wrong attitude that I've seen mocked in the DUP? I read his story as to why he changed his mind and it makes sense for a normal human being. Sure, maybe he lied and then got his boots on the ground and campaigned for something he loathed because Reasons but that he went out and worked for it is a point towards an honest change in his view. Much like Ni Riada's sea-change on vaccination and that she now recommends it and even recommends extending the program.

I reckon that actions on top of the words do help to show someone's actual intent.

It is nothing to do with Brexit, nor does it mean that he's going to discover he's a Brexiter at heart.

At times, the sorta knee-jerk cynicism can be a bit wearing. Especially when it's not based on anything relevent.

Capt'n Midnight

Deleted User wrote: »

If a fudge happens and there is any notion that the EU made Ireland accept it, expect an extreme turn from pro-EU to anti in Ireland.

It would also upset all the small countries that rely on the EU to keep their larger neighbours in check.

And it would upset the Germans and French who don't want the UK to get special treatment.

judeboy101

Rhineshark wrote: »

That is a bit of a red herring.

Are we going to ban people from changing their minds now? Do we really want to encourage that sort of dogmatic-I-am-never-wrong attitude that I've seen mocked in the DUP? I read his story as to why he changed his mind and it makes sense for a normal human being. Sure, maybe he lied and then got his boots on the ground and campaigned for something he loathed because Reasons but that he went out and worked for it is a point towards an honest change in his view. Much like Ni Riada's sea-change on vaccination and that she now recommends it and even recommends extending the program.

I reckon that actions on top of the words do help to show someone's actual intent.

It is nothing to do with Brexit, nor does it mean that he's going to discover he's a Brexiter at heart.

At times, the sorta knee-jerk cynicism can be a bit wearing. Especially when it's not based on anything relevent.

"his story" smelled like spin to cover the fact he was on a hide to nothing. He is a very well paid politician first, remember that. If he thinks his job is safer by selling out the no-border, he will. Politics and optimism don't mix well, so a healthy dose of cynicism is a prerequisite.

Rhineshark

judeboy101 wrote: »

"his story" smelled like spin to cover the fact he was on a hide to nothing. He is a very well paid politician first, remember that. If he thinks his job is safer by selling out the no-border, he will. Politics and optimism don't mix well, so a healthy dose of cynicism is a prerequisite.

So why hasn't he?

judeboy101

Rhineshark wrote: »

So why hasn't he?

Because his boss hasn't yet.

EdgeCase

You also have to remember the EU is looking at this from a long game point of view. If the UK wants to go, it needs to leave cleanly without having any more nonsense and interfering in the future of the EU.

There's far more concern about the stability of the EU and the Eurozone and it's future than there is about UK deals on trade. The UK isn't in a strong negotiating position and will ultimately have to take a deal or just go off and sulk.

I'm getting concerned that FF will take the bait too. There's an agenda in the UK to cause political instability here before March by sowing seeds of conflict between FG and FF or even SF. You can see that plainly when you look at the headlines on climbdowns and fudges.

My view of it is keep a united political front here and have any general election fights after March.

We're going to be hit with every public relations, spin and political communication trick in the book from Britain over the next few months both from official levels if we're an impediment to the Tories and from campaigners who have shown themselves willing to use anything to get this over the line including all of the bizzare and manipulative Cambridge Analytica stuff.

So I would take a lot of these stories with a huge pinch of salt and be very aware of what's likely to come our way over the months ahead.

We effectively have a grand coalition at present and it's something we should use to the best of our ability by ensuring the entire Dail is contributing to active debate on Brexit and related issues. It's very much one of those situations where it's bigger than Irish politics.

I'm not a big fan of FG or FF or SF. At times I've no idea where I stand on party politics here. However, I'm very sure that we need to treat this as a major impending national crisis where we're pulling the best of the best from across the whole spectrum of elected representatives. There are ideas from all sides and there's significant soft power in Europe and beyond held by many parties here and we should be combining it and ensuring we've a decent outcome.

The only thing that matter is Ireland doesn't end up as collateral damage. It's something I think a shades of Irish politics can agree on.

An Claidheamh

Re: the above.

If the Irish government want to be taken seriously, then they may tell the British and their media, they want a united Ireland referendum in the event of a hard Brexit.

The British establishment and media use these tricks because they know the Irish government of the past will always toe their line, not defend their own interests and blame SF.

Fine Gael and the Irish media have a history of deference to Britain.

Coveney and Varadkar still do all of the above at any opportunity.

Even if the British put up a hard border, FG or FF would never dare retaliate like join Schengen or let immigrants through and the British know that.

McGiver

An Ciarraioch wrote:

And another question mark - have living standards fallen in the western LÀnder due to subsiding the former DDR? The evidence of the last 30 years suggests otherwise.

You have no alterative scenario to compare it with. The living standards have not fallen but you could argue that if there was no unification Western Germany’s living standards would be even higher than it is today.

EdgeCase

The problem is constitutionally in Northern Ireland the only way that can be triggered is by the Northern Assembly which, rather conveniently for the DUP and Tories, is out of service due to "artistic differences" and general Northern Irish political dysfunctionality.

Without the assembly in place, there's effectively no representation for the nationalist community or even the moderate unionist community. The only voice Northern Ireland has is the hard-line DUP.

The Irish government can attempt to represent the nationalist community and try to protect the GFA but only the NI assembly can kick start major constitutional debate in the North.

It's all too convenient that the assembly is crippled by a dispute over two topics that should be non issues in this day and age.

It's pretty clear the DUP want a hard Brexit, probably due to dogmatic notions. I can't see any other explanation. They've never been fans of the GFA in the first place and were only dragged along by the momentum of the process.

Perhaps they've some kind of fantasy about British isolationism. It's the only thing that makes any sense to me.

I wouldn't be so sure that there's all than many people in NI on either side of the sectarian divide who would agree with that position, but the tail wags the dog.

LeinsterDub

First Up wrote: »

Sorry; I gave it a try but got tired of watching them laughing at their own jokes.

What bits are worth watching?

Jason and Ciaran are worth listening to. Very knowledge. The guy who has travelled the world is just annoy.

FrancieBrady

EdgeCase wrote: »

The problem is constitutionally in Northern Ireland the only way that can be triggered is by the Northern Assembly which, rather conveniently for the DUP and Tories, is out of service due to "artistic differences" and general Northern Irish political dysfunctionality.

Without the assembly in place, there's effectively no representation for the nationalist community or even the moderate unionist community. The only voice Northern Ireland has is the hard-line DUP.

The Irish government can attempt to represent the nationalist community and try to protect the GFA but only the NI assembly can kick start major constitutional debate in the North.

It's all too convenient that the assembly is crippled by a dispute over two topics that should be non issues in this day and age.

It's pretty clear the DUP want a hard Brexit, probably due to dogmatic notions. I can't see any other explanation. They've never been fans of the GFA in the first place and were only dragged along by the momentum of the process.

Perhaps they've some kind of fantasy about British isolationism. It's the only thing that makes any sense to me.

I wouldn't be so sure that there's all than many people in NI on either side of the sectarian divide who would agree with that position, but the tail wags the dog.

You have to remember that it is not by any means the first time that unionists have boxed themselves into a corner such as this.
It comes from a deep strain of insecurity.

Sam Russell

EdgeCase wrote: »

The problem is constitutionally in Northern Ireland the only way that can be triggered is by the Northern Assembly which, rather conveniently for the DUP and Tories, is out of service due to "artistic differences" and general Northern Irish political dysfunctionality.

Without the assembly in place, there's effectively no representation for the nationalist community or even the moderate unionist community. The only voice Northern Ireland has is the hard-line DUP.

The Irish government can attempt to represent the nationalist community and try to protect the GFA but only the NI assembly can kick start major constitutional debate in the North.

It's all too convenient that the assembly is crippled by a dispute over two topics that should be non issues in this day and age.

It's pretty clear the DUP want a hard Brexit, probably due to dogmatic notions. I can't see any other explanation. They've never been fans of the GFA in the first place and were only dragged along by the momentum of the process.

Perhaps they've some kind of fantasy about British isolationism. It's the only thing that makes any sense to me.

I thought that it was the Secretary of State for NI who, alone, could trigger a referendum on UI, if the SoS for NI is of the opinion that it would be passed by a majority. If a referendum is to be put to the electorate of NI, then one would also be put to the electorate of Ireland at the same time. It would need to be passed by a simple majority by both electorates. The Assembly in NI is not necessarily involved.

Maybe I am wrong.