Brexit discussion thread IV

Water John

Remember borders between many countries in Europe have moved over the years. Not a student of European history, but even Strazbourg and the EU encamping there for one week a month. Strazbourg once in Germany now in France, TMK.
Also Barnier was directly involved in the GFA.

lawred2

EdgeCase wrote: »

My view of it is they Tories think the DUP are a puppy that will do what it's told like the Lib Dems did. So far, they've behaved and towed the line.

Are the DUP going to show they're capable of having an independent position on this or are they going to go down as having sold Northern Ireland out for a bit of a bung, which may never be paid anyway.

If they destabilise Northern Ireland, they are 100% to blame for it. They have the power to put a stop to this. I don't think they even care one way or the other about Brexit from an ideological point of view. I mean within the EU unionist and loyalist rights are guaranteed and there's a peaceful, relatively prosperous status quo. Without the EU they're a regional backwater with a very angry nationalist community and entirely at the behest of a UK government that probably thinks very little of Northern Ireland.

Does Arleen want the legacy of having set Northern Ireland back 40 years and undoing the constitutional status quo?

The DUPs politics isn't exactly complicated or nuanced.

A backwater with subjugated paddies would be heavenly

briany

EdgeCase wrote: »

My view of it is they Tories think the DUP are a puppy that will do what it's told like the Lib Dems did. So far, they've behaved and towed the line.

That would require the Tories knowing (or caring) about NI politics literally less than the stereotypical Midwestern American tourist. It's the DUP - the Democratic Unionist Party. Unionism is their main issue. It's their only issue, when push comes to shove. It would be like going into government with Plaid Cymru and expecting them not to kick up a fuss if the idea of abolishing Wales came about. There are many issues that these regional UK parties would go along on, but they're all heavily ideological when it comes to the status of their respective regions. It's the one area where you can expect the least compromise.

EdgeCase

Sam Russell wrote: »

It was always said of Loyalists that Loyalty to the Crown was second only to Loyalty to the half-Crown.

For those born after decimalisation, and not able to Google, The half-crown was a unit of currency in pre-decimal days.

Well it's loyalty to a version of Britishness that very few British people in Britain would recognise or be familiar with.

kuro68k

fergiesfolly wrote: »

Is the situation as it stands that the UK must leave the EU by March '19?
If there is a second referendum , does that automatically mean the UK stays within the EU or must they negotiate to remain?
I only ask because, if at the end of this debacle, there's a second  referendum that changes their decision, there should be a penalty for all the time and resources wasted over the last two years.
As in, they must accept the Euro and deeper integration into the EU.

The UK would have to ask to stay. The EU would likely allow Article 50 to be cancelled without too much fuss. An extension is a strong possibility, no-one really wants to see a no-deal crash out.

The terms of remaining are not clear... The EU has said that all the UK's special benefits, like the rebate, are already gone. But in the interests of getting it sorted quickly and avoiding the appearance of "punishing" the UK they might be willing to carry on as before.

I expect there would be some requirement that Article 50 is not immediately re-triggered. Article 50 will probably be removed/reformed heavily.

Kermit.de.frog

Someone is going to get stung in the coming days, but who?

Irish govt
DUP
EU
British govt

No way to please everyone here.

briany

kuro68k wrote: »

The UK would have to ask to stay. The EU would likely allow Article 50 to be cancelled without too much fuss. An extension is a strong possibility, no-one really wants to see a no-deal crash out.

The terms of remaining are not clear... The EU has said that all the UK's special benefits, like the rebate, are already gone. But in the interests of getting it sorted quickly and avoiding the appearance of "punishing" the UK they might be willing to carry on as before.

I expect there would be some requirement that Article 50 is not immediately re-triggered. Article 50 will probably be removed/reformed heavily.

If the EU and UK can't come to an agreement over two years from the referendum, all an extension is going to achieve is to buy some extra time for the UK to stockpile food etc.

Maybe that alone is worthwhile, but I seem to remember reading about one EU school of opinion being the sooner the UK learns Brexit reality, the better, and not be allowed to string this whole thing out indefinitely, posturing all the while.

ancapailldorcha

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Someone is going to get stung in the coming days, but who?

Irish govt
DUP
EU
British govt

No way to please everyone here.

I think you need to narrow your net to Conservative pro-Remain rebels and the ERG faction before looking outside the UK.

badtoro

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Someone is going to get stung in the coming days, but who?

Irish govt
DUP
EU
British govt

No way to please everyone here.

I think you need to narrow your net to Conservative pro-Remain rebels and the ERG faction before looking outside the UK.

Depends where you live, no?

Capt'n Midnight

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I don't think that's very likely - but if it was, I'd strongly consider Ireland taking the same deal and forging a trade partnership with the UK (joining the Commonwealth or something).

The key difference about being on either side of the border is whether its Dublin or Westminster making the big decisions.

The Economic and Social Research Institute has revised up its growth forecast for this year to 8.9%.

Up North , IF there is a "trade friendly" deal then total growth over the next three years will be just 1%.

Kermit.de.frog

The Brexiteers across the water seem very excited about Tusk's tweet on a Canada deal.

An Claidheamh

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I don't think that's very likely - but if it was, I'd strongly consider Ireland taking the same deal and forging a trade partnership with the UK (joining the Commonwealth or something).

The British commonwealth with it's unaccountable unelected secretive elites celebrating a vicious empire like the Soviet union?

Where do Irish people get the idea that a royal soirée of 3rd world countries is the same as a European economic and social bloc of democracies? The British papers.
It's not a trading bloc with zero tariffs like the EU. Just British visas for bowing to a monarch.


But then again,.... Britain control that organisation.

It's almost as if they can't countenance being equal members of anything.....

prawnsambo

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

The Brexiteers across the water seem very excited about Tusk's tweet on a Canada deal.

I think somebody posted earlier in the thread that if the EU made a statement that had some words switched around from a previous one, they'd all think the EU was caving. It wasn't so long ago that Barnier repeated something he'd said earlier in the year with a different emphasis and the brains trust that likes to comment on articles in The Telegraph were all "we have them now" and "let's bend them over, now that they're caving" and other such tasteful remarks.

ancapailldorcha

Leroy42 wrote: »

What are peoples opinions of the BBC journalists Laura Kuenssberg?

I find a lot of her 'political' stuff to be little more than window dressing. For example, her article yesterday on BBC about May's speech spent more time telling us that she danced, joked and didn't cough and that therefore she was back.

It didn't deal with the fact that Chequers wasn't mentioned, that she had promised to end austerity without any actual plan, she had just admitted that she had failed in the last two years to tackle housing despite it being a main plank of her leadership. That overall, the Tory conference offered nothing to prospective voters save for we aren't labour and we need to stick together.

Not for the first time, I was left feeling that she is more a social journalist, more interested in the goings on within politics, than the politics themselves.

To be honest, I think she's a fairly typical establishment commentator who isn't going to stray from the standard Tory narrative. I've never found her to be terribly insightful and recall that she was found guilty of bias by the BBC over an interview she did with Jeremy Corbyn where, if memory serves she tried to present him as a threat to national security in much the same manner as the Sun or Daily Mail might endeavour to.

She's on fine form today:

https://twitter.com/Andrew_Adonis/status/1047723620917817345?s=19

Akrasia

Its not the EU that's stopping the Brexiters from getting a deal, it's their own multitude of mutually contradictory 'red lines'

Dymo

Is the Canada deal good for the UK, they seem to be getting everything they want.

prawnsambo

Dymo wrote: »

Is the Canada deal good for the UK, they seem to be getting everything they want.

They didn't want it when it was first offered over a year ago.

An Ciarraioch

Dymo wrote: »

Is the Canada deal good for the UK, they seem to be getting everything they want.

It would need to be Canada plus SM elements for NI, otherwise you still have a hard Border both North-South and East-West.

Strazdas

Dymo wrote: »

Is the Canada deal good for the UK, they seem to be getting everything they want.

May doesn't want it as it locks her out of the Single Market and Customs Union or any sort of significant access to it.

Nody

Dymo wrote: »

Is the Canada deal good for the UK, they seem to be getting everything they want.

No single market access (no JIT possible etc.), no fix for the Irish border (without DUP throwing a strop about it) and no services (i.e. London is screwed) would be the big three issues with it.

The problem is May wants all the benefits of being in EU without any downsides which is simply a deal that will never be done but for some reason they keep claiming it's EU's fault for not giving it to them.

briany

Bit confused, here. Donald Tusk has tweeted that a Canada +++ deal is on the table, as it has been since day one. Boris Johnson has hailed that as a 'superb way forward'. This is the deal that includes a 'common rule book' on goods, but no CU.

So, the deal that was there all along, according to Tusk, is a step forward? Why did the UK ever take a step back, in that case?

Is the tactic that, by skirting so close to a hard Brexit, accepting a so-called Canada +++ will now be accepted as a huge win by everybody?

Econ__

briany wrote: »

Bit confused, here. Donald Tusk has tweeted that a Canada +++ deal is on the table, as it has been since day one. Boris Johnson has hailed that as a 'superb way forward'. This is the deal that includes a 'common rule book' on goods, but no CU.

So, the deal that was there all along, according to Tusk, is a step forward? Why did the UK ever take a step back, in that case?

Is the tactic that, by skirting so close to a hard Brexit, accepting a so-called Canada +++ will now be accepted as a huge win by everybody?

'Canada +++' does not include any common rule book for goods. It is a bog standard FTA like the EU has done with many third countries.

The UK took a step back from it because it's an agreement that guarantees the activation of the Irish backstop and thus placing a border down the Irish Sea.

Econ__

Dymo wrote: »

Is the Canada deal good for the UK, they seem to be getting everything they want.

The hint is in the name.

Canada = far away

Canada deal = designed for counties that are far away and do not rely on deep and comprehensive trade with the EU


Given the UK's geographical location is tied down in Europe and many of its businesses rely on integrated trade with the EU - I would say it's a pretty bad deal.

Econ__

Leroy42 wrote: »

What are peoples opinions of the BBC journalists Laura Kuenssberg?

I find a lot of her 'political' stuff to be little more than window dressing. For example, her article yesterday on BBC about May's speech spent more time telling us that she danced, joked and didn't cough and that therefore she was back.

It didn't deal with the fact that Chequers wasn't mentioned, that she had promised to end austerity without any actual plan, she had just admitted that she had failed in the last two years to tackle housing despite it being a main plank of her leadership. That overall, the Tory conference offered nothing to prospective voters save for we aren't labour and we need to stick together.

Not for the first time, I was left feeling that she is more a social journalist, more interested in the goings on within politics, than the politics themselves.

She is an excellent journalist.

Gets a lot of subtle but important information out of various high level sources and communicates it well. Sometimes with Laura it's more important to listen to how she says things rather than what she says.

There's a fine line to tread when you're a journalist in her position - reporting accurately - but doing so while keeping your sources happy (so they don't stop feeding you info). It's a very difficult balancing act, and while she makes some mistakes which get magnified, on the whole she does an excellent job.

flatty

Econ__ wrote: »

Leroy42 wrote: »

What are peoples opinions of the BBC journalists Laura Kuenssberg?

I find a lot of her 'political' stuff to be little more than window dressing. For example, her article yesterday on BBC about May's speech spent more time telling us that she danced, joked and didn't cough and that therefore she was back.

It didn't deal with the fact that Chequers wasn't mentioned, that she had promised to end austerity without any actual plan, she had just admitted that she had failed in the last two years to tackle housing despite it being a main plank of her leadership. That overall, the Tory conference offered nothing to prospective voters save for we aren't labour and we need to stick together.

Not for the first time, I was left feeling that she is more a social journalist, more interested in the goings on within politics, than the politics themselves.

She is an excellent journalist.

Gets a lot of subtle but important information out of various high level sources and communicates it well. Sometimes with Laura it's more important to listen to how she says things rather than what she says.

There's a fine line to tread when you're a journalist in her position - reporting accurately - but doing so while keeping your sources happy (so they don't stop feeding you info). It's a very difficult balancing act, and while she makes some mistakes which get magnified, on the whole she does an excellent job.

Nope, she's a reporter, not a journalist. She is economist-lite, and seems very much a govt lapdog by bbc proxy. I struggle to think of an incidence where she has presented the economic facts of brexit. Its all autocue reading of bland non specific, non critical "balanced" puff pieces.

Econ__

flatty wrote: »

Nope, she's a reporter, not a journalist. She is economist-lite, and seems very much a govt lapdog by bbc proxy. I struggle to think of an incidence where she has presented the economic facts of brexit. Its all autocue reading of bland non specific, non critical "balanced" puff pieces.

She's a journalist - she collects information (often exclusive) and reports/writes about it.

Not all journalists are economically oriented - there are others in the BBC that carry out that role.

flatty

She's the economics editor.

Dymo

Econ__ wrote: »

'Canada +++' does not include any common rule book for goods. It is a bog standard FTA like the EU has done with many third countries.

The UK took a step back from it because it's an agreement that guarantees the activation of the Irish backstop and thus placing a border down the Irish Sea.

Ok, so does that mean then that they get to control free movement of people, get to make there own trade agreements, no ECJ involvement and no more payments to the EU, and the have a FTA in place, plus we don't know what the extra +++ is yet.

That looks like a huge win for the UK, I know they have to sort out the Border but Barnier is already softening on that.

Econ__

flatty wrote: »

She's the economics editor.

She's the political editor.

A Dub in Glasgo

Econ__ wrote: »

She is an excellent journalist.

.

Nah, I don't buy it