Brexit discussion thread IV

Alan_P

Enzokk wrote: »

Almost everyone, you forgot the DUP. In any other time they would not even be thought of, but not this parliament.

You think if Theresa May presents that to Westminister she won't get 450 votes ?

LeinsterDub

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I didn't say they were the reason, I said they forced them.

By stepping back and not taking the lead (as would have been expected) they left the way open for the government (petrified of being seen to be in alliance with the shinners) to do what they have so often failed to do - speak up for those who identify as Irish and for those who live along the border.
What would have happened if SF led in this would be patronising 'go easy' talk from Leo and Co. while trying to achieve the same thing behind closed doors.
They made FG be honest, so to speak.

I have no idea whether that was a thought out strategy or not but it sure has worked in terms of how nationalists in the north see Dublin now.

This is a very SF can do no wrong reading of the situation. SF aren't in government here and couldn't possibly take the lead. I'm not sure how you expected them to do so. The Irish government as a guarantor of the GFA was always going to try push for as close to the status quo as possible in NI.

Muscles Schultz

Leonard Hofstadter wrote: »

A Canada deal with a backstop for NI is surely a win win for everyone.

It means it will be a Hard Brexit so for all intents and purposes the Brexiters get what they want.

It's also far inferior to current deal with the EU (and let's not forget, free trade deals only cover goods - which is 20% of the UK economy) but it keeps all the good bits from the point of view of EU countries who do a lot of trade with the UK (no tariffs on the food we sell to the UK or on the cars the Germans sell to them either) but the UK won't have passporting or any of the other benefits of the single market and the EU won't have compromised the single market so it's still the same deal other third countries get with the EU so it's a win for the EU as well.

Or am I missing something?

But is the backstop permanent? If not what happens long term with regard to NI?

Imreoir2

Muscles Schultz wrote: »

But is the backstop permanent? If not what happens long term with regard to NI?

The backstop would be inplace until the British come up with some other proposal that would solve the problem and agree with the EU to implement that new solution. So essentially permanent.

swampgas

Leonard Hofstadter wrote: »

A Canada deal with a backstop for NI is surely a win win for everyone.

It means it will be a Hard Brexit so for all intents and purposes the Brexiters get what they want.

It's also far inferior to current deal with the EU (and let's not forget, free trade deals only cover goods - which is 20% of the UK economy) but it keeps all the good bits from the point of view of EU countries who do a lot of trade with the UK (no tariffs on the food we sell to the UK or on the cars the Germans sell to them either) but the UK won't have passporting or any of the other benefits of the single market and the EU won't have compromised the single market so it's still the same deal other third countries get with the EU so it's a win for the EU as well.

Or am I missing something?

What about non-tarriff barriers? I honestly don't know what is being proposed by a Canada style free trade deal, would this deal mean inspections and paperwork checks at Dover?

UsedToWait

Imreoir2 wrote: »

The backstop would be inplace until the British come up with some other proposal that would solve the problem and agree with the EU to implement that new solution. So essentially permanent.

Isn't the backstop signed up to open to interpretation about its scope?

The level of good faith shown by the British so far in the negotiations would lead me to think they'll try for the bare minimum of what was agreed.

Would that then definitely mean life could carry on as normal for people living and working and trading in the border area?

Enzokk

Alan_P wrote: »

You think if Theresa May presents that to Westminister she won't get 450 votes ?

Sure, for this vote she may get it through, but what about future votes where she needs the DUP to get it through?

FrancieBrady

LeinsterDub wrote: »

This is a very SF can do no wrong reading of the situation.

It isn't really, as I said:

franciebrady wrote:

I have no idea whether that was a thought out strategy or not

SF aren't in government here and couldn't possibly take the lead. I'm not sure how you expected them to do so. The Irish government as a guarantor of the GFA was always going to try push for as close to the status quo as possible in NI.

Farage, Boris and Rees Mogg aren't in government either. There are many things they could have done right up to taking their seats and agitating in Westminster but they didn't.
There would be plenty of people in the north and south who would say that the Irish government has been lazy with regard to it's role as a guarantor of the GFA up to now. But that is getting off topic.

Imreoir2

UsedToWait wrote: »

Isn't the backstop signed up to open to interpretation about its scope?

The level of good faith shown by the British so far in the negotiations would lead me to think they'll try for the bare minimum of what was agreed.

Would that then definitely mean life could carry on as normal for people living and working and trading in the border area?

The backstop is yet to be formally agreed in the withdrawl treaty, its scope is yet to be set, but the EU has been quite clear that it will be open ended and will only cease if replaced by some other agreed provision should the UK come up with some other workable solution that both sides can agree to. Lets not forget that the EU has said that for a backstop to be acceptable it has to be "all weather".

Anthracite

FrancieBrady wrote: »

There would be plenty of people in the north and south who would say that the Irish government has been lazy with regard to it's role as a guarantor of the GFA up to now. But that is getting off topic.

Those people would be wrong, of course.

LeinsterDub

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It isn't really, as I said:




Farage, Boris and Rees Mogg aren't in government either. There are many things they could have done right up to taking their seats and agitating in Westminster but they didn't.
There would be plenty of people in the north and south who would say that the Irish government has been lazy with regard to it's role as a guarantor of the GFA up to now. But that is getting off topic.

Probably the same sort of people who think the Irish government should of sent the army into Derry in the 70's. Completely out of touch with reality.

FrancieBrady

Anthracite wrote: »

Those people would be wrong, of course.

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Probably the same sort of people who think the Irish government should of sent the army into Derry in the 70's. Completely out of touch with reality.

I think you need to research the subject a bit more tbh. There is a tension here with regard to how the Irish governments role in delivering the process that the GFA was intended to be has played out.

Trite generalisations just reveal a lack of awareness on your part. The GFA was in trouble (because of inaction) long before Brexit came onto the horizon.

trellheim

So it is looking like they are trying to build a bridge on NI https://twitter.com/faisalislam


I can't see it to be honest , ERG would block it or someone like Liam Fox would rip it up as it would constrain NI to no new FTAs ... Unless May unites the party on this one or Labour get a Canada+++ which would explain the reaching out from Tories during the week

Econ__

Leonard Hofstadter wrote: »

A Canada deal with a backstop for NI is surely a win win for everyone.

It means it will be a Hard Brexit so for all intents and purposes the Brexiters get what they want.

It's also far inferior to current deal with the EU (and let's not forget, free trade deals only cover goods - which is 20% of the UK economy) but it keeps all the good bits from the point of view of EU countries who do a lot of trade with the UK (no tariffs on the food we sell to the UK or on the cars the Germans sell to them either) but the UK won't have passporting or any of the other benefits of the single market and the EU won't have compromised the single market so it's still the same deal other third countries get with the EU so it's a win for the EU as well.

Or am I missing something?

No it isn't.

It's good from the perspective that it avoids a hard border in Ireland - and that's it.

It's bad for remainers in the UK, it's bad for soft Brexiters, it's bad for the Irish economy. In the long term, it's only better than 'no deal' on the margins.

LeinsterDub

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I think you need to research the subject a bit more tbh. There is a tension here with regard to how the Irish governments role in delivering the process that the GFA was intended to be has played out.

Trite generalisations just reveal a lack of awareness on your part. The GFA was in trouble (because of inaction) long before Brexit came onto the horizon.

And what would you suggest the Irish government do? They can't force the British to force Stormont to return nor can they force British Irish council to meet

Sam Russell

LeinsterDub wrote: »

And what would you suggest the Irish government do? They can't force the British to force Stormont to return nor can they force British Irish council to meet

The British Gov should call fresh elections for the Northern Assembly.

LeinsterDub

Sam Russell wrote: »

The British Gov should call fresh elections for the Northern Assembly.

Indeed they should but that's not something the Irish government can control.

FrancieBrady

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Indeed they should but that's not something the Irish government can control.

The Irish gov more or less sat on it's hands and criticised SF mainly (for political gain and to hold them at bay in the south) since the signing of the GFA
They stood by and more or less watched the process stagnate.
It is no accident that nationalists have welcomed their sudden vocal involvement now that Brexit threatens both jurisdictions.
They should have been much more vocal before.

flatty

badtoro wrote: »

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

charlie14 wrote: »

.......if you consider our own experience of just 7 years ago with Jean-Claude Trichet and bank senior bondholders.

Not letting this pass, putting the tax payer in hock by guaranteeing the Bank Bond holders with taxpayer money is wholly Fianna Fails fault, utterly and entirely.

Nate

Though I find myself siding with them more often than I used to, I must agree with the above. The reality is Ireland blinked first, we had the ticking parcel and agreed to keep it.

We were entirely responsible for the parcel. We had actually had a taoiseach wandering round the eu lecturing the other countries on the wonders of light touch regulation. It was absolutely our own mess of our own making, preceded by swathes of irish buying everything and anything in Europe. I have a friend who is an estate agent in Budapest. He told me in the early noughties that it was insane, with irish buyers buying everything sight unseen. I quote him directly "it is mental, there's actually now one price for the locals, one for Europeans, and a third for the Irish". This is an English man who had stated with us as schoolkids back in the eighties, and loved it.
All the eu did was bail us out.

flatty

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

charlie14 wrote: »

I may have missed it, but I cannot recall Ireland making any commitment not to burn bondholders prior to Trichet`s call to Michael Noonan 31st. March 2011 ?

You missed the Bank guarantee specifically ensuring the bondholders weren't on the hook made by Fianna Fail?

Nate

My reading of that is that the decision makers thought that in those highly uncertain times, the bank guarantee would lure enormous capital to the Irish banks, and reverse the haemorrhage of money. They actually alluded to this at the time and were convinced they could and would entice nervous money in huge amounts from the rest of Europe, and the UK in particular. They were wrong, for whatever reason as things seemed to just happen too quickly, but it has been done to death.
It is relevant here, in that the EU did not shaft us. It actually stabilised us. It will, I am certain, continue to stand four square behind us on the border issue. I don't know quite how many more times it has to be said by the negotiating team.

charlie14

Alan_P wrote: »

Of course we could have. We couldn't because of Fianna Fail stupidity, arrogance and incompetence. Fianna Fail made bond holder debt national debt :- this cannot be repeated enough.


It was the third time they'd impoverished the country, after the Economic War of the 30s, and the 77 manifesto. If FF are truly patriotic, they might perhaps consider they're not actually good at governing, and disband ?

Are you not perhaps confusing your apples and oranges ?
It appears from your post that you are at variance with the view of Michael Noonan the then Fine Gael finance minister, and Ajia Chopra of the IMF that the only impediment to burning unsecured bank bondholders was the ECB in the form of Jean-Claude Trichet. Something had it been done in the case of Anglo Irish Bank and Irish Nationwide alone would have alleviated the burden on the the Irish taxpayer by 9 billion euro.



If you are making a case for political parties disbanding on the basis of the bank guarantee Dail vote of September 2008 then not only should Fianna Fail do so but also Fine Gael, Sinn Fein and The Green Party also disband as they all supported it ?

trellheim

OK so it looks like a lot of the poll corrs are lining up behind a fudge on controls to avoid calling it a border , see todays Irish Mail on Sunday . I still cant see how its going to work unless they stay in the Customs Union forever.... much media prepping is being done

badtoro

flatty wrote: »

badtoro wrote: »

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

charlie14 wrote: »

.......if you consider our own experience of just 7 years ago with Jean-Claude Trichet and bank senior bondholders.

Not letting this pass, putting the tax payer in hock by guaranteeing the Bank Bond holders with taxpayer money is wholly Fianna Fails fault, utterly and entirely.

Nate

Though I find myself siding with them more often than I used to, I must agree with the above. The reality is Ireland blinked first, we had the ticking parcel and agreed to keep it.

We were entirely responsible for the parcel. We had actually had a taoiseach wandering round the eu lecturing the other countries on the wonders of light touch regulation. It was absolutely our own mess of our own making, preceded by swathes of irish buying everything and anything in Europe. I have a friend who is an estate agent in Budapest. He told me in the early noughties that it was insane, with irish buyers buying everything sight unseen. I quote him directly "it is mental, there's actually now one price for the locals, one for Europeans, and a third for the Irish". This is an English man who had stated with us as schoolkids back in the eighties, and loved it.
All the eu did was bail us out.

It was the fault of people who over indulged, I happen not to be in that cohort of people.

The reality of the situation is that European banks were exposed. We could have played on that and got a much better situation in the end, but the Irish govt rolled over, if I remember correctly with 17 hours until the deadline. That's blinking first. That's owning the parcel, including the TNT belonging to private gamblers.

Nate--IRL--

badtoro wrote: »

It was the fault of people who over indulged, I happen not to be in that cohort of people.

Bull****, it was lack of governance by those responsible for regulating the system.

Nate

LeinsterDub

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The Irish gov more or less sat on it's hands and criticised SF mainly (for political gain and to hold them at bay in the south) since the signing of the GFA
They stood by and more or less watched the process stagnate.
It is no accident that nationalists have welcomed their sudden vocal involvement now that Brexit threatens both jurisdictions.
They should have been much more vocal before.

So you've no actual suggestions on what the Irish government should do apart from being more vocal what ever that would achieve?

FrancieBrady

LeinsterDub wrote: »

So you've no actual suggestions on what the Irish government should do apart from being more vocal what ever that would achieve?

They haven't even been 'vocal' about the issues surrounding the stagnation of an agreement that is NOW of ultra importance.

The problem is that it is only important now that the south is under threat and they are applying plenty of pressure and being vocal. Just ask any DUPer about that.

badtoro

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

badtoro wrote: »

It was the fault of people who over indulged, I happen not to be in that cohort of people.

Bull****, it was lack of governance by those responsible for regulating the system.

Nate

It may be an uncompleted picture, but it's far from bull****, well you know it too.

Correct there was sfa regulation.

There were also the thousands upon thousands of gullible people who took out massive loans for apartments, houses, new cars, twenty seven holidays a year, multi day parties, the list goes on. People who had very ordinary jobs. Like being on a bicycle at the top of a steep hill, blindfolded, all you need do is hit something on the way down and you're screwed.

ancapailldorcha

Mod: Can we get back on topic please.

LeinsterDub

FrancieBrady wrote: »

They haven't even been 'vocal' about the issues surrounding the stagnation of an agreement that is NOW of ultra importance.

The problem is that it is only important now that the south is under threat and they are applying plenty of pressure and being vocal. Just ask any DUPer about that.

How is the south under threat? Surely the best thing for the south is to say the north be damned let's have a FTA with Britain.

FrancieBrady

LeinsterDub wrote: »

How is the south under threat? Surely the best thing for the south is to say the north be damned let's have a FTA with Britain.

It is economically under major threat if there is a hard border and if there is a Brexit.

Saying the 'north be dammed' is just suicide for this island, even though I know many would like to say that. Not even FG or FF are that myopic or or stupid.