Brexit discussion thread IV

FrancieBrady

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Yet discussing the GFA interested you here ? Odd that.

Wrong again. I referred to it. And declined getting into further discussion of it.

LeinsterDub

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Wrong again. I referred to it. And declined getting into further discussion of it.

We aren't going to have much of a discussion , if one poster constantly throws out assertions , someone offers a counter point and the original poster says actually I don't want to talk about it .

Anyway this is actually way off topic so I'm going to leave it now.

MrMusician18

LeinsterDub wrote: »

We aren't going to have much of a discussion , if one poster constantly throws out assertions , someone offers a counter point and the original poster says actually I don't want to talk about it .

Anyway this is actually way off topic so I'm going to leave it now.

Francie seems to think it's been SF that's led on this issue and forced the Irish government into the line it's taken.

Completely wrong of course, the Irish government would have taken the line it has regardless of the existence of SF if for purely practical reasons.

Zubeneschamali

trellheim wrote: »

The ERG etc view it religiously; there is no benefit to being out but that does not matter; sovereignty outwith the EU is all that matters.

The UK here is a bit like Dev's Ireland in the 1930s, starting an economic war with a much larger neighbour because patriotism/chauvinism plays well domestically.

Zubeneschamali

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I didn't think I would ever hear a FG Taoiseach stressing that they were the United Ireland party tbh.

ORIGINS OF FINE GAEL
Fine Gael was founded in 1933 following the amalgamation of a number groups: the pro-treaty Cumann na nGaedheal of W. T. Cosgrave, the Centre Party under Frank MacDermot, and the National Guard. It was also given a secondary name ‘the United Ireland Party’, as a result of which in its early years it was occasionally referred to in newspapers as ‘UIP’.

Imreoir2

Calina wrote: »

If you want unification at some point in the future, this attitude is going to have to change. I owe you nothing. Comments like this suggest nationalists in the north despise the population in the south. Why should we unite with people for whom we can never do enough, see your comments about the GFA pages back.

Either the people in the north and the people in the south are one people or they are not. If you truly see them as one, then stop criticising the south. The more you do it, the more the south doesnt see you as one with us.

Since when is citicising fellow Irish people "un-Irish"? I would have thought it was something of a national passtime.

Peregrinus

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

The UK here is a bit like Dev's Ireland in the 1930s, starting an economic war with a much larger neighbour because patriotism/chauvinism plays well domestically.

Interesting thought! There are definitely parallels, although I would say that Dev had more cause for his measures than the UK does. In economic terms, the land annuities were a drain on Ireland for the benefit of the UK,whereas EU membership has been nothing but an economic blessing for the UK.

Zubeneschamali

Peregrinus wrote: »

the land annuities were a drain on Ireland for the benefit of the UK,whereas EU membership has been nothing but an economic blessing for the UK.

I think the land annuities were more like the UKs Divorce Bill than the UKs membership contributions, paying off existing commitments which are unpopular.

FrancieBrady

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Francie seems to think it's been SF that's led on this issue and forced the Irish government into the line it's taken.

Completely wrong of course, the Irish government would have taken the line it has regardless of the existence of SF if for purely practical reasons.

Something changed FG's mind on special status for northern Ireland. Kenny's government absolutely opposed it.
What that was is a matter of opinion I suppose, but given SF have been advocating for it since the UK decided to leave, it is fair to say that they changed FG's mind or led on that issue.

demfad

Huge story broke last night. UK appears to have taken an autocratic lurch.

https://opendemocracy.net/uk/brexitinc/james-cusick-adam-ramsay/met-police-stall-brexit-campaign-investigations-claiming-polit

Five months ago, the Electoral Commission began referring various Leave campaigners to Met police for breaking Uk law. But police has stalled investigating citing ‘political sensitivities’.

This involves AAron Banks massive movement of money into the Leave campaigns, money that he apparently didn't have.

The Vote Leave, BeLeave investigation may show criminality on the behalf of Johnson and Gove. The whistleblowers are claiming full knowledge of and particpation in crimes of these prominent politicians and have provide an extensive dossier to the police over 5 months ago. Also implicated are people now acting as personal secretaries to Theresa May.
This would also presumably lead to a full investigation of Cambridge Analytica/AIQ as Mueller and the Canadian parliament are now doing.
That would potentially take out the rotten core of the Tory party.


Some comments below:

“If the MPS are delaying an investigation into a likely crime because of political interference then ‘scandal’ does not begin to cover it. Were that true, we would be living in a police state where criminality was overlooked – if that criminality was expedient to the government"

JO Maugham, QC.

Labour’s deputy leader, Tom Watson, said that breaking law during “one of the most critical moments in the UK’s history” made it of “urgent national interest that the police investigate what happened, how it happened and who was responsible.”

"To not even consider charges for illegality on basis of political sensitivities threatens the defence of our cherished rule of law."

Thom Brooks, Uk's only Professor of Law and Government.



"Take my word, the evidence that I brought forward, that you have seen for yourself is extensive and clear. The police aren’t stalling it because of evidence. They’re stalling it because of ‘political sensitivities’. The most powerful people in this country are behind this."

Shahmir Sanni, Former BeLeave employee and whistleblower.

demfad

Leroy42 wrote: »

The fact is that nearly all the actors in this sorry saga have played their roles as everyone would have expected them to prior to the start. The only stand out is the Tory party which have been naive, lying, cowardly, indecisive, unprepared, shown a staggering lack of control and foresight and been nothing more than a omnishambles.

I would add the Labour party to the Conservatives. Their opposition has been disgraceful.

Panrich

The DUP are being outflanked here and their stance is looking ridiculous at this point.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/oct/12/eu-makes-direct-appeal-northern-irish-firms-brexit-backstop

It looks like the EU is offering NI the best of both worlds and that should be something that the unionist community would grab with both arms. A deal that allows free trade with both the EU and the 'mainland' UK gives NI business an advantage over the rest of the island. It also gives an iron-clad reason to maintain the status quo and the union in perpetuity.

Voting down the deal against the wishes of the people and the business community is a folly that makes no strategic sense and could fatally weaken the union they want to defend.

FrancieBrady

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

ORIGINS OF FINE GAEL
Fine Gael was founded in 1933 following the amalgamation of a number groups: the pro-treaty Cumann na nGaedheal of W. T. Cosgrave, the Centre Party under Frank MacDermot, and the National Guard. It was also given a secondary name ‘the United Ireland Party’, as a result of which in its early years it was occasionally referred to in newspapers as ‘UIP’.

I know that. What I said was that I would never have expected a FG Taoiseach to be stressing that.

Leroy42

Panrich wrote: »

The DUP are being outflanked here and their stance is looking ridiculous at this point.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/oct/12/eu-makes-direct-appeal-northern-irish-firms-brexit-backstop

It looks like the EU is offering NI the best of both worlds and that should be something that the unionist community would grab with both arms. A deal that allows free trade with both the EU and the 'mainland' UK gives NI business an advantage over the rest of the island. It also gives an iron-clad reason to maintain the status quo and the union in perpetuity.

Voting down the deal against the wishes of the people and the business community is a folly that makes no strategic sense and could fatally weaken the union they want to defend.

Depends on your POV. They are looking at this from a purely union point of view. That any created difference will only hasten the pushing of NI out of the union. They, quite rightly, see NI as being sold off on the back of the drive for Brexit. In essence GB is willing to let go of NI in order to secure their wishes. No one in NI has voted for that.

Panrich

Leroy42 wrote: »

Depends on your POV. They are looking at this from a purely union point of view. That any created difference will only hasten the pushing of NI out of the union. They, quite rightly, see NI as being sold off on the back of the drive for Brexit. In essence GB is willing to let go of NI in order to secure their wishes. No one in NI has voted for that.

But the EU deal does just the opposite to that. Yes it will create a difference between NI/GB but it will also create a unique environment for NI where it can orbit both the EU and GB stars at once.

That creates a competitive advantage for the province and one that is dependent on the union remaining in place. In the event of NI joining a UI it then becomes just another part of the EU and would lose it's free access to the UK market.

catrionanic

Panrich wrote: »

But the EU deal does just the opposite to that. Yes it will create a difference between NI/GB but it will also create a unique environment for NI where it can orbit both the EU and GB stars at once.

That creates a competitive advantage for the province and one that is dependent on the union remaining in place. In the event of NI joining a UI it then becomes just another part of the EU and would lose it's free access to the UK market.

Ah but anything at all that brings NI closer to ROI, or even an inch further from GB, is the worst nightmare of the DUP. To them, their Britishness is the be all and end all of everything. It absolutely comes before any concerns about the economy or what the general populace may wish for, or even the threat of a return to violence. The union is EVERYTHING. It is the very foundations they are built on.

It's been bred into them from they were born. It's intrinsic and almost innate. Anything that even has the whisper of a UI shakes them to their core because it would mean that they have lost and the enemy has won. And in a society and culture where this fear permeates and is at the centre of everything, they will do anything within their power to avoid it. Anything at all.

The DUP's lines really are "blood" red. There is no talking them down from the edge of their cliff. And they will take everyone else off that cliff with them if need be - they are martyrs to loyalism and the union.

I grew up in north Belfast and have witnessed plenty of this first-hand.

Strazdas

trellheim wrote: »

Same old crap from the tories since Maastricht . I recently finished John Major's bio and there is just so much in common.

The ERG etc view it religiously; there is no benefit to being out but that does not matter; sovereignty outwith the EU is all that matters. From that narrow point of view I see it from the Ireland point of view, but the EU is in no way the same as Ireland was in 1916 , Juncker is not going to send a gunboat up the thames.

These guys are stuck in the 1950s. They want to be "sovereign" and have hard borders in a globalised world which has instant communication, cheap air travel, integrated trading systems and the world 100 times more interconnected than it has ever been before.

They are a bunch of fantasists and ideologues unable to cope with the real world.

Enzokk

trellheim wrote: »

The point was made on the Andrew Neil shows that if we had a GE we would likely get Theresa May back again

I don't know about that. Labour started something like 15 points behind the Conservatives when she called the last election and they were neck and neck by the time of the election. The reason for this was a combination of incompetence from the Conservatives and people getting to hear the message from Labour outside of the media bubble as they have rules on reporting when it comes to elections. Once the rhetoric around Corbyn was silenced and people saw their policies they found they agreed with them.

I don't see any change in the leadership of the Conservatives so you know they will screw up again. It will not be a dementia tax this time but maybe their proclamation that austerity is over, when we know it is not. They will be hammered again and this time they do not have a lead and also Brexit is looming ever larger and they have made a right mess of that.

Also, while Andrew Neil is very good at putting politicians on the spot his views on Brexit makes him an impartial at the moment. If you look at his views on HIV and AIDS and being a climate change denier, I think it is dangerous to have such a voice that is so influential, not matter how good he is at asking politicians questions.

Panrich wrote: »

But the EU deal does just the opposite to that. Yes it will create a difference between NI/GB but it will also create a unique environment for NI where it can orbit both the EU and GB stars at once.

That creates a competitive advantage for the province and one that is dependent on the union remaining in place. In the event of NI joining a UI it then becomes just another part of the EU and would lose it's free access to the UK market.

But NI will only be in that position as long as the UK stays close to the EU, same as Ireland. Once the UK starts signing their own trade deals and the regulations start diverging from the EU it will mean that NI will move further away from the UK and more checks will be done.

Lets be clear here that once the backstop is signed and it allows for divergence in regulations, while it may not mean a "border" in the Irish sea right now, it will mean it in the future. I think all sides know it is only about getting it over the line initially and then having implemented as needed later on.

There is no way that NI will be able to participate in the US free trade deal if it means the UK will accept lower food standards so they will lose that advantage.

Leroy42

Whatever deal TM finally comes back to Parliament with, I still find it very hard to see where she is going to get the numbers to get it though.

The DUP will be off, at best they might get them to abstain.

But there is the ERG, with Baker claiming 80 (although during the week he watered this down to possibly 40). Not sure if that includes the likes of Johnson and Davies.

On top of that, the rumours doing the rounds is that another few current cabinet ministers are thinking of resigning. So where is TM going to make up these lost 60 (I'm being generous to TM) or so votes?

I can't see how they will get it through.

Some commentators have stated that TM has shown great resilience and staying power to date, but all that was predicated on not actually making any actual decisions. The one decision she did make, December agreement, she rowed back on.

Zubeneschamali

Leroy42 wrote: »

I can't see how they will get it through.

Despite all the noise from the ERG, they do not actually want to crash out in March. Since May will not bring this to Parliament until there is no time left to negotiate, it will be her deal or no deal.

Even if the DUP rebel, she can probably get 10 Blairites to defy Corbyn and get it through.

UsedToWait

catrionanic wrote: »

Ah but anything at all that brings NI closer to ROI, or even an inch further from GB, is the worst nightmare of the DUP. To them, their Britishness is the be all and end all of everything. It absolutely comes before any concerns about the economy or what the general populace may wish for, or even the threat of a return to violence. The union is EVERYTHING. It is the very foundations they are built on.

It's been bred into them from they were born. It's intrinsic and almost innate. Anything that even has the whisper of a UI shakes them to their core because it would mean that they have lost and the enemy has won. And in a society and culture where this fear permeates and is at the centre of everything, they will do anything within their power to avoid it. Anything at all.

The DUP's lines really are "blood" red. There is no talking them down from the edge of their cliff. And they will take everyone else off that cliff with them if need be - they are martyrs to loyalism and the union.

I grew up in north Belfast and have witnessed plenty of this first-hand.

Regarding the Blood Red lines, the Ulster Covenant was apocryphally signed in blood.

It's interesting to see how far they've travelled since then..

BEING CONVINCED in our consciences that Home Rule would be disastrous to the material well-being of Ulster as well as of the whole of Ireland, subversive of our civil and religious freedom, destructive of our citizenship, and perilous to the unity of the Empire, we, whose names are underwritten, men of Ulster, loyal subjects of His Gracious Majesty King George V., humbly relying on the God whom our fathers in days of stress and trial confidently trusted, do hereby pledge ourselves in solemn Covenant, throughout this our time of threatened calamity, to stand by one another in defending, for ourselves and our children, our cherished position of equal citizenship in the United Kingdom, and in using all means which may be found necessary to defeat the present conspiracy to set up a Home Rule Parliament in Ireland.

Enzokk

Seems like the deal will not have a indefinite customs union clause, at least according to the Prime Ministers office.

Brexit: No 10 says it will not agree to indefinite customs union with EU

Downing Street has insisted the government will not sign up to any deal with the EU that would keep the UK in a customs union indefinitely, as the prime minister tries to assuage concerns in her cabinet.

British negotiators in Brussels are thought to be preparing to sign up to a draft of the backstop for Northern Ireland – aimed at preventing a hard border – that could see the whole of the UK effectively inside the customs union.

The EU27 have long signalled they will not accept any end date for the backstop being inserted into the legally binding text of the withdrawal agreement.

So we have the UK not willing to sign up to a agreement unless it has an end date. We have the EU who will not be willing to sign a deal if it has a date attached to it.

We could have a fudge of words from No.10 where the UK will not be in it permanently but NI would, but this would contradict her words since she was promoted to the top job about keeping the Union in place.

So its still a mess.

VinLieger

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Well if he doesn't accept it, join those who are against it or who want to discard it.
Plenty of things I wasn't born for that I accept as my responsibility to uphold.
If I don't, I work for and vote for change, like same sex marraige legislation or other constitutional reforms.
Pretty simple really.

Do you have a problem reading questions asked of you? Ill ask it again so.


What as an ROI citizen born post 1980 do I need to accept responsibility for in relation to the problems in NI?

Leroy42

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Despite all the noise from the ERG, they do not actually want to crash out in March. Since May will not bring this to Parliament until there is no time left to negotiate, it will be her deal or no deal.

Even if the DUP rebel, she can probably get 10 Blairites to defy Corbyn and get it through.

But there are still the likes of Johnson and Davies (there are others). They simply cannot be seen to cave. The only reason for their prominence is Brexit. I do agree on the ERG numbers. Thought it was telling that Steve Baker was saying during the week that 40 would vote against, it was 80 only a few weeks ago!

Enzokk wrote: »

Seems like the deal will not have a indefinite customs union clause, at least according to the Prime Ministers office.

Brexit: No 10 says it will not agree to indefinite customs union with EU


So we have the UK not willing to sign up to a agreement unless it has an end date. We have the EU who will not be willing to sign a deal if it has a date attached to it.

We could have a fudge of words from No.10 where the UK will not be in it permanently but NI would, but this would contradict her words since she was promoted to the top job about keeping the Union in place.

So its still a mess.

There won't be any line that states no time limit. There will simply not be a leaving date. There will be vague mentions of future agreements, technological advancements etc. Vague enough that both sides can claim to have what they need, but vague enough that neither side actually does.

An Ciarraioch

Maintenant, Irlande est un membre de la Francophonie:

http://www.thelocal.fr/20181012/brexit-wary-ireland-joins-global-francophone-club

In truth, the only likely benefit would seem to be increased trade with sub-Saharan Africa, but given that Greece and Bulgaria are actually full members, we're far from the least Francophone in the club.

FrancieBrady

VinLieger wrote: »

Do you have a problem reading questions asked of you? Ill ask it again so.


What as an ROI citizen born post 1980 do I need to accept responsibility for in relation to the problems in NI?

The south's role in it.
Or do you just accept the good bits of your history?

Spook_ie

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Maintenant, Irlande est un membre de la Francophonie:

http://www.thelocal.fr/20181012/brexit-wary-ireland-joins-global-francophone-club

In truth, the only likely benefit would seem to be increased trade with sub-Saharan Africa, but given that Greece and Bulgaria are actually full members, we're far from the least Francophone in the club.

Ah sure we can scrub compulsory Irish and throw the resources into French, might even get some movement in the north afterwards

Lemming

Leroy42 wrote: »

Some commentators have stated that TM has shown great resilience and staying power to date, but all that was predicated on not actually making any actual decisions. The one decision she did make, December agreement, she rowed back on.

Not so much that she has shown 'great' resilience as riding the coat-tail of sheer luck to get this far. She's only still in power because nobody else in the Tory party wants her job at this moment in time. As soon as we have an outcome from Brexit, whatever way it goes, she's for the chop and being assigned all the blame by her esteemed parliamentary colleagues.

Zubeneschamali

Leroy42 wrote: »

But there are still the likes of Johnson and Davies (there are others). They simply cannot be seen to cave. The only reason for their prominence is Brexit.

Unhappiness about the lack of a real Brexit is the reason for their prominence, but if they were in charge, they would have to actually deliver something instead of pandering to the unhappy people.

With a Withdrawal agreement and a Transition period in place, they can moan about the negotiations on the Future relationship for at least the next 10 years.

Leroy42

That is the one thing that could save a deal, and no doubt been the plan from the start.

The UK are simply not ready for a no deal, either physically in terms of the operations and technical requirements, but their economy is not ready. You cannot simply turn the UK away from their biggest market in 1 day. If nothing else, the last 2 years have shown just how complex and difficult this will be (I mean shown for many brexiteers, they were given plenty of warnings).

Even the most die hard Brexiteer must acknowledge that any no deal with result in major chaos, a probable recession and therefore a significant negative impact. I would say that they are willing to bet that a soft brexit now could lead to gradual separation in the future, whilst a hard brexit would raise the real risk of calls to rejoin, and Brexit will be lost forever.