Brexit discussion thread IV

backspin.

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Sadly the Sun readers will just accept what they are told. And other MSM are not without fault either.

Similar article in the dailymail about Leo 'threatening' to stop UK planes. 5000 comments so far and majority of them ripping into Ireland and the Irish.

blanch152

Bambi wrote: »

What Leo should do is hop in a ministerial merc with Simon tomorrow morning and zip up to Belfast then give a press conference up there around the same time as Theresa. Perhaps find someone up there who's still in the SDLP to give him a tour of the Malone Road. Suggest that Rialtas Na hEireann might have a cabinet meeting in Derry or Newry in the near future

Put some egg on Theresa Mays face over the non-border she wants to enforce.

Another one who wants to throw the GFA in the bin. Seriously lads, we have legal commitments enshrined in the GFA that we must stick to.

blanch152

Trasna1 wrote: »

I don't really think that it would have made much difference if they took their seats. Every bit of problematic legislation voted through can be overturned when the final withdrawal treaty is voted on.

The only place SF could make a difference is that if they voted in a confidence motion to collapse the government. That would be very risky for them as they would precipitate an election immediately after abandoning a core principle.

Yeah, really risky that, putting the welfare of the people before their core principles. Well, we know where they stand then and who they are like.

The UK in the 1840s had core principles that they didn't do food handouts. Millions starved in Ireland as a result. Yup, core principles are the most important thing to follow.

Infini

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Don't give them ideas, please!

Yeah we dont wanna see mass Darwin award's when they find that valve! C_C

blanch152 wrote: »

Another one who wants to throw the GFA in the bin. Seriously lads, we have legal commitments enshrined in the GFA that we must stick to.

The problem here though is we have a situation that was not wanted by the majority of the people of NI, an incompetent and impotent UK government controlled by headbanger idiot's who are determined to wreck their own country and who give no regard to NI because it doesnt suit them and the only one's from NI are the DUP who are blatantly compounding the situation by not only supporting a position (Brexit) that reactivated the Irish Question that was frozen in stasis but refusing the ONLY reasonable offer that was made by the EU/Irish side on having custom's checks at the port and airports where it would be manageble and not affect NI business. This is a situation in the event of a crashout brexit that could leave an unstable state of affair's on OUR doorstep that we didnt want in the first place.

If anything should a crashout brexit occur we should be hammering for a Border Poll and making it clear were not looking for the 6 counties back because it's simply part of the Island of Ireland but because we can offer those people an OUT to the failures of the UK goverment who happily abandoned them and their wellbeing because it didn't suit their agenda to begin with. Money talk's big and those in the unionist community who arent headbangers like the DUP will seriously consider the UI option when given the choice between a London Government that didnt give a toss about them and drove their local economy into a recession/depression needlessly and a far more stable Dublin Government who will actually listen to them and who will have much more influence provided they can elect decent people who will actually do a proper job representing their interest's and not headbangers like the DUP who contributed to this mess to begin with.

I honestly have to think though if the NI economy tanks will the DUP actually be punished at the ballot box though since it's their party that pursued such a reckless and stupid policy to begin with.

FrancieBrady

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

Too soon in my opinion, it'll take a while after the effects of Brexit kick in to maximise the potential of any such call.

Nate

blanch152 wrote: »

Why? Ireland has signed up to the GFA. The GFA sets out clear conditions for the holding of a referendum. Those conditions have not been met. Anyone calling for a referendum now is calling for a breach of the GFA.

No Irish government would be stupid enough to call for a breach of the GFA.

Extenuating circumstances. If you genuinely care about northern Ireland then you now need a plebiscite on what the people want.

Imreoir2

blanch152 wrote: »

Another one who wants to throw the GFA in the bin. Seriously lads, we have legal commitments enshrined in the GFA that we must stick to.

Sorry, this is getting silly at this stage. Where in the GFA are Irish polititans banned from crossing the border?

Phoebas

Bambi wrote: »

Put some egg on Theresa Mays face over the non-border she wants to enforce.

I'm struggling to see any political advantage whatsoever in putting 'egg on Theresa May's face'.

BonnieSituation

Phoebas wrote: »

So, if I'm to understand correctly, you're calling on FG to do what they've done?

I'm calling on nobody to do anything. I'm pointing out to Francie that this FG government have actually been relatively proactive re the north and brexit. It didn't just start with Leo and Simon.

Was there something wrong with my rebuttal of your first foray into this morass?

BonnieSituation

Imreoir2 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/CStalfordMLA/status/1019672905662246918

The DUP is threathning to cut off our gas supply from the UK over Leo's airspace comments. Unfortunatly for them, we don't get gas from the UK, we supply the UK through those pipes.

If he wants to go down that road we can always remind him about who owns NIE.

Cookie_Monster

prawnsambo wrote: »

I'd say a lot of people don't know that. Spread the word I'd say.

It's an interesting one alright, have just fired off an email to ACCA to see what they say about it.

Phoebas

BonnieSituation wrote: »

If he wants to go down that road we can always remind him about who owns NIE.

We should just ignore impotent blowhards.

The idea that the Irish Government should 'remind' NI politicians about the ownership of NUI is Daily Mail level stupidness.

FrancieBrady

Phoebas wrote: »

I'm struggling to see any political advantage whatsoever in putting 'egg on Theresa May's face'.

There wouldn't be a whole pile of room left in fairness.

Enzokk

Trasna1 wrote: »

I don't really think that it would have made much difference if they took their seats. Every bit of problematic legislation voted through can be overturned when the final withdrawal treaty is voted on.

The only place SF could make a difference is that if they voted in a confidence motion to collapse the government. That would be very risky for them as they would precipitate an election immediately after abandoning a core principle.

As I was trying to say, in hindsight they should have taken up their seats. But to expect them to have only taken their seats for these votes is not reasonable. Had they taken up their seats at the start of the current parliament it would have made a difference regarding the votes. Just the threat of her majority being even smaller than it is now would be a warning. Seeing that Theresa May won the votes in the ERG amendments by a maximum of 4 votes (I think), simple arithmetic tells you their 7 votes would have swing it the other way.

The vote on the customs union where the Tories played the system was won by 6 votes. Again simple math tells you their 7 votes would have changed the result.

But I am not blaming them for the vote results. They have always run on not taking up their seats, but their votes could have made it very hard for Theresa May.

Dyr

blanch152 wrote: »

Another one who wants to throw the GFA in the bin. Seriously lads, we have legal commitments enshrined in the GFA that we must stick to.

You should give it a read it sometime. There's absolutely nothing in the Good Friday Agreement that would prevent an Taoiseach from taking a spin over the border, or even meeting his cabinet up there. In fact, it facilitates it

Theresa's wacky DUP plan however, is going to drive a coach and four through the GFA.

Rjd2

devnull wrote: »

Don't worry, they're already getting their revenge and punishment stories ready in the press

https://twitter.com/TheSun/status/1020058456194154496

Just as dishonest as the politicians they support.

One of those things which is amusing if if you rely on the right wing tabloids for information on Leo and did not really research him elsewhere, you'd have this image of him as a firebrand, wild nationalist intent on bringing the empire down.:o:pac:

I think even he would admit, that's not really close to the truth.:D

captainspeed wrote: »

Yvette Cooper is very good at skewering anyone who starts telling her nonsense.

What a shame she's not the leader of the Labour Party over there.

May struggles with her hugely and that's an opinion I have seen repeated quite a bit from the likes of the spectator etc.

Corbyn to be fair has landed some blows on May recently, but at times seems more interested in grand standing and creating social media viral content. It may work long term, but ultimately May is an average politician fronting a disaster and she should be getting hammered every week, fact is she isn't.

Infini

Enzokk wrote: »

As I was trying to say, in hindsight they should have taken up their seats. But to expect them to have only taken their seats for these votes is not reasonable. Had they taken up their seats at the start of the current parliament it would have made a difference regarding the votes. Just the threat of her majority being even smaller than it is now would be a warning. Seeing that Theresa May won the votes in the ERG amendments by a maximum of 4 votes (I think), simple arithmetic tells you their 7 votes would have swing it the other way.

The vote on the customs union where the Tories played the system was won by 6 votes. Again simple math tells you their 7 votes would have changed the result.

But I am not blaming them for the vote results. They have always run on not taking up their seats, but their votes could have made it very hard for Theresa May.

There is one thing though about Sinn Fein's abstentionist policy though: It suit's their agenda for Britain to screw up royally on their own. The abstentionist thing isnt new it's part and parcel on why they get elected. The thing though is if Britain crashes out hard though it become's a MASSIVE point towards reunification for them as it allow's them to make a perfect example on why should NI stay part of a country that crashed out with no interest in all the warning signs. As an added bonus they can hammer the DUP endlessly for supporting a policy that ironically lead to the situation of reunification coming about in the first place, ie. We had a perfect situation, we had the best of both worlds but the DUP just couldn't leave it well enough alone.

BonnieSituation

Phoebas wrote: »

We should just ignore impotent blowhards.

The idea that the Irish Government should 'remind' NI politicians about the ownership of NUI NIE is Daily Mail level stupidness.

You're not really one for "humour" or facetiousness are ya?

Enzokk wrote: »

As I was trying to say, in hindsight they should have taken up their seats. But to expect them to have only taken their seats for these votes is not reasonable. Had they taken up their seats at the start of the current parliament it would have made a difference regarding the votes. Just the threat of her majority being even smaller than it is now would be a warning. Seeing that Theresa May won the votes in the ERG amendments by a maximum of 4 votes (I think), simple arithmetic tells you their 7 votes would have swing it the other way.

The vote on the customs union where the Tories played the system was won by 6 votes. Again simple math tells you their 7 votes would have changed the result.

But I am not blaming them for the vote results. They have always run on not taking up their seats, but their votes could have made it very hard for Theresa May.

But simple arithmetic only works in a vacuum. There would be nothing simple about SF taking up their seats to vote. And it would not occur in a vacuum. And as soon as they do take up their seats to vote you can bet your bottom dollar that others will cross the lobbies or abstain to ensure that they are NOT on the winning side and are NOT stifling "the will of the people". We are dealing with a group of insanely petty people. SF's votes WOULD HAVE MADE NO DIFFERENCE.

BonnieSituation

Infini wrote: »

There is one thing though about Sinn Fein's abstentionist policy though: It suit's their agenda for Britain to screw up royally on their own. The abstentionist thing isnt new it's part and parcel on why they get elected. The thing though is if Britain crashes out hard though it become's a MASSIVE point towards reunification for them as it allow's them to make a perfect example on why should NI stay part of a country that crashed out with no interest in all the warning signs. As an added bonus they can hammer the DUP endlessly for supporting a policy that ironically lead to the situation of reunification coming about in the first place, ie. We had a perfect situation, we had the best of both worlds but the DUP just couldn't leave it well enough alone.

One of the points I have been making over and over and still people insist that SF's votes would have made a difference and that they should feck their "principles".

Enzokk

Infini wrote: »

There is one thing though about Sinn Fein's abstentionist policy though: It suit's their agenda for Britain to screw up royally on their own. The abstentionist thing isnt new it's part and parcel on why they get elected. The thing though is if Britain crashes out hard though it become's a MASSIVE point towards reunification for them as it allow's them to make a perfect example on why should NI stay part of a country that crashed out with no interest in all the warning signs. As an added bonus they can hammer the DUP endlessly for supporting a policy that ironically lead to the situation of reunification coming about in the first place, ie. We had a perfect situation, we had the best of both worlds but the DUP just couldn't leave it well enough alone.

That is one of the most frustrating things about Brexit. We have politicians on all sides that are taking positions where they are taking some huge gambles on the outcome for their own personal beliefs. I believe that Jeremy Corbyn could hit Theresa May very hard and force an election, but I think he will be very happy should he get to be PM of a country that is outside of the EU

This is not only a criticism of Sinn Fein, I also believe the SNP is in the same boat. The only difference I guess is that they have taken up their seats, because...you know history. But they will also benefit from an absolute screw up from the UK government and it will further their own causes.

BonnieSituation wrote: »

But simple arithmetic only works in a vacuum. There would be nothing simple about SF taking up their seats to vote. And it would not occur in a vacuum. And as soon as they do take up their seats to vote you can bet your bottom dollar that others will cross the lobbies or abstain to ensure that they are NOT on the winning side and are NOT stifling "the will of the people". We are dealing with a group of insanely petty people. SF's votes WOULD HAVE MADE NO DIFFERENCE.

So you are telling me that just enough people rebelled to not lose the vote? Think carefully what you are saying now. You are saying that the party decided beforehand that only 14 of their party would be pro-EU enough to stand by their principles. They also then colluded with Labour so that 4 of their MPs would vote with the government so that the Tory rebels would not overturn the result. Had Sinn Fein been there to vote you are saying that those rebels would have changed their minds on principle and would have voted with the government.

Are you sure you want to keep deflecting from reality? Occam's razor would lend that the simple explanation is that the vote passed by a majority of between 3-6 votes. SF has 7 seats, if you want to get to the thinking that their votes would not have made a difference you have to make some wild leaps of logic.

BonnieSituation wrote: »

One of the points I have been making over and over and still people insist that SF's votes owudl ahve made a difference and that they should feck their "principles".

I have no problem with them sticking to their principles, but do not insult people's intelligence by trying to deflect the facts of what could have happened. This is the same as after Tuesday's votes where Labour supporters were trying to shift the focus on how Anna Soubry would speak against a proposal but then vote for it in the past, so people shouldn't praise her too highly for rebelling at the vote. Instead of focusing on the 4 Labour votes that allowed the amendments to pass they were deflecting the attention elsewhere.

To add insult to their wounds those 4, then 5, MP's again defied their party and voted the next day with Theresa May. Had they not done that there could have been a motion of confidence against her. So they stopped their party from going to power, I believe had those voices that are very pro-Labour and pro Jeremy Corbyn not spent the night trying to deflect praise off Soubry and instead focused on getting their own MP's to vote with their party they could have made a difference.

So I don't blame SF for not taking their seats. I applaud them sticking to their principles, but accept that had they been there it could have made a huge difference.

J Mysterio

May to say backstop deal would be in breach of Belfast AgreementBritish leader to speak at Waterfront Hall of ‘economic and constitutional dislocation’

"Theresa May will use a speech in Belfast on Friday to rule out agreeing to any Border backstop based on the European Union’s proposal to keep Northern Ireland in the customs union and parts of the single market.

"Speaking at Belfast’s Waterfront Hall, she will say that the EU’s proposal is in breach of the Belfast Agreement, leaving the people of Northern Ireland without their own voice in trade negotiations and would be destabilising for their economy.

“The economic and constitutional dislocation of a formal ‘third country’ customs border within our own country is something I will never accept and I believe no British prime minister could ever accept. And as they made clear this week, it is not something the House of Commons will accept either,” she will say.

BonnieSituation

Enzokk wrote: »

So you are telling me that just enough people rebelled to not lose the vote? Think carefully what you are saying now. You are saying that the party decided beforehand that only 14 of their party would be pro-EU enough to stand by their principles. They also then colluded with Labour so that 4 of their MPs would vote with the government so that the Tory rebels would not overturn the result. Had Sinn Fein been there to vote you are saying that those rebels would have changed their minds on principle and would have voted with the government.

That's not at all what I'm saying. And I don't know why you have developed such a long-winded theory above as to what it is that I am saying. I've repeated ad nauseum what I think the effect of SF taking up their seats would be and I will do it again... NO EFFECT

You seem to be thinking that we just plop in 7 more votes and Bob's your Mother's brother and that will be that. Straight into a vacuum where their presence will have no bearing on the reactions or the mental state of an already wound up chamber.

How could you think otherwise?

Seriously. I actually don't understand how you and others, and FWIW I enjoy your contribuitions generally as much as others, but Im sorry, I am lost for words that you seriously think that it is a simple question of maths.

Are you sure you want to keep deflecting from reality? Occam's razor would lend that the simple explanation is that the vote passed by a majority of between 3-6 votes. SF has 7 seats, if you want to get to the thinking that their votes would not have made a difference you have to make some wild leaps of logic.

Of course that logic works if you literally plonk them down during a division and have them vote.
But there is no way that the earthquake of SF taking their seats wouldn't have other ([un]intended) consequences. Do you appreciate that SF doing so would not rally the troops and cause all sorts of dealing to occur to ensure that SINN FÉIN/IRA don't defeat the British Government in the House of Commons in Westminster? Because that's what you think is going to happen. And there is no way it would transpire as you think.

It just couldn't possibly.

I have no problem with them sticking to their principles, but do not insult people's intelligence by trying to deflect the facts of what could have happened. This is the same as after Tuesday's votes where Labour supporters were trying to shift the focus on how Anna Soubry would speak against a proposal but then vote for it in the past, so people shouldn't praise her too highly for rebelling at the vote. Instead of focusing on the 4 Labour votes that allowed the amendments to pass they were deflecting the attention elsewhere

How is that what I'm doing?

I'm merely pointing out that SF taking up their seats is not the sinple arithmetic you would like to think it is. It will not occur in a vacuum. It just can't. I can keep repeating myself if you wish.

Remember this is the place were Airey Neave was murdered (I know it was the INLA [apparently], but sure they're all Paddys). And you think that SF can just waltz in and vote and it will have no consequences other than changing the maths?

To add insult to their wounds those 4, then 5, MP's again defied their party and voted the next day with Theresa May. Had they not done that there could have been a motion of confidence against her. So they stopped their party from going to power, I believe had those voices that are very pro-Labour and pro Jeremy Corbyn not spent the night trying to deflect praise of Soubry and instead focused on getting their own MP's to vote with their party they could have made a difference.

So it's SFs fault that there was a no motion of confidence because the lunaticker fringe of the Labour Party chose to defy their party?

That's stretching it beyond credible.

So I don't blame SF for not taking their seats. I applaud them sticking to their principles, but accept that had they been there it could have made a huge difference.

I won't accept that because they would have made NO difference.

Enzokk

BonnieSituation wrote: »

So it's SFs fault that there was a no motion of confidence because the lunaticker fringe of the Labour Party chose to defy their party?

That's stretching it beyond credible.

We have different opinions on what effect their votes may have had. We can play the game of what may possibly happen with people's opinion of Sinn Fein and how they could possibly have reacted. Either way it didn't matter as the Labour votes for the government was the crucial difference.

That leads me to your reply above. You would need to show me where I blamed Sinn Fein for the Labour rebels not voting with their party. I was comparing the reaction of supporters of both parties (I am assuming you are a Sinn Fein supporter) to each other. They are deflecting or at least trying to deflect the attention from their own parties and decisions so that people wouldn't focus too hard on their actions.

I blame Labour a million times more for this than Sinn Fein. The simple truth is that those amendments could have been overturned had they not voted against their party. This could also possible have led to a motion of confidence against the government. Not the Sinn Fein votes but the Labour rebels. But their is an interesting what if question regarding those seats that SF holds in Westminster, especially with the majority this small.

Infini

J Mysterio wrote: »

May to say backstop deal would be in breach of Belfast AgreementBritish leader to speak at Waterfront Hall of ‘economic and constitutional dislocation’

"Theresa May will use a speech in Belfast on Friday to rule out agreeing to any Border backstop based on the European Union’s proposal to keep Northern Ireland in the customs union and parts of the single market.

"Speaking at Belfast’s Waterfront Hall, she will say that the EU’s proposal is in breach of the Belfast Agreement, leaving the people of Northern Ireland without their own voice in trade negotiations and would be destabilising for their economy.

“The economic and constitutional dislocation of a formal ‘third country’ customs border within our own country is something I will never accept and I believe no British prime minister could ever accept. And as they made clear this week, it is not something the House of Commons will accept either,” she will say.

I honestly think she's just trying to fool herself at this point. Her party allowing the DUP a kingmaker position in the government, a party that not only doesnt represent the majority of people there but doesn't represent the view of how they voted either is a breach of the agreement as is Brexit itself for creating this situation.

As for not accepting a custom's border it's going to come down to a very simple matter of the EU saying to her: "If you dont want to see your country crash into a depression because of your own goverment's incompetence, ignorance and blatant stupidity your going to be forced to accept these arrangement's not least because you lack any other credible alternative other than locking yourselves out of the biggest market in the neibourhood for a very long time.

You made your bed now you can lie in it."

Leroy42

If May delivers the speech as being reported, then she is giving two fingers to the EU and Ireland.

SF having seats in WM can't deal with a government reneging on agreements it itself made.

UK wants Brexit, it wants it so much that it prepared to renege directly on one agreement (which it is clear now was only 'agreed to' in order to get what it wanted) but is willing to put jeopardy a 20 year agreement that has brought peace to the very union they profess to love.

I think its crazy that we are discussing SF on the day that May is doing that.

I have no time for SF, disagree on nearly everything they stand for, and personally think that they should take up their seats in WM after being elected. But everything about this mess is 100% on the UK.

If Leo etc are called out for pointing out the realities can you imagine the freak out if the government was defeated due to votes from SF?

murphaph

Leroy42 wrote: »

If May delivers the speech as being reported, then she is giving two fingers to the EU and Ireland.

SF having seats in WM can't deal with a government reneging on agreements it itself made.

UK wants Brexit, it wants it so much that it prepared to renege directly on one agreement (which it is clear now was only 'agreed to' in order to get what it wanted) but is willing to put jeopardy a 20 year agreement that has brought peace to the very union they profess to love.

I think its crazy that we are discussing SF on the day that May is doing that.

I have no time for SF, disagree on nearly everything they stand for, and personally think that they should take up their seats in WM after being elected. But everything about this mess is 100% on the UK.

If Leo etc are called out for pointing out the realities can you imagine the freak out if the government was defeated due to votes from SF?

Agree 100%. I have basically no time for SF either but this mes is not of their making. This is a UK mess.

Akrasia

Trasna1 wrote: »

I don't really think that it would have made much difference if they took their seats. Every bit of problematic legislation voted through can be overturned when the final withdrawal treaty is voted on.

The only place SF could make a difference is that if they voted in a confidence motion to collapse the government. That would be very risky for them as they would precipitate an election immediately after abandoning a core principle.

Sinn fein would need to call an Ard Fheis before changing their policy on voting in Westminster. If Mary Lou announced an emergency Ard Fheis tomorrow it would give Theresa May such a heart attack that she might offer them concessions without them having to even break their position on not taking their seats at Westminster

Akrasia

backspin. wrote: »

Similar article in the dailymail about Leo 'threatening' to stop UK planes. 5000 comments so far and majority of them ripping into Ireland and the Irish.

Vladimir Putin's troll army are in overtime this week so.

Mancomb Seepgood

In order to take their seats in Westminster,Sinn Fein would have to start making the case to their own people and probably hold a special Ard Fheis to pass it.There would be a good chance of some sort of split if the history of republicanism is anything to go by.By which point there would probably have been a general election and any members from Northern Ireland would again be completely irrelevant in terms of the Westminster arithmetic,as they usually are.

I'm no Sinn Fein supporter but they would be mad to attempt this.

Zubeneschamali

J Mysterio wrote: »

“The economic and constitutional dislocation of a formal ‘third country’ customs border within our own country is something I will never accept

No worries Theresa, just keep your whole country in the SM, problem solved.

zapitastas

Mancomb Seepgood wrote: »

In order to take their seats in Westminster,Sinn Fein would have to start making the case to their own people and probably hold a special Ard Fheis to pass it.There would be a good chance of some sort of split if the history of republicanism is anything to go by.By which point there would probably have been a general election and any members from Northern Ireland would again be completely irrelevant in terms of the Westminster arithmetic,as they usually are.

I'm no Sinn Fein supporter but they would be mad to attempt this.

That is the most likely outcome if they had decided to go down that route. A republican paty swearing allegiance to a British monarch in order to be able to cast votes in the HoC wouldn't exactly be too palatable to many members