Brexit Discussion Thread VI

mickoneill31

Scoondal wrote: »

You do not realise that in The Republic of Ireland people have numerous referenda every year. In UK a referendum for the people is rare.
So when it happens, the result is very important.
UK and ROI are constitutionally different.
Again, in a rare public vote in UK ... they voted to leave EU. UK citizens are normal people.

This is a childish post. I think most people in Ireland understand referendums. And we'd argue that the results of Irish ones are also very important.
I think the UK experience has shown we are better at doing them.
We don't have "advisory" referendums over here which then turns into a legally binding one on the day of the result. Similarly we have definitive questions and answers in ours. Once ours are done we know what the change will mean exactly to our constitution, we don't then go off for 3 years to implement ours.

But yes the UK voted to leave. So leave. Or have another referendum now that way more facts are known about what Brexit means. Up to the UK. I personally think the UK leaving is the best thing now for the EU. Its not what I wanted but the UK is tearing itself apart. No point taking the EU with it.

josip

JLR have now confirmed 5,000 UK job losses, not all due to Brexit it must be said.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-46810473
Still it must be pointed out that one of the problems is a collapse in a market touted to replace EU demand post Brexit, China.
Plus, given its reliance on diesel technology, the company be emblamatic of not having moved with the times and living somewhat in the past.
Unlike Dyson for example.

Scoondal

Strazdas wrote: »

The former I would say : May is duplicitous and tells lies at the drop of a hat.

Mrs. May is lying to the UK voters by pretending to re-negotiate the Brexit deal. The EU has said that the Brexit deal is finished and agreed by the UK government. Butthe UK government can't even get it through their parliament where they are supposed to govern.
What kind of a country is that ?

hill16bhoy

Scoondal wrote: »

You do not realise that in The Republic of Ireland people have numerous referenda every year. In UK a referendum for the people is rare.
So when it happens, the result is very important.
UK and ROI are constitutionally different.
Again, in a rare public vote in UK ... they voted to leave EU. UK citizens are normal people.

Ireland only holds referendums on constitutional matters and the questions and options are always clearly defined. We don't hold numerous referenda each year. 2018 is an unusual one in that we have had multiple ones but that is by no means the norm.

We've never held a non-constitutional referendum.

Britain does not have a written constitution and has a system of parliamentary sovereignty - it's parliament that makes the decisions, not the people. That has always been the way.

British referendums hold no legal weight. They can only be advisory. But Margaret Thatcher, much as I loathe her overall contribution to British politics, specifically realised the danger referendums could cause there, because they presented the prospect of a hostile, rival decision making system to parliament.

This wasn't borne out until the 2016 referendum.

The running of the referendum was shambolic, completely the opposite to what happens in Ireland where we are well practiced at running referendums.

Disinformation was allowed to completely distort the campaign.

Most importantly, one of the options was completely undefined - the Leave option was basically "talking unicorns".

The Leave option - what people thought they were voting for, whatever it was, was undeliverable and has proved to be so.

Most people who voted Leave were voting for the following: all the benefits of being in the European Union, none of the responsibilities , and a seamless transition to this brave new era of cake. Cake, cake and more cake. "Because we're Great Britain".

It was about as deliverable as a referendum which voted to abolish all taxes and simultaneously quadruple public spending.

Now, British politics is entrapped in a land of make believe, where they're negotiating with themselves over things which would completely rip up the deal which nobody is happy with, but which the government specifically signed off on.

They don't know what they want, but by George they're going to get it, or something.

Britain is becoming a rogue state which nobody takes seriously.

Capt'n Midnight

Newsdump.
The UK economy isn't doing as well as some might like. Politicians aren't offering real solutions. (Corbyn will make noises tomorrow but naught will come of it)

One truck can block a motorway for hours.

And the sides aren't getting closer.


Arlene Foster: Theresa May's Brexit backstop plan is 'dead'

MPs want hunger minister role introduced - 19% of children under 15 in the UK live with adults who struggle to buy food

Motorway partially closed for 6 hours after 27 suspected migrants were found in the back of a vehicle

Jaguar Land Rover to cut up to 5,000 jobs

Brexit: Jeremy Corbyn faces demands from Labour activists to back referendum


MP Nick Boles received 'death threat' after no-deal Brexit bill vote

Scoondal

If UK wants control of their borders, they are free as an independant country to set up controls of their own borders. They don't care about Ireland ... never have and never will. And we should forget about trade and cultural links to UK. It's a two way street.

SMRT

Happy to delete if this is not appropriate. Don't be on Boards often and this seemed a reasonable place for a sanity check before I bite the bullet.

From and live in the Republic in a border County. Have been working in the North for 11 years but now have the chance of getting a similar job in the Republic for a slight increase in pay and slightly closer to home.

Happy in my current role and company but with Brexit it's a no brainer to ditch the likely sinking sterling and come back to the Euro. Right? My guts saying leave the North if possible but the uncertainty of everything is the killer for me.

It's a fairly niche IT role so feel this opportunity won't come up again any time soon.

Scoondal

hill16bhoy wrote: »

Ireland only holds referendums on constitutional matters and the questions and options are always clearly defined. We don't hold numerous referenda each year. 2018 is an unusual one in that we have had multiple ones but that is by no means the norm.

We've never held a non-constitutional referendum.

Britain does not have a written constitution and has a system of parliamentary sovereignty - it's parliament that makes the decisions, not the people. That has always been the way.

British referendums hold no legal weight. They can only be advisory. But Margaret Thatcher, much as I loathe her overall contribution to British politics, specifically realised the danger referendums could cause there, because they presented the prospect of a hostile, rival decision making system to parliament.

This wasn't borne out until the 2016 referendum.

The running of the referendum was shambolic, completely the opposite to what happens in Ireland where we are well practiced at running referendums.

Disinformation was allowed to completely distort the campaign.

Most importantly, one of the options was completely undefined - the Leave option was basically "talking unicorns".

The Leave option - what people thought they were voting for, whatever it was, was undeliverable and has proved to be so.

Most people who voted Leave were voting for the following: all the benefits of being in the European Union, none of the responsibilities , and a seamless transition to this brave new era of cake. Cake, cake and more cake. "Because we're Great Britain".

It was about as deliverable as a referendum which voted to abolish all taxes and simultaneously quadruple public spending.

Now, British politics is entrapped in a land of make believe, where they're negotiating with themselves over things which would completely rip up the deal which nobody is happy with, but which the government specifically signed off on.

They don't know what they want, but by George they're going to get it, or something.

Britain is becoming a rogue state which nobody takes seriously.

Yes, they voted out. They are in opposition to EU's goals. They should not have any say within EU.
EU has problems and we don't need UK adding to our problems. And yes, UK politics is laughable.
And yes, the UK government has already signed off on the withdrawal agreement.
These are all facts as you correctly state.

Bit cynical

Enzokk wrote: »

Is there a set time limit that the UK has to wait before they can change their minds on the EU after the referendum? I only ask because the previous referendum on the EU was an overwhelming majority it was 41 before the next referendum. So if a 67% to 33% results in a 41 year wait, how long does a 52% to 48% result mean we have to wait?

Also, seems that 17.4m people voted to leave the EU out of a population of 65.6m and 46.5m registered voters and this means you go and don't look back at all. But what does 17.3m people voting to join the EEC out of a population 56.2m and 40m registered voters mean?

I don't think those numbers mean anything, it has just been bugging me when it is mentioned that 17.4m people voted to leave the EU as if it is some magical number.

The two years comes from the A50 itself which was in place before the people voted. Therefore, imo, another referendum would be required to extend (or more accurately request an extension to) the period. As pointed out, there would really need to be two referendums. The first of which would be whether or not to accept the deal. Then, if rejected, whether or not to extend article 50 or exit on no deal.

On other question on how long is needed before a referendum on the same question, I don't know. I would imagine ten to twenty years, but others might suggest a much shorter period. I don't think there's any legal problem with a shorter period. I know we in Ireland have had repeat referendums involving a less than two year gap, however I don't think any of the major parties in the UK are pushing this.

I think if there is to be a second referendum in the UK, it will either happen very quickly (e.g. one year) out of panic or else (more likely imo) a much longer period of over ten to twenty or even more years.

Scoondal

SMRT wrote: »

Happy to delete if this is not appropriate. Don't be on Boards often and this seemed a reasonable place for a sanity check before I bite the bullet.

From and live in the Republic in a border County. Have been working in the North for 11 years but now have the chance of getting a similar job in the Republic for a slight increase in pay and slightly closer to home.

Happy in my current role and company but with Brexit it's a no brainer to ditch the likely sinking sterling and come back to the Euro. Right? My guts saying leave the North if possible but the uncertainty of everything is the killer for me.

It's a fairly niche IT role so feel this opportunity won't come up again any time soon.

Get out while you have the chance. Why would you work in a chaotic country /H.M.'s tax system. Pay your tax to Ireland not to Her Majesty's government.

Folkstonian

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

One truck can block a motorway for hours.

Motorway partially closed for 6 hours after 27 suspected migrants were found in the back of a vehicle

How are you linking this to Brexit? I heard this being discusses on the radio tonight. It sounds like it was an intelligence led operation by the police which ended with migrants being detained and a man arrested for people smuggling?

I’m not being facetious, I just genuinely can’t see the link. Would the motorway have remained open if it happened in different EU country? It sounded like dozens of police and National Crime Agency vehicles were involved and it was a decent job, obviously with good information

Capt'n Midnight

Folkstonian wrote: »

How are you linking this to Brexit?

Now imagine the gridlock if Operation Stack is running.

It's not the thing , it's the knock on effects , it has the makings of a perfect storm.

fash

cryptocurrency wrote: »

WA without the backstop.

Why should Ireland accept that?
The UK government (including BoJo etc) agreed to the backstop and in any case the only reason not to include a backstop would be to put political pressure on Ireland during later negotiations to accept a hard border.
Scr*w that and the duplicitous b*****ds who want it.

cryptocurrency wrote: »

as for being brought to its knees, by whom? The EU?

It is the economic reality of having no international agreements that would bring the UK to its knees - and if you want to go further than that - the UK's long history of sc**wing with Ireland, carving out Northern Ireland and then signing the GFA.

cryptocurrency wrote: »

The reaction to ignoring brexit is more extreme brexiteers in number 10 who will remember their enemies and who tried to bring the nation to its knees.

EU tries that then all bets are off. UK and US be well within their right to clip these lads wings big style, maybe even bring some "freedom" their way. Shame there is no oil.

Interesting that you believe failing to come to an economic agreement is a reason for declaration of war by the UK. That's not very libertarian of you. It is even more interesting for a supposed Irish person to do so when the only reason for the UK failing to come to that agreement is their desire to impose a hard border between the Republic and NI and breach the GFA.

Edit:
It is quite extraordinary and frankly not believable that a supposed Irish libertarian is advocating that the UK declare war (and invade Ireland if the quip about bringing freedom is to believed) if Ireland refuses to agree to the UK's desire to breach its obligations not to impose a hard border between the Republic and NI.

c.p.w.g.w

SMRT wrote: »

Happy to delete if this is not appropriate. Don't be on Boards often and this seemed a reasonable place for a sanity check before I bite the bullet.

From and live in the Republic in a border County. Have been working in the North for 11 years but now have the chance of getting a similar job in the Republic for a slight increase in pay and slightly closer to home.

Happy in my current role and company but with Brexit it's a no brainer to ditch the likely sinking sterling and come back to the Euro. Right? My guts saying leave the North if possible but the uncertainty of everything is the killer for me.

It's a fairly niche IT role so feel this opportunity won't come up again any time soon.

Maybe post this in work & jobs https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=10

Zubeneschamali

cryptocurrency wrote: »

The UK can't remain now

In fact this would be the simplest solution of all - they just withdraw A50. No need for talks or negotiations, they just do it. We will all agree to never speak of Brexit again.

Zubeneschamali

SMRT wrote: »

Happy in my current role and company but with Brexit it's a no brainer to ditch the likely sinking sterling and come back to the Euro. Right? My guts saying leave the North if possible but the uncertainty of everything is the killer for me.

I'd be gone already.

murphaph

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

In fact this would be the simplest solution of all - they just withdraw A50. No need for talks or negotiations, they just do it. We will all agree to never speak of Brexit again.

As the government runs out of options (assuming it loses the vote next week) it will surely come down to this or hardest of hard Brexits. The calls from sensible heads seem to be getting louder than the ERG right now. There is still time for parliament to actively prevent a no deal, but not much.

demfad

hill16bhoy wrote: »

.

The running of the referendum was shambolic, completely the opposite to what happens in Ireland where we are well practiced at running referendums.

Disinformation was allowed to completely distort the campaign.

Most importantly, one of the options was completely undefined - the Leave option was basically "talking unicorns".

To be fair, this is what basically happened for Nice 1 and Lisbon 1 here.

demfad

It looks like the Mueller report will be out sometime in February.
Key Brexit figures and companies are being investigated by Mueller for their role in Brexit (Brexit was Petri-Dish for Trump), and in the 2016 Presidential election.
I can't help but feel that this will catch up with Brexit before 29th March.

Dyr

kunst nugget wrote: »

I don't think that's true at all. We were pretty easily hoodwinked by BS during the first Lisbon referendum.

If a time traveller from 2018 had popped up during the second referendum and told the voters that The Irish Army would be deploying units in some dismal war torn part of North Africa in a non UN role via PESCO (which was a part of the Lisbon Treaty) the treaty would have been shot down again

So hardly hoodwinking.

AlmightyCushion

Bambi wrote: »

If a time traveller from 2018 had popped up during the second referendum and told the voters that The Irish Army would be deploying units in some dismal war torn part of North Africa in a non UN role via PESCO (which was a part of the Lisbon Treaty) the treaty would have been shot down again

So hardly hoodwinking.

Were we required to join PESCO?

Donald Trump

Bambi wrote: »

If a time traveller from 2018 had popped up during the second referendum and told the voters that The Irish Army would be deploying units in some dismal war torn part of North Africa in a non UN role via PESCO (which was a part of the Lisbon Treaty) the treaty would have been shot down again

So hardly hoodwinking.

Sure why would anyone give that much of a shit about that. It'd give the army fellas something to do. No harm for them to have a bit of experience and surely it'd be more attractive for a person joining to actually be sent abroad on a mission. Or else maybe they could just have the slogan "Come join the Irish Army and see the world Curragh"

Just watched Corbyn's speech there. Complete waste of time. The man can't give details.


Hoping for something better from the Q&A.

Harry Palmr

Corbyn is more than useless - he is dangerous as he refuses to offer a genuine alternative.

Who is this media handler? Good grief.

Tell me how

Deleted User wrote: »

Just watched Corbyn's speech there. Complete waste of time. The man can't give details.

Hoping for something better from the Q&A.

History will not be kind to him.

When the frenzy and manic environment of Brexit has passed, and people sit down to actually look at what happened, they will keep going back to the news reports thinking they missed something because they will find it hard to believe that Labour have performed as weakly and ineffectively as they have done for the last 18 months.

There will be books written in future titled "The Labour party. 2010 - 2020. The invisible years"

FreudianSlippers

Calina wrote: »

Any extension has to be approved by the member states. Not the European Commissioners. It is the 27 governments who would have to be convinced.

Sorry, that's incorrect. It's the European Commission that conducts negotiations and makes recommendations regarding Art 50 to the European Council for implementation; that includes a request for extension. It is certainly the case that the Council must approve and implement the Commission's decision, but it is the Commission that need to agree to an extension.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

It hasn't been completely agreed. It needs to be ratified by Parliament as well as the governments of the EU27.

Just to clarify - it has been agreed by the European Commission and the UK negotiation team; unlike in the UK, the European Council is not likely going to reject the deal if it is ratified by Parliament.

rusty the athlete

As sickening as it is, the maybot holds all the cards:

1. A50 is law. A50 can only be revoked by Parliament. I can hardly see a maybot government introducing such a motion.
2. If a motion of no confidence is passed against her, she could easily call a GE, say, for April 1st, two days after A50 is implemented
3. There is absolutely insufficient time to call a referendum before 29th. There's their Electoral Commission to negotiate, the questions to be prepared (imagine the protracted arguments over that) so that A50 would have to be pushed back to make the time, which I can't see happening. I have seen impartial estimates that this would take at least 6 months.

So basically she needs to do absolutely nothing and a hard brexit becomes reality by default.

john9876

But does she want a hard Brexit?

prawnsambo

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Sorry, that's incorrect. It's the European Commission that conducts negotiations and makes recommendations regarding Art 50 to the European Council for implementation; that includes a request for extension. It is certainly the case that the Council must approve and implement the Commission's decision, but it is the Commission that need to agree to an extension.

That's not what paragraph 3 of Article 50 says:

3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.

Tell me how

john9876 wrote: »

But does she want a hard Brexit?

I don't think so.

I think if she did, she would have been much more bullish in her manner to the EU. Why get ridiculed by most in the house of Commons if she could have put out a more aggressive stance knowing it would appeal to many and get her her No deal.

I think she would rather that Remain had one, but is trying to limit the damage while upholding the balance of the referendum.

Maybe I am being excessively kind to her there. (I'm not ignoring the fiascos, I think her intent was as I outlined, maybe I am wrong)