Brexit Discussion Thread VI

kowtow

While we all wait for the NC vote result does anyone want to address their thoughts to my speculative question which dissapeared up the thread above...

If a softer (e.g. Customs Union) Brexit was agreed, would we still require the backstop? Bear in mind that the UK would hardly enter such an arrangement in perpetuity.. it would be free to leave presumably...

Calina

kowtow wrote: »

While we all wait for the NC vote result does anyone want to address their thoughts to my speculative question which dissapeared up the thread above...

If a softer (e.g. Customs Union) Brexit was agreed, would we still require the backstop? Bear in mind that the UK would hardly enter such an arrangement in perpetuity.. it would be free to leave presumably...

Yes. Most likely. Single market otoh would not. But aint no way the UK understands this

EdgeCase

micosoft wrote: »

And what happens when it destroys the United Kingdom instead as appears apparent?

I am bemused that you regard Irelands democratic vote as a crime but I suspect you are one of those who supports final "enabling" act...

We actually negotiated a protocol to be added to those treaties and voted on that. It was a negotiation with the Irish public and there was absolutely nothing to stop us voting them down twice either.

Protocol text : https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:22013A0302(01)&rid=4

But I mean, it doesn't suit the post-truth agenda to just spout any old nonsense and keep saying it until eventually it becomes accepted. So they just keep spouting the same line over and over and it goes unchallenged most of the time.

Hurrache

Risteard81 wrote: »

It's what I voted for in the referendum.

Also the so-called "EU" is a despicable organisation which seeks to force its will on every country. Let us not forget the crimes of Nice 2 and Lisbon 2. I support every effort to ensure the destruction of the so-called "EU" and I believe a no deal scenario is the best way forward. When I voted for Brexit I was voting for the hardest Brexit possible. That hasn't changed.

With each post you make less and less sense.

judeboy101

kowtow wrote: »

While we all wait for the NC vote result does anyone want to address their thoughts to my speculative question which dissapeared up the thread above...

If a softer (e.g. Customs Union) Brexit was agreed, would we still require the backstop? Bear in mind that the UK would hardly enter such an arrangement in perpetuity.. it would be free to leave presumably...

Turkey is in a customs union with EU but has borders due to not being in SM, can't see how that wouldn't be different for Ireland , UK

kowtow

Calina wrote: »

Yes. Most likely. Single market otoh would not. But aint no way the UK understands this

Out of interest why not the single market?

I think the possible need for a backstop even in an ongoing CU arrangement has been missed entirely by most at Westminster.

There is an impression that if only May accepted the CU (and some Labour votes) all would be doable. In reality she needs to throw away everything in her current deal except the backstop ... and that's quite a tricky proposition.

Hurrache

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

The 17.00 update on the British Times website is running with the following, I would be very surprised if the EU would agree to this and the comments section is full of 'the EU are running scared' type posts

EU members have already said today that at best it will be as far as the EU elections, they won't let toxic British politics infect the EU any further.

wiggle16

artanevilla wrote: »

Is there any point in extending? Does anyone actually believe a deal can be reached that the British parliament will approve?

I'd say the condition will be that an extension would be considered by the EU as long as there is another referendum, ie, on whether to accept the current deal or some other rebranded form of it or to revoke Article 50 entirely.

I can't see them offering an extension so that the UK can go back to the negotiating table (this deal is the only one they are going to get, the EU can't really concede anything more than what's in there) or to prepare for a hard Brexit.

There is no reason to extend Article 50 unless the UK is willing to put it to a referendum. So, as you say, extending it as things stand is pointless.

Donald Trump

Risteard81 wrote: »

It's what I voted for in the referendum.

Also the so-called "EU" is a despicable organisation which seeks to force its will on every country. Let us not forget the crimes of Nice 2 and Lisbon 2. I support every effort to ensure the destruction of the so-called "EU" and I believe a no deal scenario is the best way forward. When I voted for Brexit I was voting for the hardest Brexit possible. That hasn't changed.

So much for the so-called "United" Kingdom.




At first, you'd feel sorry to see them disintegrate into chaos and mayhem. Directed to do so by their "betters" in the form of JRM who conveniently opened up his Dublin office of his investment vehicle in order to take advantage. Led on a merry dance with demagoguery and soundbites without any substance.





But then when you read ill-educated drivel and rhetoric like the above, I'll have to admit that a part of me wants to see those people crash and burn. Farage will retire on his EU pension and presumably to the nice warm climes of the continent by virtue of a handy German passport.





Risteard, given your username, I'll hazard a guess that you have, or can claim, an Irish passport. So you might think that it won't affect you directly. You can go and live in the EU. "I'm alright Jack". But you will have indirect problems trying to get goods or services across that border. As will your employers. And your friends and family.

EKRIUQ

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

The 17.00 update on the British Times website is running with the following, I would be very surprised if the EU would agree to this and the comments section is full of 'the EU are running scared' type posts

yes but to the ordinary lay man in the UK doesn't it look like the EU are running a bit scared. After last night's vote falling over themselves wishing the UK would stay.

There is no hardline bone in the EU willing to tell the UK to get there act together and then talk of postponing Brexit for another year when they know how difficult the last 2 were. Next they will reopen negotiations.

Hurrache

Sky News mentioning the extension into next year, to which they added they're sure their viewers will lose the will to live.

I'm sure it's just another story thrown out into the ether like many of the others that were issued and later discredited.

eire4

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

The 17.00 update on the British Times website is running with the following, I would be very surprised if the EU would agree to this and the comments section is full of 'the EU are running scared' type posts

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/brexit-eu-ready-to-delay-withdrawal-until-next-year-j20f9rm3h

photo website hosting

I doubt we will see that happening. The next EU elections are at the end of May this year and the seats are already apportioned now based on the exit of Britain.

Hurrache

Vaguely threatening of the backstop, it should be careful of its knees
https://twitter.com/NigelDoddsDUP/status/1085598650133286912?s=19

Water John

My understanding of tonight's No Confidence vote is that TM could come back for a second vote within 14 days.
Oh the irony, of MPs being asked to vote a second time.

Kowtow, Lb have been saying that as per there idea, staying in a CU would do away with the need of the NI backstop. Some disagree with this.

kowtow

Water John wrote: »

Kowtow, Lb have been saying that as per there idea, staying in a CU would do away with the need of the NI backstop. Some disagree with this.

Yeh I thought I had heard Corbyn say that but as a matter of principle we should surely require the backstop for NI regardless of the actual trade deal agreed... at least on the assumption that the UK is not prepared to enter a deal it cannot somehow exit of it's own volition at some point in the future.

Risteard81

branie2 wrote: »

I think they should cancel Brexit

Never.

Lackey

Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »

Arlene Foster can go on international news and deny that there was ever a hard border in Northern Ireland - and not get called out on it.

Did you see the responses to that on Twitter ...
Comedy gold

Can I ask the knowledge people on this thread in regards to the vote tonight
Is it all for show because the voted against the deal?
Does anyone actually want May’s job right now?

Risteard81

prawnsambo wrote: »

He never answers this question. But he doesn't recognise the Irish government either, so I really wouldn't bother.

I absolutely do recognise the true Government of the Sovereign Irish Republic proclaimed in arms at Easter 1916. I also recognise that the sovereignty and unity of the Republic are inalienable and non-judicable.

prawnsambo

Water John wrote: »

My understanding of tonight's No Confidence vote is that TM could come back for a second vote within 14 days.
Oh the irony, of MPs being asked to vote a second time.

Kowtow, Lb have been saying that as per there idea, staying in a CU would do away with the need of the NI backstop. Some disagree with this.

Well yes, the CU alone isn't enough. NI has to be part of the single market too. An interesting example was given on the radio today of somebody in Donegal getting treatment for something like cancer in a Derry hospital. That would be impossible without both being in the SM. Then there's the more obvious situation of NI dairy producers getting their product processed in Ireland. That can't continue without both being in the same regulatory framework.

Risteard81

munstermagic11 wrote: »

Or do you refer to the UK as the so called UK?

I always have referred to it as such actually, so that makes you look rather silly.

It most certainly is not a united kingdom, the same way as the Brussels cabal is not uniting Europe.

prawnsambo

Risteard81 wrote: »

I absolutely do recognise the true Government of the Sovereign Irish Republic proclaimed in arms at Easter 1916. I also recognise that the sovereignty and unity of the Republic are inalienable and non-judicable.

That declaration seems to be hedged very carefully. The government that was declared in 1916 doesn't exist any more.

Risteard81

prawnsambo wrote: »

Then there's the more obvious situation of NI (sic) dairy producers getting their product processed in Ireland.

Their product is already in Ireland.

Ireland has 32 Counties.

Risteard81

prawnsambo wrote: »

That declaration seems to be hedged very carefully. The government that was declared in 1916 doesn't exist any more.

Yes it does.

The 2nd Dáil transferred its Governmental Authority of the Republic to another body to hold in trust for the people until such time as the 3rd Dáil could convene.

Hurrache

Risteard81 wrote: »

I always have referred to it as such actually, so that makes you look rather silly.

Calling a Union of European countries a so called European Union is what's pathetically silly.

ancapailldorcha

Mod: Cut out the "so-called" nonsense. It's juvenile.

lawred2

SNIP.

wiggle16

Risteard81 wrote: »

I absolutely do recognise the true Government of the Sovereign Irish Republic proclaimed in arms at Easter 1916. I also recognise that the sovereignty and unity of the Republic are inalienable and non-judicable.

prawnsambo wrote: »

That declaration seems to be hedged very carefully. The government that was declared in 1916 doesn't exist any more.

I thought that too.... the words "true Government" stick out a bit there.

Risteard81, so do you live in some sort of anachronistic bubble?

Seeing how you don't think the EU, the UK, or Republic of Ireland (Free State, maybe?) actually exist?

You said when you voted for Brexit you voted for a hard Brexit. At the time of the referendum that concept did not exist because it was not considered a possibility and so it was not discussed.

j8wk2feszrnpao

Risteard81 wrote: »

I always have referred to it as such actually, so that makes you look rather silly.

It's called asking a question. Your failure to recognize a question mark makes you look silly. One of many ways you look silly.

branie2

Only a few minutes to go to the vote

prawnsambo

Risteard81 wrote: »

Their product is already in Ireland.

Ireland has 32 Counties.

Unfortunately the rules in your parallel universe didn't follow you through the wormhole to ours. So as it stands, the six counties of Antrim, Armagh, Derry, Fermanagh, Tyrone and Down exist in a different jurisdiction from the other 26. Hence all the talk about 'borders'. So if you want to take part in this discussion, you'll probably have to get your head around that.

So with that being said, is there something practical that you can add to my post that you quoted?