Brexit Discussion Thread VI

flatty

Laois_Man wrote: »

IMO, a reunification referendum would struggle to pass in the republic as it is - it might have some chance though if the EU outlined assistance before such a referendum. Us being asked to give up or taxation solvency as a price for it would give it no chance whatsoever.

And there we have it. September 1913.
I can't abide brexit, brexiteers or the tories, but some of the hypocrisy on these threads is nauseating. "we will only unify if we get money to do so" "the eu will give us money to help us if there's a hard brexit"
We, as a nation, have found it very easy to be good Europeans, as they've thrown money at us hand over fist, and then bailed us out when we nearly, through our own greed, crashed the European banking system. We have constantly been devious, the gombeen man of the eu, tugging the forelock, the best boys in the class, whilst facilitating wholesale widespread tax avoidance. Anyone remember the "double Irish"?, or read about the further 43billion and counting of corporation tax non payment that we continue to facilitate?
Some on here need to realise that we are in no position to spout superiority about what a great bunch of Europeans we are. It's not only a bit hypocritical, it's also much easier to be pro EU when we have been massive net beneficiaries both financially and in terms of trade. We are hugely wealthy compared to swathes of the EU.
We should welcome the North back, and not expect to be paid to do so.
Does paddy always have to put a price on every single thing??

briany

DOCARCH wrote: »

This question went through my head yesterday....

Why don't England leave the United Kingdom?

I'd agree with CelticRambler suggestion that the UK is likely to dissolve sooner or later!

The whole point for England is to rule a union, not be ruled by one. They want to be the most important thing in any union in which they participate, which is why they'll attempt to walk the mental tightrope of arguing against one union while arguing for another.

Strazdas

briany wrote: »

The whole point for England is to rule a union, not be ruled by one. They want to be the most important thing in any union in which they participate, which is why they'll attempt to walk the mental tightrope of arguing against one union while arguing for another.

Fintan O'Toole makes this very point in his new Brexit book. In the English Brexiteers' eyes, the country can only be at the head of something (just as it has always been) or the hideous alternative of being subjugated by a "foreign power". There is no halfway house for them of being a 'partnership of equals' or any of that malarkey.

An Claidheamh

Wow, really good article.

Pretty much my reading of the whole cause of Brexit anyway.

https://www.politico.eu/article/brexit-britain-small-boring-and-stupid-theresa-may-eu-withdrawal-deal/

Excellent

The comments below it only prove the man's point.

joe40

briany wrote: »

DOCARCH wrote: »

This question went through my head yesterday....

Why don't England leave the United Kingdom?

I'd agree with CelticRambler suggestion that the UK is likely to dissolve sooner or later!

The whole point for England is to rule a union, not be ruled by one. They want to be the most important thing in any union in which they participate, which is why they'll attempt to walk the mental tightrope of arguing against one union while arguing for another.

In a similar vein, I always found it strange that NI, Scotland and wales have devolved parliments, but not England.

DOCARCH

joe40 wrote: »

In a similar vein, I always found it strange that NI, Scotland and wales have devolved parliments, but not England.

They are looking for that, an English parliament. It just has been on the back burner since Brexit.

Folkstonian

briany wrote: »

The whole point for England is to rule a union, not be ruled by one. They want to be the most important thing in any union in which they participate, which is why they'll attempt to walk the mental tightrope of arguing against one union while arguing for another.

I don’t think this is the most accurate appraisal of the current English mindset.

Only anecdotal of course, but from my experiences or casual conversation with friends and colleagues from back home, if England were to be given an ‘independence’ referendum of its own, the result would be really quite different to the Scottish vote.

English people don’t generally cut around in life like it’s one giant game of Risk anymore. That’s if they ever did. I can’t comment for those before my time!

awec

joe40 wrote: »

In a similar vein, I always found it strange that NI, Scotland and wales have devolved parliments, but not England.

Since ~2015 English MPs can veto bills on English issues.

They can't however (as far as I remember), pass their own bills without an overall majority. I think by coincidence they could until the most recent election, when the parliamentary arithmetic changed significantly (Tories have more Scottish MPs and fewer English).

Folkstonian

An Claidheamh wrote: »

Wow, really good article.

Pretty much my reading of the whole cause of Brexit anyway.

https://www.politico.eu/article/brexit-britain-small-boring-and-stupid-theresa-may-eu-withdrawal-deal/

Excellent

The comments below it only prove the man's point.

Looking past his quite liberal use of some quite nasty language, what parts do you most strongly agree with?

In my own experience, there aren’t many people who see Brexit as an opportunity for Britain to reassert itself as a global power on the level of China or the United States.

People are generally more focused on issues such as migration, lawmaking and democratic accountability.

I’m happy to debate all day long whether there is much substance to their concerns, but I don’t think it’s fair to dismiss the things people are actually saying in order to accuse them of channeling the spirits of James Cook and Cecil Rhodes.

Laois_Man

flatty wrote: »

And there we have it. September 1913.
I can't abide brexit, brexiteers or the tories, but some of the hypocrisy on these threads is nauseating. "we will only unify if we get money to do so" "the eu will give us money to help us if there's a hard brexit"
We, as a nation, have found it very easy to be good Europeans, as they've thrown money at us hand over fist, and then bailed us out when we nearly, through our own greed, crashed the European banking system. We have constantly been devious, the gombeen man of the eu, tugging the forelock, the best boys in the class, whilst facilitating wholesale widespread tax avoidance. Anyone remember the "double Irish"?, or read about the further 43billion and counting of corporation tax non payment that we continue to facilitate?
Some on here need to realise that we are in no position to spout superiority about what a great bunch of Europeans we are. It's not only a bit hypocritical, it's also much easier to be pro EU when we have been massive net beneficiaries both financially and in terms of trade. We are hugely wealthy compared to swathes of the EU.
We should welcome the North back, and not expect to be paid to do so.
Does paddy always have to put a price on every single thing??

Saying a unification referendum wouldn't pass is a opinion of what a result would be - not an opinion not an opinion on what the result should be. Hypocrisy ?? It's what an opinion forum is for - yanno....opinions on what will likely happen! Anyway, there's no way Ireland could have taken down the European banking system on its own and none of that or the rest belongs in a Brexit thread anyway so it's not appropriate to get into the whole Apple Tax case here, which is still unresolved in any case. 2018 is the third year in a row that Ireland will be net contributors to the EU coffers and that doesn't count the billions made over the years in our fishing waters by other European countries....and nobody that I have seen is advocating 'Irexit' because of any of it.

yrreg0850

Tell me how wrote: »

We have been very closely aligned with the UK in our history, we know about the bad stuff but there has been plenty good stuff also and I hope we don't (which we are not doing so far) adopt a gloating position if they do experience difficulties in the case of a hard border.

Both Our Govt and the UK say that they don't want a hard border.
We have Government ministers claiming they cannot do anything because of Europe .

Are we not a soverign country? or, have we given that right away.
The Italians and Greeks seem to be able to do what suits them, why can we not do likewise instead of taking dictation from Briussles/Berlin

Tell me how

yrreg0850 wrote: »

Both Our Govt and the UK say that they don't want a hard border.
We have Government ministers claiming they cannot do anything because of Europe .

Are we not a soverign country? or, have we given that right away.
The Italians and Greeks seem to be able to do what suits them, why can we not do likewise instead of taking dictation from Briussles/Berlin

Being a sovereign country does not mean being belligerent just so you can say "No one can tell me what to do".

We are members of the EU, they are supporting our position in relation to the border. Why on earth would we try to start a fight on our own. I am very thankful we don't have many politicians who would think that that is a good thing.

Nody

yrreg0850 wrote: »

Both Our Govt and the UK say that they don't want a hard border.
We have Government ministers claiming they cannot do anything because of Europe .

Are we not a soverign country? or, have we given that right away.
The Italians and Greeks seem to be able to do what suits them, why can we not do likewise instead of taking dictation from Briussles/Berlin

Your first mistake was to think the UK government a) has a clue what they are talking about b) are telling you the truth and c) has any plan to actually make it so.

The whole "Take control of our borders" goes directly against the idea of an open border and that's before we start touching on all the bad things connected with such a concept from VAT smuggling (you can make a couple of mil per truck of cigarettes for example) to uncertified products (horse meat scandal any one?) etc. In short an open border can ONLY work in a concept such as EU were all countries follow one set of regulation; which once again goes exactly against what Brexit is suppose to be about ("take back control of our laws"). Hence in short UK government may speak of an open border but they are lying or if you want to be generous clueless of reality.

Sam Russell

DOCARCH wrote: »

joe40 wrote: »

In a similar vein, I always found it strange that NI, Scotland and wales have devolved parliments, but not England.

They are looking for that, an English parliament. It just has been on the back burner since Brexit.

Actually, the Westminster HOC looks upon itself as the English Parliament and is trying to restrict the members from non-English constituencies from speaking on matters that only pertain to England. [They may have succeeded in this, I am not sure].

They have nine regions in England, and they should all be given the same level of devolved administration as Scotland and Wales. All being brought to the same level of devolved powers.

The English MPs look upon themselves as superior, but we already knew that.

FrancieBrady

An Claidheamh wrote: »

Wow, really good article.

Pretty much my reading of the whole cause of Brexit anyway.

https://www.politico.eu/article/brexit-britain-small-boring-and-stupid-theresa-may-eu-withdrawal-deal/

Excellent

The comments below it only prove the man's point.

Very well written summation.
Particularly on point here:

Nothing tells the story better than the sad stop-start diplomacy of Theresa May. The prime minister is an appropriate leader for a shrinking Britain — one without a clear or consistent vision, whose efforts at both navigating Brexit and her own political survival seem driven by awkward improvisation.

Strazdas

An Claidheamh wrote: »

Wow, really good article.

Pretty much my reading of the whole cause of Brexit anyway.

https://www.politico.eu/article/brexit-britain-small-boring-and-stupid-theresa-may-eu-withdrawal-deal/

Excellent

The comments below it only prove the man's point.

It's quite surreal that hard Brexiteers and Europhobes have taken over the comments section of the politico.eu website.

A Dub in Glasgo

Akrasia wrote: »

They want to keep access to the goldmine that is the Scottish fishing industry

It is not just fish that they want to keep from the waters off Scotland

A Dub in Glasgo

joe40 wrote: »

In a similar vein, I always found it strange that NI, Scotland and wales have devolved parliments, but not England.

Essentially, Westminster is the English parliament

strandroad

Folkstonian wrote: »

In my own experience, there aren’t many people who see Brexit as an opportunity for Britain to reassert itself as a global power on the level of China or the United States.

Anyone who says that UK can negotiate with the EU like equals, or counts on automatic great deals with US or China is in fact expressing this belief. UK has a fraction of their power after all.

Tell me how

Nody wrote: »

Your first mistake was to think the UK government a) has a clue what they are talking about b) are telling you the truth and c) has any plan to actually make it so.

https://twitter.com/Caroline_Stocks/status/1073130160885587968

judeboy101

TM proposes start date for new relationship to get around backstop.

Inquitus

judeboy101 wrote: »

TM proposes start date for new relationship to get around backstop.

A date that can only be met with agreement on the new relationship else there is a backstop........

judeboy101

Inquitus wrote: »

A date that can only be met with agreement on the new relationship else there is a backstop........

That's what they have at the moment with transition period, surely. This sounds like " if the EU is so serious about negotiating a deal then we dare you to dare the backstop to sort one out in x time, you agree, we get deal, you try to string it out, we leave"

FrancieBrady

Good Brexity line up on Question Time. Dimbelby's last show. Who is replacing him? Be good to see a rolling chair like Have I Got News For You

Mr.Nice Guy

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Good Brexity line up on Question Time. Dimbelby's last show. Who is replacing him? Be good to see a rolling chair like Have I Got News For You

Fiona Bruce will be taking over.

I expect David Davis to bluff his way through tonight's programme to rapturous applause.

A Dub in Glasgo

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Good Brexity line up on Question Time. Dimbelby's last show. Who is replacing him? Be good to see a rolling chair like Have I Got News For You

Have given up on QT over the last 3-4 years. Might watch it with Fiona Bruce on

Water John

TM gets nothing from the EU.

judeboy101

Water John wrote: »

TM gets nothing from the EU.

She got some more frequent flier miles and a bit of lunch, so that's something.

devnull

https://twitter.com/breeallegretti/status/1073355642541355008?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1073355642541355008&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fnews.sky.com%2Fstory%2Ftheresa-may-heads-to-brussels-for-brexit-talks-after-surviving-confidence-vote-11579370
Pretty much saying what we all know and seems a dig at Duncan-Smith's comments this morning.

Mr.Nice Guy

Very interesting thread here from Peter Foster:

https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1073355214340743168

This bit in relation to Ireland:

https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1073357332485148673

Frustration with her position:

https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1073358059131551750

Expect plenty of Brexiteer fury tomorrow by the looks of this.

Headshot

I burst my hole at that idiot in the audience with the glasses in question time

what an idiot

Headshot

Question Time has been a good watch.

****ing love if someone would ask why does May pander to the ERG where it's only makes up 10% of the Conservatives. They caused this mess and reaping the rewards from it

Tell me how

Interesting how David Dimbleby didn't push Davis to answer Jo Brands question as to why he said Brexit would be so easy.

I'd love someone to ask why aren't they listening to the EU and what they are saying repeatedly.


Suggestion if 2nd referendum gets big cheer. (Show tonight is being held in London of course)

FrancieBrady

Tell me how wrote: »

Interesting how David Dimbleby didn't push Davis to answer Jo Brands question as to why he said Brexit would be so easy.

I thought the exact same thing. That is why QT is just soundbyte entertainment and not really a serious political discussion. Nobody ever gets questioned properly.

For Forks Sake

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Good Brexity line up on Question Time. Dimbelby's last show. Who is replacing him? Be good to see a rolling chair like Have I Got News For You

Politically astute, previous television experience?
Time for the return of the right honourable tub of lard.

tuxy

Headshot wrote: »

Question Time has been a good watch.

****ing love if someone would ask why does May pander to the ERG where it's only makes up 10% of the Conservatives. They caused this mess and reaping the rewards from it

In what way is she pandering more to the ERG than the rest of her party that voted no confidence in her?
If only 10% are ERG and it was 36% who voted no confidence.
That's a massive number considering she has also lost the support of the DUP.

Tell me how

Dimbleby actually going out strong tonight.

Enzokk

joe40 wrote: »

In a similar vein, I always found it strange that NI, Scotland and wales have devolved parliments, but not England.

Imagine having even more politicians that needs to have their expenses covered by the taxpayer.

As others have posted it seem like it didn't go well for May.

https://twitter.com/JamesCrisp6/status/1073364321370038273

Imreoir2

Enzokk wrote: »

Imagine having even more politicians that needs to have their expenses covered by the taxpayer.

As others have posted it seem like it didn't go well for May.

https://twitter.com/JamesCrisp6/status/1073364321370038273

The cynic in me thinks the supposed slapdown by the EU was the desired outcome. The media keeps talking about the EU giving May support and a "lifeline". If anything May is strongest when perceived as being attacked by the EU. The chance to play the wronged party in the aftermath of Slazberg was probably her best moment in the last six months. The reality is that the deal won't be changing. Within the confines of that reality, EU support is not going to get her anywhere domestically. Being allowed to look like she is standing up to/being attacked by the EU on insubstantial things like the tone of meetings and the wording of statements will probably do more to shore up her image at home than any warm words of reasurances the EU could provide.

Enzokk

Imreoir2 wrote: »

The cynic in me thinks the supposed slapdown by the EU was the desired outcome. The media keeps talking about the EU giving May support and a "lifeline". If anything May is strongest when perceived as being attacked by the EU. The chance to play the wronged party in the aftermath of Slazberg was probably her best moment in the last six months. The reality is that the deal won't be changing. Within the confines of that reality, EU support is not going to get her anywhere domestically. Being allowed to look like she is standing up to/being attacked by the EU on insubstantial things like the tone of meetings and the wording of statements will probably do more to shore up her image at home than any warm words of reasurances the EU could provide.

This tactic would only work if she actually gets concessions and I cannot remember her getting anything from Salzburg, hence parliament hoping to vote against her deal.

A penny for the thoughts of those MPs that were hesitating on voting for or against her but decided to give her a chance. Another meeting with other EU leaders and another humiliation for her and the UK.

Imreoir2

Enzokk wrote: »

This tactic would only work if she actually gets concessions and I cannot remember her getting anything from Salzburg, hence parliament hoping to vote against her deal.

A penny for the thoughts of those MPs that were hesitating on voting for or against her but decided to give her a chance. Another meeting with other EU leaders and another humiliation for her and the UK.

I don't think concessions are in the cards one way or another. The deal is what it is. It's a matter of optics at this stage and I think that warm words and platitudes from the EU are probably not as helpful to May domesticly as the chance to play the bloody dificult woman again.

Folkstonian

Imreoir2 wrote: »

I don't think concessions are in the cards one way or another. The deal is what it is. It's a matter of optics at this stage and I think that warm words and platitudes from the EU are probably not as helpful to May domesticly as the chance to play the bloody dificult woman again.

She delayed her meaningful vote to gain some concessions from the EU.

It was literally the only reason she did it.

That she has hit a brick wall despite her apparent confidence when explaining her U-turn on the vote in Parliament, cannot be anything other than disastrous.

She’s well beyond the ‘bloody difficult woman’ stage. She looks hobbled and hopeless.

Imreoir2

Folkstonian wrote: »

She delayed her meaningful vote to gain some concessions from the EU.

It was literally the only reason she did it.

That she has hit a brick wall despite her apparent confidence when explaining her U-turn on the vote in Parliament, cannot be anything other than disastrous.

She’s well beyond the ‘bloody difficult woman’ stage. She looks hobbled and hopeless.

I don't think she is niave enough to expect any significant concession from the EU. She delayed the vote because she could not win it, not because she thought there were any concessions to be won. It's not good enough for her and her ministers to say there are no concessions available, and that the renegioatiation backbenchers are calling for won't work. She has to prove the point, ask for concessions and be seen to fail. If nothing else, that will at least take some of the wind out of the sails of those who are currently insisting on a renegiotiation.

In January, while the deal won't have changed, the context will, at least somewhat. The cliff edge is closer, there is less time for a renegioatiation and an atempt at renegiotiation will be seen to have already failed. This may or may not change the result of the vote, but it is a better strategy than having the deal voted down by a huge margin already.

J Mysterio

Folkstonian wrote: »

She delayed her meaningful vote to gain some concessions from the EU.

No. She delayed the meaningful vote because she was going to lose it badly.

She only then decided, under duress, that she would go to Brussels to seek assurances that the backstop is temporary.

But why does she need to go to Brussels for this? It says it in the withdrawal agreement which agreed between the UK/ EU negotiators: it is an insurance mechamism for if the future relationship negotiations fail to avoid a hard border. And even then it only applies untill another solution is found. So it is inherently temporary and imperminant.

The ERG should be placated by that given how they said the 'alternative' (magic) solutions are easy. They can spend all the time they like thinking about it as the future relationship is negotiated.

Honestly, I wonder why the backstop has become such a focus of the hysteria - there are so many other aspects which it would seem would be more offensive to Brexiteers. DUP influence perhaps.

J Mysterio

Whats clear to me at this point is that if there is to be a Brexit, it will be the deal currently on the table.

Whats also clear is that the EU have decided to stop doing little merry dances to comfort May so she can go home with a bone to show in Parliament. It's reality time and the fun and games are over. No one has any more time or patience for the nonsense.

Options as I see them, in order of preference:

* Ratify the deal, work on future relationship
* Second referendum: May Brexit or Revoke article 50
* Revoke article 50
* General Election, Article 50 extension
* No deal Brexit (disaster)

Infini

Folkstonian wrote: »

She delayed her meaningful vote to gain some concessions from the EU.

It was literally the only reason she did it.

That she has hit a brick wall despite her apparent confidence when explaining her U-turn on the vote in Parliament, cannot be anything other than disastrous.

She’s well beyond the ‘bloody difficult woman’ stage. She looks hobbled and hopeless.

She's run out of road at this stage. They got 3 choices so make one is the honest responce she's going to get. Remaining either through an A50 withdrawal or a 2nd referendum would end this with the least damage and probably an unwritten rule of "Never Speak of this again" sort of thing.

Otherwise it's either you take the agreement that's on the table and accept that's what you get or you crash out with no deal, ruin your country and cause it's possible breakup as well. If thing's go bad in NI economically at least and enough support builds up I could see a border poll happening or even being a part of any new EU agreement with the State of Little England.

At this point the EU need to take the glove's off and basically hammer home the same point over and over till it finally sink's in with the Brits: Thats the deal take it or leave it, theres no further negotiations at this point. It probably would not hurt to make the point that if they crash out hard any future agreements will be even harsher than what you got now expecially by damaging Ireland as well.

J Mysterio

Not very impressed with Kuenssburgs reporting:

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1073355430884241409

prinzeugen

J Mysterio wrote: »

Not very impressed with Kuenssburgs reporting:

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1073355430884241409

Not what you wanted to read? Two sides to a story. I am convinced it will end up in a no deal.

And it is the EU commission to blame not the UK.

Peregrinus

What the Kuenssberg tween doesn't mention is that the reason May is given "little hope of anything she can offer to backbenchers at home" is because, when asked what she needed, she was unable to answer. She's not getting because she didn't ask. She didn't ask, I'm guessing, because she was unable to think of anything that she could plausibly hope to get that would, in fact, solve her domestic problem.

OK, it's a tweet; you can only get so much into a tweet. Still, other journalists are managing to tweet about this.

It's clear how this looks from the EU side; as they see it, May thinks it's her job to tell them about her problem, and their job to devise and deliver a solution to her problem. Hence their frosty response.

As for the EU commission being to blame, that's absurd. This problem is entirely of May's making, the consequence of errors which were in no way forced upon her by the EU. Despite having already adopted the objective of avoiding a hard border in Ireland, and knowing that that was also an objective of the EU's, May chose in her Lancaster House speech, six months after the referendum, to target a hard brexit, ruling out all of the mechanisms which, currently, keep the border open. Then, again in no way forced by the EU, she chose to call a general election, thereby losing her majority and making herself dependent on the DUP, which creates barriers to making any special terms for NI which could help to keep the border open, while allowing her to pursue the hard brexit she wants for the bulk of the UK. May's difficulty now in honouring the commitment she gave last December, and repeated last March, is entirely the result of obstacles that she choose to place in her own way. There is no way the EU Commission can be blamed for May's choices.

Imreoir2

prinzeugen wrote: »

Not what you wanted to read? Two sides to a story. I am convinced it will end up in a no deal.

And it is the EU commission to blame not the UK.

The EU did not force the UK to adopt its red lines. A much better deal could have been reached if not for the red lines the UK set out at the start. It may well end up in a no deal, but the fault is the UK's from start to finish. Brexit is a UK decision, and chosing to allow a no-deal Brexit is also a UK decision. No one is forcing them to do this to themselves.