Brexit Discussion Thread VI

sandbelter

aindriu80 wrote: »

What do you make of the polish leader Mateusz Morawiecki having a go at Ireland :

https://www.independent.ie/business/gavin-mcloughlin-leo-varadkar-was-brutally-undercut-by-his-polish-counterpart-in-front-of-the-worlds-most-influential-people-37745441.html

That country is starting to stink a lot for me

Just google and do some research on the Polish state's role in the dismemberment of Czechoslovakia in 1938. They single handy blocked the Russians coming to the Czechs aid, thereby permitting the Nazi invasion.

So the apple doesn't fall far from the tree I'm afraid...and blaming the Germans for everything in WW2 is a convenient way to other to shirk their responsibility.

They're a package deal....

blanch152

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Why should it not be an option? I've never been in an organisation that you aren't allowed to leave. I'd have thought it's only criminal gangs and such like that have these rules.

Of course it should be an option to leave.

However, if a club or an organisation is to work, then it should be worse for those who leave than those who stay. The UK will learn how bad after March 29.

c.p.w.g.w

Strazdas wrote: »

They're screwed basically.....talking up No Deal as if they haven't a care in the world.

Your one suewellan is literally lying through her teeth...no deal will mean no delays at Calais or Dover...

Headshot

That woman in blue is piece of work, the amount of bs she is spewing is typical of the brexiteers lies and they are just driving their country to recession

FrancieBrady

c.p.w.g.w wrote: »

Your one suewellan is literally lying through her teeth...no deal will mean no delays at Calais or Dover...

They all think they are at a football match and it will be over after 90 minutes.

Suella Braverman?? hasn't said anything of truth, only cheap rabble rousing.

Sierra Oscar

aindriu80 wrote: »

What do you make of the polish leader Mateusz Morawiecki having a go at Ireland :

https://www.independent.ie/business/gavin-mcloughlin-leo-varadkar-was-brutally-undercut-by-his-polish-counterpart-in-front-of-the-worlds-most-influential-people-37745441.html

That country is starting to stink a lot for me

The Polish Government are furious with Ireland at the moment because our judiciary have been very publicly calling out the Polish Government for implementing some very dodgy and authoritarian judicial reforms. This has resulted in the issue being raised at the highest levels in the EU, resulting in the possibility that Poland could be kicked out of various EU justice mechanisms such as the European Arrest Warrant and so on. They are having a go at us at every opportunity. Sad really.

c.p.w.g.w

FrancieBrady wrote: »

They all think they are at a football match and it will be over after 90 minutes.

Suella Braverman?? hasn't said anything of truth, only cheap rabble rousing.

That's her, I think she has lied 90% of the time she spoke. Find it interesting that she is pro brexit, control our borders...

WomanSkirtFan8

Strazdas wrote: »

They're screwed basically.....talking up No Deal as if they haven't a care in the world.

yep. But don't worry they'll find out the reality of that delusion soon enough. :cool:

WomanSkirtFan8

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

The Polish Government are furious with Ireland at the moment because our judiciary have been very publicly calling out the Polish Government for implementing some very dodgy and authoritarian judicial reforms. This has resulted in the issue being raised at the highest levels in the EU, resulting in the possibility that Poland could be kicked out of various EU justice mechanisms such as the European Arrest Warrant and so on. They are having a go at us at every opportunity. Sad really.

pathetic is the way i'd put it. No probs to us though as its lilke water off a duck's back.

funkey_monkey

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The question on the ballot paper was not SF or DUP, it was Remain or Leave.
The majority (across the party divide) voted to Remain.

Yes, I am well aware of that. I was one of those who voted to remain.
The point I am making is that it is not up to the DUP to represent those who voted for another party - one that stands on an abstentionist manifesto. Their voices are not being heard due to they themselves voting SF.
The DUP, for reasons best known to themselves, stood on a leave platform, and that is what they are following through on.

Infini

spacecoyote wrote: »

I don't even think I need to reply & point out the obvious here but I mean...wow, that is one of the most farcical points I've seen made on this thread.

1 - Everyone keeps saying NI wanted to stay
2 - There's no evidence for that
3 - Except for the evidence that I just pointed out myself one sentence later

https://www.bbc.com/news/politics/eu_referendum/results

EVIDENCE!!!!

Seriously NI voted 56% to stay not 51 or 52 but 56% that's a decisive vote not a razor thin one like 52%. That's black and white evidence there.

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

The Polish Government are furious with Ireland at the moment because our judiciary have been very publicly calling out the Polish Government for implementing some very dodgy and authoritarian judicial reforms. This has resulted in the issue being raised at the highest levels in the EU, resulting in the possibility that Poland could be kicked out of various EU justice mechanisms such as the European Arrest Warrant and so on. They are having a go at us at every opportunity. Sad really.

To be fair the only thing that happened here is there was a judge who sent a case for review because of doubts over someone getting a fair trial in Poland. In all honesty though what's getting the Polish government in trouble there is they're populists who are landing themselves in trouble because they're going against agreed norm's that the other states have. They're just throwing shade but won't do anything too serious as they aren't in a great position if the Brits start being tards and kicking out poles over their car crash brexit fiasco.

funkey_monkey wrote: »

Yes, I am well aware of that. I was one of those who voted to remain.
The point I am making is that it is not up to the DUP to represent those who voted for another party - one that stands on an abstentionist manifesto. Their voices are not being heard due to they themselves voting SF.
The DUP, for reasons best known to themselves, stood on a leave platform, and that is what they are following through on.

In fairness to the shinners lets be honest they're not stupid. The DUP are acting the bollocks with stormont, the whole cash for ash fiasco with Arelene shows they a party of cronyism with no interest in facts outside their blinkered ideology and no integrity which in fairness our politicians at least have the integrity to resign if they mess up and put themselves in an aquward position here. The DUP have adopted a policy that is literally going to backfire if the likes of Moggles and BoJo get their wish and the UK crashes out. Brexit is the biggest gift for them in decades all they got to do is bide their time and when thing's go tits up they can tear the likes of the DUP apart for their incompetent stupidity while at the same time offer a UI as the most immediate solution to problems that were inflicted on the province by an incompetent DUP and a dysfunctional Tory and Labour party who did not act in the best interests of the nation.

FrancieBrady

funkey_monkey wrote: »

Yes, I am well aware of that. I was one of those who voted to remain.
The point I am making is that it is not up to the DUP to represent those who voted for another party - one that stands on an abstentionist manifesto. Their voices are not being heard due to they themselves voting SF.
The DUP, for reasons best known to themselves, stood on a leave platform, and that is what they are following through on.

I don't think you are. It wasn't a vote to support a particular party.
The 'voice' is quite clear - 56% of the people of northern Ireland wish to remain in the EU.

serfboard

Infini wrote: »

they aren't in a great position if the Brits start being tards and kicking out poles over their car crash brexit fiasco.

A million extra mouths to feed?

Trying to prevent that is their motivation.

Fionn1952

funkey_monkey wrote: »

The missing 7 SF MPs could have negated the influence of the DUP - actually they would have, as the DUP would not have been king makers.

Why does this nonsense still persist!? I thought it was debunked several threads ago.

It isn't like we even need to discuss the political impact SF may have on the middle ground, this is basic f**king arithmetic.

If nothing else changed, and SF went to Westminster, and stood in direct opposition to every government position, DUP would STILL be kingmakers.

Without SF in Westminster, the government have a majority of 13 seats. If every elected SF representative took their seat, that would reduce the government's parliamentary majority to 6.

If we consider the motion of no confidence vote, which passed by 19 votes, even if SF voting one way hadn't convinced anyone to change sides, that leaves a majority of 12.

This isn't rocket science, it just requires basic reading ability instead of parroting off blatant mistruths without checking them for yourself.

This is without even opening the can of worms as to how much it could be seen as a betrayal of those who voted for SF based on their abstentionist platform. I'm pretty certain that there weren't a significant number of their voters who were unaware of this part.

moceri

EU now putting the squeeze on Ireland to start implementing the infrastructure for a Border Frontier... Which is what I suspected was going to happen anyway. I think Leo & Simon have been ambushed. https://m.independent.ie/business/brexit/eu-now-looks-set-to-ask-ireland-to-accept-concessions-37739911.html

BonnieSituation

moceri wrote: »

EU now putting the squeeze on Ireland to start implementing the infrastructure for a Border Frontier... Which is what I suspected was going to happen anyway. I think Leo & Simon have been ambushed. https://m.independent.ie/business/brexit/eu-now-looks-set-to-ask-ireland-to-accept-concessions-37739911.html

Welcome to Wednesday morning.

Do keep up dear boy.

Infini

I would take the independent with a fair bit of salt right they seem to be a bit off recently and jumping the gun a bit.

CelticRambler

downcow wrote: »

it would only require a very small number of the remain voters to believe in the union and be democrats to now be in a position of wanting to accept the UK vote and leave. So you have no basis for suggesting the majority in NI currently want to go against the referendum result

In case the previous posts haven't convinced you to review your assumptions, here are some bases for suggesting that you're completely wrong, and out of touch with "the will of the people" in your own community.
Sept 2018, independent poll, reported in the Belfast Telegraph Over half (52%) said they would vote for a united Ireland after Brexit
November 2018, RTE/BBC poll, reported in thejournal.ie, 62% of those surveyed in Northern Ireland believe Brexit makes a united Ireland a more likely possibility and Asked whether the UK should proceed with Brexit if it meant a hard border in Ireland, 61% of people surveyed in Norther Ireland answered ‘No’.
December 2018, poll conducted by The Times (link to the Express report) if Britain left without a deal the number of people ready to back a united Ireland would reach 55 percent
December 2018, poll conducted by Lucid Talk, reported in The Week,
support for remaining in the EU through reunification with the Republic was marginally greater (48%) than support for staying in the UK (45%).

But here's a curious thing, reported in the Belfast Telegraph in October 2018:

'The Future of England Study' from the Universities of Cardiff and Edinburgh found that 87% of NI's leave voters would see the collapse of the peace process as an acceptable price for Brexit. It also found that 75% of English Conservatives would support the collapse of the peace process as long as Brexit is delivered.

Read that again: the euphemistically labelled "NI's leave voters" believe the return of violence to Northern Ireland is a price worth paying for "the future of England" and their one-sided relationship with the Tories. Anyone who was undecided in the past, but has since come down on the side of Leave might want to remember that in the future. :mad:

Cookie_Monster

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Just in case there is any confusion about how well the DUP are looking after NI there's five times as many border crossings as truck permits to use them.

NI has 13,000 truck movements a day across the border. If there is a Hard Brexit, Northern Ireland truckers only have permits for 60 trucks into the EU.

Ireland is in the EU.

I've seen this a couple of times, whats the deal with the permits, or more correctly, the complete lack of them? Who is issuing them and surely they must be aware that 60 is a farcically small number given the situation???

Strazdas

moceri wrote: »

EU now putting the squeeze on Ireland to start implementing the infrastructure for a Border Frontier... Which is what I suspected was going to happen anyway. I think Leo & Simon have been ambushed. https://m.independent.ie/business/brexit/eu-now-looks-set-to-ask-ireland-to-accept-concessions-37739911.html

This was covered by RTE News on Wednesday night. They said the govt is very annoyed by the idea that is being put out there that they are under pressure from the EU......they say it is total fiction.

Bit cynical

Amprodude wrote: »

What is this I see in the news with the European commissioner saying that if there is no deal its obvious there will have to be hard border. The Irish government won't agree to this. what happens then after this?

Something that is a hard border will be presented as not being a hard border.

Infini

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

I've seen this a couple of times, whats the deal with the permits, or more correct the complete lack of them? Who is issuing them and surely they must be aware that 60 is a farcically small number given the situation???

I think it's highlighting more the fact that a no deal is essentially the negation of basically every arrangement that the UK currently has being part of the EU and how defaulting to WTO trade rules is going to literally eviscerate them trade wise because that's the allocation WTO default is essentially. It's essentially unworkable and it'll paralyse the UK for months or even years trade wise in a No deal.

Bit cynical wrote: »

Something that is a hard border will be presented as not being a hard border.

In all honestly a Hard Border can only happen if the situation becomes long term. Even talk of them having checks in mainland Europe is just that right now: talk and most likely only of various scenarios for example. Realistically if the UK crashes out they'll be on their knees by the Summer in a crash out scenario as event would likely overtake them and at that point they'll be forced to having to accept a deal or agreement on OUR terms which could mean the backstop being implimented down the line anyways not because "oh noes the EU annexing UK territorry" but the sheer reality that the only practical checks that can be carried out is at airport and ports and trying to enforce the border just isnt going to work unless the UK turns around and decides to cede significant amounts of territory on their side to straiten it out or outright just try and sort it with a border poll.

CelticRambler

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

I've seen this a couple of times, whats the deal with the permits, or more correct the complete lack of them? Who is issuing them and surely they must be aware that 60 is a farcically small number given the situation???

If you haven't already got one, you might as well sell the lorry:

You can no longer apply for ECMT permits for 2019. Applications were open from 26 November 2018 to 18 January 2019.

(Source: UK Dept of Transport guidance notice)

What? You never heard about it till now? Ah, that's probably because it was being kept secret so as not to weaken the UK's negotiating hand or some such nonsense. Oh and Project Fear, of course. :rolleyes:

Bit cynical

blanch152 wrote: »

Of course it should be an option to leave.

However, if a club or an organisation is to work, then it should be worse for those who leave than those who stay. The UK will learn how bad after March 29.

However the EU has decided, effectively, that a hard border, i.e. something that is the natural consequence of leaving the customs union, is unacceptable and therefore no transition deal is possible.

The EU says on the one hand that countries are free to leave its institutions but, on the other hand, do not accept the natural consequences arising from that. Therefore leaving the EU is worse than staying in, not because the EU is a fine and great institution, but because the EU actively makes it hard to leave.

fash

Bit cynical wrote: »

However the EU has decided, effectively, that a hard border, i.e. something that is the natural consequence of leaving the customs union, is unacceptable and therefore no transition deal is possible.

...The UK itself made that one of its red lines.
The border and the NI region is different and is subject to special considerations. The fact that Ireland is talking about having checks in the Celtic sea shows that.
Furthermore, an FTA needs unanimous consent of the EU members (just ask Canada or Wallonia) - why should Ireland be happy with the UK putting up a border- who would feel "railroaded" and aggrieved in that case at their concerns regarding a hard border not being listened to? Should the EU put the economic well-being of England above peace in the EU, on its borders and the interests of its member states?
What would the future attitude in Ireland to the EU be if the EU ignored Ireland's concerns about a hard border "ha ha ha- you are small, nobody cares about your concerns"?

Bit cynical wrote: »

The EU says on the one hand that countries are free to leave its institutions but, on the other hand, do not accept the natural consequences arising from that. Therefore leaving the EU is worse than staying in, not because the EU is a fine and great institution, but because the EU actively makes it hard to leave.

I can agree that for those countries that have very significant and problematic territorial disputes which were resolved by being a member of the EU, that on leaving the EU without the other EU member state who is party to the dispute simultaneously leaving, it can be complicated to leave. That is not however the EU intentionally making it hard to leave.

The EU is only doing what it was requested to do by Ireland. The. UK said all along it has a plan to avoid putting in a hard border in NI and that nobody was talking about putting up a hard border. They have guaranteed it and promised it
during the campaign, at every level of government and in parliament. They accept that it is required for the GFA.
All anyone is asking for is to see this plan. That is all the backstop is.

Enzokk

c.p.w.g.w wrote: »

That's her, I think she has lied 90% of the time she spoke. Find it interesting that she is pro brexit, control our borders...

Suella Braverman is no stranger to massaging the facts. Here she is calling the divorce bill a project fear manifestation.

https://twitter.com/damocrat/status/999258109506916352

And here she is giving evidence about that same Brexit Bill.

Brexit minister Suella Braverman confirms UK will be legally bound to pay ‘divorce bill’ regardless of nature of future trade deal

Here is a tweet with a video combining her two comments.

https://twitter.com/ChukaUmunna/status/999580307044098049

Bit cynical wrote: »

The EU says on the one hand that countries are free to leave its institutions but, on the other hand, do not accept the natural consequences arising from that. Therefore leaving the EU is worse than staying in, not because the EU is a fine and great institution, but because the EU actively makes it hard to leave.

No, it is not making it hard to leave. The UK can leave but it cannot just forget its international obligations to the GFA. This is really simple and I have to wonder why we are getting stuck on this. If Hungary were to leave the EU it would be very simple because they have not signed an international treaty that maintains peace between two countries that relies on continued membership of the EU. They would negotiate the divorce bill and citizen rights and once that is done on the date of article 50 Hungary would leave and border would go up.

If Hungary decides it still wants to be part of EU institutions it would be able to negotiate participation of those on a case by case basis and it would pay to participate in those they can. If they decide to draw up all bridges then it is full border around Hungary with the EU.

But the UK has a problem and it had this problem before the vote and will still have the problem until it goes away in a vote for a UI. They are paying right now for the decision not to relinquish Belfast to the Irish because it was a powerhouse city at the time. If they only knew what waited for them 60 years later they probably would have let it go.

Zubeneschamali

J Mysterio wrote: »

if you 'feel European'.

One odd thing is that it is the same suspects, Bannon, Farage and the Right wing, who are convinced that there is a long term war between The West and the Eastern Hordes with Funny Religions.


Yet here they are undermining the institutions of The West and denying that Europe is a thing.

Zubeneschamali

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

we'll stay in the EU if you agree that we can discuss x, y, z in the coming months with a view to constructive reform of the EU in line with the 4 freedoms and in a manner that doesn't undermine the fundamental purpose of the EU, I think the EC would agree.

Here is wikipedia on the changes Cameron negotiated, addressing reforms the Tories wanted. The UK voted Leave anyway, because sovrinty innit.


The fact is that Leave voters do not understand the existing EU, and don't care about proposed reforms. They just want their blue passports and bendy bananas back.

Christy42

Bit cynical wrote: »

blanch152 wrote: »

Of course it should be an option to leave.

However, if a club or an organisation is to work, then it should be worse for those who leave than those who stay. The UK will learn how bad after March 29.

However the EU has decided, effectively, that a hard border, i.e. something that is the natural consequence of leaving the customs union, is unacceptable and therefore no transition deal is possible.

The EU says on the one hand that countries are free to leave its institutions but, on the other hand, do not accept the natural consequences arising from that. Therefore leaving the EU is worse than staying in, not because the EU is a fine and great institution, but because the EU actively makes it hard to leave.

I would point out the UK has also repeatedly declared a hard border unacceptable.

Admittedly they seem to be trying to get one but that is what they agreed to. It would also hurt the UK to have a hard border (admittedly just the bit a lot of them forget about).

Why is it up to the EU to manage the UK leaving? They are a grown country who should be able to manage their own decisions. If I decide to leave a rented apartment then my landlord is under no obligation to ensure that I get a safe place to stay. That is my responsibility. Similarly if a country leaves the EU it is their responsibility to be able to look after their own affairs.

Zubeneschamali

Bit cynical wrote: »

However the EU has decided, effectively, that a hard border, i.e. something that is the natural consequence of leaving the customs union, is unacceptable and therefore no transition deal is possible.

The EU says on the one hand that countries are free to leave its institutions but, on the other hand, do not accept the natural consequences arising from that.

A transition deal is not a natural consequence, it is not a thing a country leaving the EU is entitled to. It is not guaranteed by A50. The UK is asking for a transition deal.


The EU is, naturally, looking out for its own interests and saying that we will give you the transition deal you want in return for you giving us things we want: 40 billion, reciprocal rights for citizens and a guarantee of no hard border in Ireland.


There is nothing whatever stopping the UK walking away and taking the natural consequences, except that a New Bronze Age is probably not an optimal outcome.