Brexit discussion thread VII (Please read OP before posting)

FrancieBrady

RobMc59 wrote: »

Ok-But if that was to happen would it be reasonable or inflammatory?-surely the fact he mentioned it means it's a possibility.

He mentioned it in the context of attacks and the history of this country. In which case it is reasonable. What would a reasonable person do? Send customs officials out without protection?

Macy0161

breatheme wrote: »

PG Tips and Twinnings being the ones I'm currently worried about. I'll actually check the origin, I never have, so I don't know if it actually comes from the UK.

Both owned by multinationals, whatever about where they're produced.

ambro25

alloywheel wrote: »

Of course the UK would like a deal, but the EU want to punish them. EU intransigence could mean no-deal Brexit. We can blame Leo when the EU then tells us to put up a border.

There is no EU intransigeance, nor any desire to punish the UK.

There is a negotiating position mutually agreed by 27 Member States, based on the combination of mutual and self interests of these countries, arrived at in view of the negotiation absolutes set by the UK government (no CJEU, no FOM, no SM), which all run contrary to that combination, at a very fundamental level.

The draft withdrawal agreement is the mutually-agreed outcome of meshing the UK and the EU27's respective wants and needs in the above context, constrained as it is.

It's taken the better part of the Article 50 period of 2 years to get there, because getting the UK to engage with the process has been, to all intents and purposes, like sweating blood out of a stone, the entire way through. That delay lays wholly and solely at the feet of political play within the navel-gazing UK.

I see only EU patience and reasonableness. The patience of a loving parent for their toddler going through a particularly bad case of the "terrible twos". The reasonableness of a parent who exercises authority when required, to avoid the tantrums escalating into trashing the furniture and the place.

breatheme

Macy0161 wrote: »

Both owned by multinationals, whatever about where they're produced.

It doesn't matter if the company is a multinational, they need to follow the Rules of Origin protocol...

Even then, once again, I still don't actually know where they're made, so I'll check it out before I start stockpiling.

Leroy42

So alloywheel, what is the solution to the problem. You seem to have plenty of reason why Leo is wrong, the problems with the EU etc, but what should Leo, what should the EU, be doing?

Leroy42

alloywheel wrote: »

The British will not spend a penny on a hard border, they do not want it, neither do the unionists.
Mark my words, the EU will tell us to put up a hard border. We will be bullied by the EU yet again.

That is an odd way of thinking.

So you think an insurance company is bullying you by telling you to lock your car at night?

I mean you do know that we currently operate a border with the US? Australia and many other countries. In fact all countries not currently inside the EU.

FrancieBrady

alloywheel wrote: »

The British will not spend a penny on a hard border, they do not want it, neither do the unionists.
Mark my words, the EU will tell us to put up a hard border. We will be bullied by the EU yet again.

Personally, while I don't want a hard border I see the absolute need to protect the EU and Single Market from the chaotic, corrupt and downright dangerous market place the UK will become.

robinph

alloywheel wrote: »

The British will not spend a penny on a hard border, they do not want it, neither do the unionists.
Mark my words, the EU will tell us to put up a hard border. We will be bullied by the EU yet again.

They* do want a border. One of the main points about the whole brexit thing being to take back control of their* borders.




Feels a bit weird talking about myself in the third person, but I really don't want to associate myself with any of the crap going on here at the moment.

4068ac1elhodqr

alloywheel wrote: »

The British will not spend a penny on a hard border, they do not want it, neither do the unionists.
Mark my words, the EU will tell us to put up a hard border. We will be bullied by the EU yet again.

Guess he who controls the drawbridge controls both sides, so not a bad thing.

Then again is there ever a chance the EU will ask to drop some of those new Franco-German soldiers on the new EU western cold-front? That would be messy.

RobMc59

FrancieBrady wrote: »

He mentioned it in the context of attacks and the history of this country. In which case it is reasonable. What would a reasonable person do? Send customs officials out without protection?

Yes-I'd agree with that,as long as trouble makers on both sides of the border don't use it as an excuse to kick off.

blanch152

alloywheel wrote: »

Leo is going to end us up in some trouble yet. Nothing compared to the credit bubble when financial institutions from the EU over lent to us, and then insisted after it all went bell up we did not burn the bondholders. And our national debt has risen to 200 billion as a result. On Nov 15th last the European Commission said it is "delighted" that the leaders of France and Germany have backed the creation of a "real" EU army. Taste of things to come.

This is funny stuff.

Nearly everything in this post has been debunked at one time or another over the last half-decade (except the 200 billion figure).

Rory28

alloywheel wrote: »

lol. Not too long ago the European bankers and the rest of the world called us "the Wild West"....I think it was them who thought of here as a "chaotic, corrupt and downright dangerous" place

I find it hard to believe any Irish person holds the beliefs you do. You keep saying "we" and "us" like you are Irish and not a full on Brexiteer. Every soundbite has been posted by you in the last few days. Have you nothing better to do than lie to us?

ancapailldorcha

Mod: Post deleted. Alloywheel will be taking a break.

Seth Brundle

alloywheel wrote: »

The British will not spend a penny on a hard border, they do not want it, neither do the unionists.
Mark my words, the EU will tell us to put up a hard border. We will be bullied by the EU yet again.

Once the UK manages to secure a trade agreement of value, how will they protect that agreement whilst they have an open border with products of inferior quality able to enter freely?
How will Britain achieve any kind of UK product standards when they don't protect foreign inferior products entering?
How will the UK stop those pesky foreigners from coming in?
How will the UK stop all those pesky Irish (in their tweed caps) coming in and availing of UK social welfare?

You, like all the pro-Brexit folk, haven't really thought this through.

blanch152

murphaph wrote: »

Give it a rest.

We import a lot from the UK because of mostly historical reasons and the associated brand familiarity.

It's mostly processed foods we import and a huge percentage of that includes foods that are really quite bad for us (snacks, chocolate etc.).

They on the other hand NEED to import the kind of stuff we ship to them (basics like meat and dairy).

Will we notice some items missing from the shelves to be replaced with "weird" Continental versions? Yes. But IME British jam and German jam taste remarkably similar ;-)

Have to agree with this. If there is a hard Brexit, we will lose brands and they will be replaced with continental equivalents. No more Walkers crisps, say hello to Lays etc.

The only people who need to worry are those who have children who are picky eaters or if you have an allergy to certain soap products and can only use a limited range. If you are in those categories, a limited amount of stocking up would be prudent sometime in March. For the most of us, there will be plenty of alternatives.

Macy0161

breatheme wrote: »

It doesn't matter if the company is a multinational, they need to follow the Rules of Origin protocol...

Even then, once again, I still don't actually know where they're made, so I'll check it out before I start stockpiling.

I guess my point was they could or would just produce it in the EU, if there was demand within the EU. Tea isn't grown in the UK, so it would be just the manufacturing they'd have to source (if they don't have it already). The mix of leaves/ skilled labour that does the mixing could move. If there was demand, which there probably isn't, so I would stock pile tbh!

prawnsambo

blanch152 wrote: »

Have to agree with this. If there is a hard Brexit, we will lose brands and they will be replaced with continental equivalents. No more Walkers crisps, say hello to Lays etc.

The only people who need to worry are those who have children who are picky eaters or if you have an allergy to certain soap products and can only use a limited range. If you are in those categories, a limited amount of stocking up would be prudent sometime in March. For the most of us, there will be plenty of alternatives.

I suspect that many of us are already buying these products in the form of 'own brand' labels. For example, I noticed that Dunnes are selling an own brand laundry detergent that is in the exact same container as Aldi's one.

robindch

The BBC Archive looks back at a proposed switch from miles to kilomometers back in 1978. Not a lot has changed.

https://twitter.com/BBCArchive/status/1092120538259038209

Hurrache

Leroy42 wrote: »

So alloywheel, what is the solution to the problem. You seem to have plenty of reason why Leo is wrong, the problems with the EU etc, but what should Leo, what should the EU, be doing?

He won't answer, he's just spamming. He was asked the very same question this morning when he posted the very same rubbish.

edit: I see he has since been banned.

FrancieBrady

May has finished her speech in Belfast and apart from 'profound relationships' this and 'shared history' that, just the usual guff tbh.

Hurrache

FrancieBrady wrote: »

May has finished her speech in Belfast and apart from 'profound relationships' this and 'shared history' that, just the usual guff tbh.

I don't understand this ?
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1092806631245729792

FrancieBrady

Hurrache wrote: »

I don't understand this ?
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1092806631245729792

She says she is looking for changes to the time limit only.

Hurrache

FrancieBrady wrote: »

She says she is looking for changes to the time limit only.

Yes, but until she stepping into NI it was all about having an "alternative" to the backstop. Now she's saying she's not looking for a deal that doesn't have the backstop.

The DUP fundamentally disagree with any sort of backstop altogether. So it's still a confusing mess. Even more so considering this from the Times

Martin Selmayr, the European Union’s most senior civil servant, spent 90 minutes yesterday with members of the Brexit select committee, who emerged saying that he was prepared to make significant concessions on Theresa May’s withdrawal agreement.

Mr Selmayr offered to give the prime minister a legally binding assurance that the backstop would not lock Britain into a permanent customs union with the EU, the MPs said.

Any such shift would allow Mrs May to say that she had secured fundamental changes to her deal, which fell to heavy defeat in the Commons last month.

However, the Brexiteers on the committee, including the Conservative MPs Andrea Jenkyns and John Whittingdale, a former culture secretary, rebuffed Mr Selmayr.

FrancieBrady

Hurrache wrote: »

Yes, but until she stepping into NI it was all about having an "alternative" to the backstop. Now she's saying she's not looking for a deal that doesn't have the backstop.

The DUP fundamentally disagree with any sort of backstop altogether. So it's still a confusing mess. Even more so considering this from the Times

Well my understanding before she arrived was that she is still sticking to 'her deal' being the only option and she was seeking changes to the backstop. Requiring a time limit. Nothing new put forward in Belfast so, just her usual patronising rhetoric.

road_high

FrancieBrady wrote: »

May has finished her speech in Belfast and apart from 'profound relationships' this and 'shared history' that, just the usual guff tbh.

I listened to her and maybe she's softened me up but I agree with practically all she said but the question is how we maintin all that within the context of Brexit!
Leo Varadkar does worry me a bit, i'm not convinced he's pragmatic enough to see us through this. What would be wrong with inviting Theresa May down to Dublin for a chat? I think he's a bit too hardline, "these are the rules" type approach- we still need to trade both ways with the UK and we must do all in our power to maintain that flow.

Leroy42

But I thought the HoC had not only voted down her deal but told her to go back on renegotiate a new deal without the backstop?

Now she is saying that she has no intention of removing the backstop? But she wants a time limit?

But both the ERG and DUP have stated that they will accept no Backstop at all.

Leroy42

road_high wrote: »

I listened to her and maybe she's softened me up but I agree with practically all she said but the question is how we maintin all that within the context of Brexit!
Leo Varadkar does worry me a bit, i'm not convinced he's pragmatic enough to see us through this. What would be wrong with inviting Theresa May down to Dublin for a chat? I think he's a bit too hardline, "these are the rules" type approach- we still need to trade both ways with the UK and we must do all in our power to maintain that flow.

Great, what is the concessions Leo should make then?

road_high

Leroy42 wrote: »

Great, what is the concessions Leo should make then?

Don't lnow but with No Deal don't we end up with something even worse than No backstop?

Peregrinus

road_high wrote: »

I listened to her and maybe she's softened me up but I agree with practically all she said but the question is how we maintin all that within the context of Brexit!
Leo Varadkar does worry me a bit, i'm not convinced he's pragmatic enough to see us through this. What would be wrong with inviting Theresa May down to Dublin for a chat? I think he's a bit too hardline, "these are the rules" type approach- we still need to trade both ways with the UK and we must do all in our power to maintain that flow.

We are doing all in our power to maintain that flow, and May's deal (with the all-UK backstop) would be about the best possible outcome from our point of view, in that respect. Whereas a deal without a backstop is highly likely to lead to a hard border in Ireland, and more significant barriers to trade with the UK.

lawred2

Leroy42 wrote: »

Great, what is the concessions Leo should make then?

What concessions are Leo (aka The Irish government as a member of the EU who hold an agreed position on Brexit) empowered to offer?