Brexit discussion thread VII (Please read OP before posting)

Imreoir2

Laois_Man wrote: »

THIS!

And it also never gets pointed out that the EU simply has no choice on backing us. They surveyed the positions of all 27 member states and took the negotiating position that all would agree to. Permitting a hard border in Ireland was always going to be vetoed by Ireland - therefore, they did not have the authority to negotiate one!

To be fair, the WA only needed a qualified majority on the EU Council and a majority in the EU Parliament. Had the UK successfully isolated Ireland on the issue, we could not have blocked the WA on our own. We could however block any subsequent trade deal with the UK on our own, though this would have been very difficult for us as no one in the EU needs a trade deal with the UK more than us.

It was never very likely that the EU would side with the UK against one of its own members on the border issue, especially given that the Irish border is also an EU external frontier after Brexit. Though many Brexiteers seem to have been surprised by this. Still, Ireland's diplomatic core have played a blinder to put the question to bed early and keep it there.

Imreoir2

Adamcp898 wrote: »

No, you complained that that particular part of the interview wasn't expanded upon enough for you. Automatically you decided this was the presenter being dismissive when, given the time sensitive nature of live broadcasting, there could be a thousand reasons why it wasn't expounded further.

If a senior Irish civil servant revealed something like that live on air on RTÉ or Newstalk, there would be no excuse under the sun for the presenter to ignore it. None.

Leroy42

Adamcp898 wrote: »

No, you complained that that particular part of the interview wasn't expanded upon enough for you. Automatically you decided this was the presenter being dismissive when, given the time sensitive nature of live broadcasting, there could be a thousand reasons why it wasn't expounded further.

Not expanded upon into the buts and bolts, expanded upon in terms of taking it seriously and talking about it. You have deemed that mean they should should talking about shin pads and riot shields.

He laughed it off, you have not addressed this salient point. He simply ignored it and moved on. Nothing to see here. Fine, you are the guy that would know all this, but I don't think its true because I simply don't understand is not really a position.

MrMusician18

Leroy42 wrote: »

If a senior civil servant came on to Morning Ireland, or Newstalk or anywhere and said that the Irish government were actively planning for riots on the streets would you expect the interviewer to just simply laugh it off?

Sometimes news stories just happen. An interview takes a turn from the original planned. You seem to be suggesting that it is perfectly reasonable for a journalist to simply ignore what is quite a staggering piece of information, because it was not part of the plan?

When Enda Kenny declared that the previous government was considering having the army at ATMs it was a big story.

Although maybe it was more about our leaders propensity for getting carried away with themselves whenever they have an audience outside of ireland

AlmightyCushion

Imreoir2 wrote: »

To be fair, the WA only needed a qualified majority on the EU Council and a majority in the EU Parliament. Had the UK successfully isolated Ireland on the issue, we could not have blocked the WA on our own. We could however block any subsequent trade deal with the UK on our own, though this would have been very difficult for us as no one in the EU needs a trade deal with the UK more than us.

It was never very likely that the EU would side with the UK against one of its own members on the border issue, especially given that the Irish border is also an EU external frontier after Brexit. Though many Brexiteers seem to have been surprised by this. Still, Ireland's diplomatic core have played a blinder to put the question to bed early and keep it there.

We have a veto on this. We had a veto for stage 1 for the border issue. The UK wanted to progress to stage 2 negotiations but couldn't as they hadn't satisfactorily resolved the border issue. We agreed to let negotiations move to stage 2 without an agreement on the border as long as we kept our veto.

Leroy42

If only R4 had been given a tip ahead of the Guardian getting a story!

Brexit crisis command centre starts hiring civilians

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/08/brexit-no-deal-crisis-command-centre-starts-hiring-civilians

The department will also have to deal with water quality issues that may emerge if there is a shortage of purification chemicals and will have to liaise with local resilience groups on any civil reaction to shortages in the shops.

Imreoir2

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

We have a veto on this. We had a veto for stage 1 for the border issue. The UK wanted to progress to stage 2 negotiations but couldn't as they hadn't satisfactorily resolved the border issue. We agreed to let negotiations move to stage 2 without an agreement on the border as long as we kept our veto.

We had a veto at that time because the EU decided to give us one, that was a choice they made, not something they were obliged to do legally.

Adamcp898

Leroy42 wrote: »

If a senior civil servant came on to Morning Ireland, or Newstalk or anywhere and said that the Irish government were actively planning for riots on the streets would you expect the interviewer to just simply laugh it off?

Sometimes news stories just happen. An interview takes a turn from the original planned. You seem to be suggesting that it is perfectly reasonable for a journalist to simply ignore what is quite a staggering piece of information, because it was not part of the plan?

Leroy42 wrote: »

Not expanded upon into the buts and bolts, expanded upon in terms of taking it seriously and talking about it. You have deemed that mean they should should talking about shin pads and riot shields.

He laughed it off, you have not addressed this salient point. He simply ignored it and moved on. Nothing to see here. Fine, you are the guy that would know all this, but I don't think its true because I simply don't understand is not really a position.

It's not a new story though. That is inferred alone from his "people don't really believe that, surely" response.

If this was breaking news then of course it should be questioned further, but when it's not, and when it's only a supporting point for a much larger topic then given the medium there simply just isn't the time to dissect every little bit, instead you concentrate on the main topic.

And let's not pretend we know the conditions of the interview, there could've been a lot of different discussion points that were agreed to.

briany

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

We have a veto on this. We had a veto for stage 1 for the border issue. The UK wanted to progress to stage 2 negotiations but couldn't as they hadn't satisfactorily resolved the border issue. We agreed to let negotiations move to stage 2 without an agreement on the border as long as we kept our veto.

And wasn't it Jim Allister or Sammy Wilson who immediately proclaimed that they'd put one over on the Irish?

Infini

Imreoir2 wrote: »

How so? People really need to educate themselves on how the EU works. When it comes to changes to the treaties, no one can force a country to agree. The EU may want something, but unless it convinces the memberstates to support it, it does not happen. This is the simple reality, and comments suggesting that Ireland or any member state can somehow be forced to accept a treaty change it does not agree with is misleading and unhelpful to discussion.

Besides the fact taxes are a national compentency theres also the fact Ireland isnt alone on the whole issue. Other states (eg Malta) have issues with the way France and Germany might want it because of the way its implimented for example. Its also been stated by the government that any changes to be made should be coordinated through the OECD as well mainly so that any tax evasion countermeasures is across the board and simply just doesnt jump to another tax haven or outside the EU instead. If theres changes to taxes it will be through coordinated and agreed measures and not adhoc measures.

BonnieSituation

Adamcp898 wrote: »

No, you complained that that particular part of the interview wasn't expanded upon enough for you. Automatically you decided this was the presenter being dismissive when, given the time sensitive nature of live broadcasting, there could be a thousand reasons why it wasn't expounded further.

Have you ever listened to Morning Ireland?

There have been countless times over the last 15 years or so of my listening to it where a story was literally being broken on that show because of some probing that Cathal Mac Coille et al were doing in an interview.

It's a live news show alright but real journalists at the end of the day know when they have something on their hands and no producer worth their salt would intervene while it's happening under their nose.

Case in point being Brian Cowen's "under the weather" interview in 2011 which precipitated the actual collapse of the government soon after.

Zubeneschamali

Adamcp898 wrote: »

It's not a new story though.

This is now standard practice from the PR spindoctors. The first time an awkward question comes up, laugh at it, it is ridiculous. The next time it comes up, dismiss it as old news, we already dealt with that, no-one is interested, move on.

Adamcp898

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Have you ever listened to Morning Ireland?

There have been countless times over the last 15 years or so of my listening to it where a story was literally being broken on that show because of some probing that Cathal Mac Coille et al were doing in an interview.

It's a live news show alright but real journalists at the end of the day know when they have something on their hands and no producer worth their salt would intervene while it's happening under their nose.

Case in point being Brian Cowen's "under the weather" interview in 2011 which precipitated the actual collapse of the government soon after.

What are you talking about?

lawred2

Adamcp898 wrote: »

What are you talking about?

He's talking about journalists reacting to stories developing in front of them.

It wasn't Swahili

Adamcp898

lawred2 wrote: »

He's talking about journalists reacting to stories developing in front of them.

It wasn't Swahili

Another tremendous contribution Columbo, but I had gathered that already.

ambro25

Laois_Man wrote: »

THIS!

And it also never gets pointed out that the EU simply has no choice on backing us. They surveyed the positions of all 27 member states and took the negotiating position that all would agree to. Permitting a hard border in Ireland was always going to be vetoed by Ireland - therefore, they did not have the authority to negotiate one!

I was attending a local Brexit preparedness event at the Chamber of Commerce in Luxembourg this morning.

We enjoyed Jean Asselborn's speech: regretting Brexit, clarifying that Luxembourg has been planning for no deal since around November 2016, confirming that legislation and departments were already all set for -even- a no deal to have negligible impact on the 6k resident Brits (some may have to apply for a residence permit, that's it), and maintaining hope that sense would prevail, but with plenty of humorous one-liners suggesting that hope looked very vain currently.

We also enjoyed Céline Gauer's speech (Deputy General Secretary, EU Commission, under Juncker & Selmayr), whose watchwords would be familiar to posters on here (no renegotiation, no deal likelihood increasing, hope for best and prepare for worst, and economic operators shouldn't expect a bail out or exceptions: they've been warned, they've had the notices, if they get caught out by Brexit it's on them).

But the reason I quoted you, is that Gauer made crystal clear that the current situation with the UK, the unilateral conditions set by the EU in case of no deal (transport still OK for 9 months, some UK-EU plane journeys still OK, EU derivatives etc.) and the legislative/regulatory preparations in each of the EU27 were all very tighly discussed, agreed and coordinated across the EU27 for the last 2 years, and all governed by and aiming at solving the 3 main questions for the EU, of the Irish border issue, citizens' rights and the UK's exit bill.

Those 26 EU flags with the Irish flag on that photo yesterday was as strong with symbolism as they come...but the distinct impression from today was that it's neither for show, nor coerced: the 26 have got your back, because long-term they have about as much skin in the game as you do.

Very few Brits in the highly-multinational audience, although the ambassador was there of course. He did a passable job of explaining that the UK wanted an agreement, just not the current one. He wasn't clapped much, relative to the others (afore-mentioned + senior customs, immigration and social security officials about 'real life' measures put in place + local CEOs from a variety of sectors explaining challenges and what preps they've been through).

One got the distinct impression that we're as ready as can be, even with a messy no deal Brexit. I don't expect it to be any different for you guys on the beautiful Isle. It's just that it would be very bad press to announce it, to say nothing of the political recuperation ("see, they want to punish us!") by the hardliners in the UK.

Kermit.de.frog

https://twitter.com/BenQuinn75/status/1093859117117132801

Solidarity is a two way street.

MrMusician18

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

This is not the most tactful tweet I have ever seen.

https://twitter.com/EU_Taxud/status/1093511086563885056

This is what the "solidarity" is going to cost us soon.

Ireland will pay a diplomatic price for the support it has seen. The question will be how and when. Ireland is most vulnerable when it needs something and it needs assistance now, to the time to move on CCCTB would be around now. If Ireland gets through the next year holding the line it will probably get away with it until the next crisis. I think the Irish government would be more likely to make concessions on common defence father than taxation however.

It's interesting though that the recent trend in the EU is for nations to group into sub blocs to counter the weight of the commission and France/Germany. Ireland is part of a northern Hanseatic league for example.

Imreoir2

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

https://twitter.com/BenQuinn75/status/1093859117117132801

Solidarity is a two way street.

We will maintain our solidarity with the numerous other member states that agree that tax issues should remain a national competance. Ireland is far from alone in that view and untill the EU can convince all member states that a change is beneficial then that is how it will remain.

lawred2

Adamcp898 wrote: »

Another tremendous contribution Columbo, but I had gathered that already.

Oh right - it's just that your question there implied that you needed a little help with your comprehension.

Turns out that it was just a case of you being a complete crank

Par for the course with Brexiteers really when anyone has the temerity to engage with them

Hurrache

The tax thing is nothing new though, it's been picked at for years. They may try guilt Ireland as a result of Brexit, but we're not the only country in the EU that benefit from such agreements.

edit: Imreoir2 points out the same.

View

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

This is not the most tactful tweet I have ever seen.

https://twitter.com/EU_Taxud/status/1093511086563885056

This is what the "solidarity" is going to cost us soon.

To point out the obvious, we have had a common agreed EU wide tax system for decades - VAT - which is a set of rules for calculating sales tax on items that are sold.

That doesn’t mean though that VAT rates are the same throughout the EU or that the European Parliament or Council of Ministers are the ones making the decisions on them.

A common systems of rules for calculating taxes does not mean common tax rates.

MrMusician18

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

https://twitter.com/BenQuinn75/status/1093859117117132801

Solidarity is a two way street.

Solidarity is easy when interests align however. The EU can be sorely lacking solidarity when interests diverge. And in taxation, interests diverge.

I've long felt that both Italy and Greece were shafted when it came to the migration crisis, simply because the states couldn't agree. Particularly Greece, as it was also burdened with resolving it's economic crisis at the same time.

Enzokk

Adamcp898 wrote: »

That's kind of his job though as a presenter. I wager most people listening had the same thought in their head. It's his job to try and get his guest to then elaborate on their point for the benefit of his listenership, not just to simply air his own view.

I know there has been many replies on the topic of John Humphrys and the interview so I am going to reply in general and not specifically to this post. John Humphrys was a respected journalist for the BBC. In 2017 he earned more than £600 000 for his work. He was known for his tough interviews of politicians but in the last few years he has not been great. This interview is an example. Its not that he asked tough questions on what preparations for riots may be, its that he firstly laughed it off and then tried to ridicule it by asking a little sarcastically how one would even do that. As if planning for this is so ridiculous and "fake news" because how can one prepare for a riot?

Basically, its not that he asked the question but his reaction to learning of it and then asking the question as if not believing him.

John Humphrys is leaving Today at last, so why don't I feel triumphant?

Railing against Humphrys has become the engine of my mornings, a tea tree shower gel and ginger juice bomb combined. On particularly bad mornings – when he is telling Jacob Rees-Mogg chummily that he knew his father – I have to get out of bed and fetch my laptop, because tweeting on my phone just isn’t fast enough. It is often hard to disentangle what I am angry about, between Humphrys, the Today programme and the BBC generally, but I don’t care. I have enough fury for all of them.

Humphrys brings his own peculiar flavour of wrong to a pro-Brexit bias that I’ll flesh out another time. (Irish border problem, you say? Why doesn’t Ireland do us all a favour and leave the EU as well?) He seems to find the very voices of the opposition annoying, and women more annoying than men, bringing an irascible edge to debates that make it hard to figure out what they are saying, even if they have something concrete to say. He often favours the “many people think [insert ridiculous assertion]” interview approach, leaving us yelling “Who? WHO THINKS THAT?” at the radio.

Anyway, now he’s leaving, I don’t feel triumphant at all. I am thinking about the old Humphrys, the one who used to enjoy a bit of mischief, the one who wrote a sensitive and unexpected book about assisted dying, and I miss the political culture that made that Humphrys. I think we probably all used to be nicer and less Harrumphrys. I can’t imagine who would replace him. Today presenters, huh? Can’t live with ’em …

MrMusician18

View wrote: »

To point out the obvious, we have had a common agreed EU wide tax system for decades - VAT - which is a set of rules for calculating sales tax on items that are sold.

That doesn’t mean though that VAT rates are the same throughout the EU or that the European Parliament or Council of Ministers are the ones making the decisions on them.

A common systems of rules for calculating taxes does not mean common tax rates.

I'm open to correcting here but the EU sets the minimum VAT and it's this minimum that forms a countries EU subscription. Isn't it like the first 18% goes to Brussels and the extra over stays at home?


The EU might be best staying away from taxation, least a light be shined on the fact the employees of the EU institutions do not pay income tax.

Kermit.de.frog

I read this as intentional briefing to put pressure on the DUP?

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47170711?ns_source=twitter&ns_linkname=news_central&ns_mchannel=social&ns_campaign=bbc_politics

Enzokk

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I read this as intentional briefing to put pressure on the DUP?

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47170711?ns_source=twitter&ns_linkname=news_central&ns_mchannel=social&ns_campaign=bbc_politics

More of the same from May really, she has tried to blackmail MPs using no deal as a threat. She has tried to bribe Labour MPs by giving their constituencies more money and now she is trying to coerce the DUP by talking about a border poll. And I suspect if all of those MPs that voted against her deal votes for it next month then all of her promises and assurances will turn out to be lies. How can May who stood on the steps of Downing Street and talked of the Conservative and UNIONIST party, because they believe in the Union, now all of a sudden call a border poll? Charlatan and a liar.

Podge_irl

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

https://twitter.com/BenQuinn75/status/1093859117117132801

Solidarity is a two way street.

Carlos Closa is a research professor at the Institute of Public Goods and Policies of the Spanish National Research Council (IPP-CSIC).

i.e. it is an utterly irrelevant viewpoint and not indicative of anything to do with the EU whatsoever.

Adamcp898

lawred2 wrote: »

Oh right - it's just that your question there implied that you needed a little help with your comprehension.

Turns out that it was just a case of you being a complete crank

Par for the course with Brexiteers really when anyone has the temerity to engage with them

From an opinion of how a snippet of a radio interview can be interpreted, you feel you have managed to deduct my political leanings - specifically those relating to Brexit?

Strawmen indeed.



Also, perhaps a thought to consider if you get the time for some quiet contemplation this evening - why do you feel the need to resort to personal insults when you come across opinions that don't agree with your own? Is it an inability to express yourself or a symptom of much deeper seated issue?

Infini

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I read this as intentional briefing to put pressure on the DUP?

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47170711?ns_source=twitter&ns_linkname=news_central&ns_mchannel=social&ns_campaign=bbc_politics

In fairness this has been flagged well in advance and with full warning that if theres a crash out no deal Brexit then the ensuing chaos will be enough to shift opinions to a majority looking for reunification. Opinion polls have shown this.