Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

charlie14

daheff wrote: »

and most of them are 30+ years older. Armies, weapons & technology has come on quite a lot in that time.

majority of population (especially younger ones) have lived in relative peace and would not want a return of the bad days. I'd imagine they would happily put up with a border & sensible government over terrorism

A border would be like red rag to a bull for NI nationalists, the vast majority of which voted remain.
It would create a political vacuum as the DUP have shown they have no interest in forming a sensible power-sharing government.

That would be exploited by a hard core that still believe in a violent solution.

Shelga

Watching Clive Lewis on Question Time- still seems completely counter-intuitive to me that they had a chance to vote for a second referendum today and Labour abstained.

Surely if you want something, you vote for it? I’m sick of this nonsense about tactics. Corbyn should have whipped his MPs to vote for it, or given them a free vote at the very least.

charlie14

FrancieBrady wrote: »

No, this guy was talking about a legal way to do it. Only problem would be capacity at NI ports. But ships had been contacted about moving up from southern ports to meet demand.

If it is tariff free exporting from NI, yet exporting from the Republic would entail 50% tariffs legally to me it sounds legally the equivalent of attempting to square a circle.
Very dodgy.

nemefuria

What a mess, but even after all the chaos it looks like TM will finally get what she wanted all along!

Really looks like ERG and DUP will flip and MV3 will pass with A50 extension to May/June.

CelticRambler

charlie14 wrote: »

If it is tariff free exporting from NI, yet exporting from the Republic would entail 50% tariffs legally to me it sounds legally the equivalent of attempting to square a circle.
Very dodgy.

It is dodgy, which is why the EU said it sounded like it'd fall foul of WTO rules; but as it stands, it wouldn't be illegal.
RoI producer sends lorry load of beef to NI. Tariff-free, as per TM's published info.
NI purchaser, head office 0.5km inside the border, sells beef on to GB end-user. Container TIR sealed, hauled by RoI operator through RoI to Dublin and on to GB. All perfectly legal.

FrancieBrady

CelticRambler wrote: »

It is dodgy, which is why the EU said it sounded like it'd fall foul of WTO rules; but as it stands, it wouldn't be illegal.
RoI producer sends lorry load of beef to NI. Tariff-free, as per TM's published info.
NI purchaser, head office 0.5km inside the border, sells beef on to GB end-user. Container TIR sealed, hauled by RoI operator through RoI to Dublin and on to GB. All perfectly legal.

Trying to find a way to listen back to PK Show, but can't.
Basically the Agri guy reckoned the backdoor had been created deliberately so Britain could basically feed it's people. But that there would be a cost to NI farming.

charlie14

CelticRambler wrote: »

It is dodgy, which is why the EU said it sounded like it'd fall foul of WTO rules; but as it stands, it wouldn't be illegal.
RoI producer sends lorry load of beef to NI. Tariff-free, as per TM's published info.
NI purchaser, head office 0.5km inside the border, sells beef on to GB end-user. Container TIR sealed, hauled by RoI operator through RoI to Dublin and on to GB. All perfectly legal.

Even if it is still sounds a bit dodgy that would work for me.
I wouldn`t give the UK the satisfaction of shipping through NI rather than the Republic to avoid their tariff.

BluePlanet

daheff wrote: »

and most of them are 30+ years older. Armies, weapons & technology has come on quite a lot in that time.

majority of population (especially younger ones) have lived in relative peace and would not want a return of the bad days. I'd imagine they would happily put up with a border & sensible government over terrorism

The dissdents can never hope to gain critical mass.
They don't care about even trying.

There are intra-generational unemployed, and just plain jaded people that delight in watching the world burn. They come out every Twelfth on both sides.

FrancieBrady

daheff wrote: »

and most of them are 30+ years older. Armies, weapons & technology has come on quite a lot in that time.

majority of population (especially younger ones) have lived in relative peace and would not want a return of the bad days. I'd imagine they would happily put up with a border & sensible government over terrorism

We are told quite regularly on here that northern Ireland was in 'relative peace through the 50's and 60's.

The problem with the border is that it will start with civil disobedience just like the last time, and then the lid came off.
What it 'came off', is largely still there, the issue of partition. It is arrogant and reckless to think this cannot spiral out of control again.

Mrsmum

Shelga wrote: »

Watching Clive Lewis on Question Time- still seems completely counter-intuitive to me that they had a chance to vote for a second referendum today and Labour abstained.

Surely if you want something, you vote for it? I’m sick of this nonsense about tactics. Corbyn should have whipped his MPs to vote for it, or given them a free vote at the very least.

This, can someone please explain what is the tactic behind Labour not voting for 2nd referendum when they are supposed to be for it ? Regarding all things Brexit, I feel like the guy admitting he doesn't understand tracker mortgages.

joe40

charlie14 wrote: »

FrancieBrady wrote: »

No, this guy was talking about a legal way to do it. Only problem would be capacity at NI ports. But ships had been contacted about moving up from southern ports to meet demand.

If it is tariff free exporting from NI, yet exporting from the Republic would entail 50% tariffs legally to me it sounds legally the equivalent of attempting to square a circle.
Very dodgy.

But there is nothing to say it is unlawful. This is the rules proposed by the British themselves.
They would have to check goods fron ni to Britain to stop this and that sounds awful like the backstop.

CelticRambler

charlie14 wrote: »

Even if it is still sounds a bit dodgy that would work for me.
I wouldn`t give the UK the satisfaction of shipping through NI rather than the Republic to avoid their tariff.

Unfortunately, it'd still be recorded as NI trade with GB ...

But I could well imagine that someone in Westminster came up with just such a cunning plan. Pity they didn't put as much mental energy into coming up with a plan prior to triggering Article 50 ... or holding that feckin' referendum.

ArmaniJeanss

Mrsmum wrote: »

This, can someone please explain what is the tactic behind Labour not voting for 2nd referendum when they are supposed to be for it ? Regarding all things Brexit, I feel like the guy admitting he doesn't understand tracker mortgages.

It wasn't going to win. Even the Peoples Vote campaigners announced they didn't want it to be voted on today. There would be little point on being on the wrong side of a defeat today.
The time to do it is after the Peoples Vote marches on the 23/03.
If (big if) they can get X Million people out marching then they'd hope to create momentum behind getting a vote through parliament then. I can't see it unfortunately.

Imreoir2

Water John wrote: »

The most bizarre thing of all the things that have happened was, Stephen Barclay, Brexit Minister summing the debate on behalf of the Govn't. He then goes into the lobbies and votes against the Govn't!!!

If he voted against the government, is he not the former Brexit secretary now?

FrancieBrady

Imreoir2 wrote: »

If he voted against the government, is he not the former Brexit secretary now?

Free vote, was it not? Bizarre either way.

hill16bhoy

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

It wasn't going to win. Even the Peoples Vote campaigners announced they didn't want it to be voted on today. There would be little point on being on the wrong side of a defeat today.
The time to do it is after the Peoples Vote marches on the 23/03.
If (big if) they can get X Million people out marching then they'd hope to create momentum behind getting a vote through parliament then. I can't see it unfortunately.

May's deal may have passed parliament by then.

If not by then, probably within a few days of it.

That's the way it's heading in my view.

joe40

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Water John wrote: »

The most bizarre thing of all the things that have happened was, Stephen Barclay, Brexit Minister summing the debate on behalf of the Govn't. He then goes into the lobbies and votes against the Govn't!!!

If he voted against the government, is he not the former Brexit secretary now?

4, I think, other cabinet ministers defied the whip yesterday so safe to say collective responsibility is out the window.

charlie14

CelticRambler wrote: »

Unfortunately, it'd still be recorded as NI trade with GB ...

But I could well imagine that someone in Westminster came up with just such a cunning plan. Pity they didn't put as much mental energy into coming up with a plan prior to triggering Article 50 ... or holding that feckin' referendum.

The upside could be that with NI exporting so much meat the UK`s carbon footprint would go up while ours goes down and saves us a few bob on penalties.:)


A cunning Blackadder based plan is not beyond the realms of believable from what we have seen from this dysfunctional UK government.

ArmaniJeanss

hill16bhoy wrote: »

May's deal may have passed parliament by then.

If not by then, probably within a few days of it.

That's the way it's heading in my view.

I don't disagree at all.
But it still doesn't mean that today was the day to really go for it in parliament on the second referendum. It would have lost, and it's kind of a one-chance thing.
The only way such a vote gets through is a perfect storm - MV3 would have to lose badly, we'd have to be in to the final days before the 29th and a massive turn-out for Peoples Vote marches (coupled with a move towards Remain in Polls) which makes it look to MPs like its an acceptable thing to vote for. Even then it requires almost a miracle on the maths in the HOC.

Charles Babbage

daheff wrote: »

thats smuggling and criminality..... not paramilitaries (granted the same persons are possibly involved in both).... so my question still remains unanswered.

A border does not equal paramilitary

Overturning the political process to impose that border does equal paramilitary.

Laois_Man

So, from tonight's Question Time....

James Cleverley STILL thinks they can get the Backstop end-dated! :eek:

Julia Hartley Brewer is the female Farage

Clive Lewis got away with more Labour spoofing

Catherine Bernard thankfully shot down the Vienna convention idea legally!

And Question Time is in Belfast nest week - that should be fun!

Junkyard Tom

daheff wrote: »

explain why so?

For these people you're not putting a border between two countries you're ramming one straight through their territory. The political map of Ireland for people on the border is inconsequential.

VinLieger

daheff wrote: »

explain why so?

plenty of places have borders betwen them without paramilitary activity. why would adding a customs checking border cause paramilitary activity?

Are you honestly trying to compare the NI border to other borders around the world that have nothing close to the very recent complex history it does?

Borderhopper

I think the situation and the potential for violence is being underestimated. The troubles didn't start in 1969 when the British army arrived, tension had been building for years. Don't forget , the UVF were murdering people in the mid 60s long before the provisional IRA were formed.

It's not a border agreed over centuries, it's imposed on an island, with a line arbitrarily drawn following 19th century county lines that were ignored previously. Coming from the border, I can tell you that smuggling is definitely not seen as criminality. I can say this as someone with relatives in HMRC. We didn't want it, it cuts us off from where our people come from (most people in Derry are originally from Donegal, and very conscious of that fact), and if we can profit from it, then that's our right. Not saying this is right, but that's the prevailing view.

As regards to young people not wanting a return to violence, the anniversary of the shankill bombing was 5 months ago. In 1993 I was 13, and25 years ago was 1968. Ancient history. History in Ireland is both close and faraway. Don't assume just because something awful happened 25 years ago it stops something awful happening now

lawred2

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Free vote, was it not? Bizarre either way.

Should free votes extend to cabinet members?

Obviously it does but seems somewhat morally/ethically arseways

lawred2

Laois_Man wrote: »

So, from tonight's Question Time....

James Cleverley STILL thinks they can get the Backstop end-dated! :eek:

Julia Hartley Brewer is the female Farage

Clive Lewis got away with more Labour spoofing

Catherine Bernard thankfully shot down the Vienna convention idea legally!

And Question Time is in Belfast nest week - that should be fun!

Just imagine the handpicking that will be done for that episode

Peregrinus

lawred2 wrote: »

Should free votes extend to cabinet members?

Obviously it does but seems somewhat morally/ethically arseways

It generally doesn't extend to cabinet members. But, obviously, this time it does. Even if that decision has only been made retrospectively.

According to the twittersphere, May was furious and gave them a bollocking in cabinet the following morning.

FrancieBrady

lawred2 wrote: »

Should free votes extend to cabinet members?

Obviously it does but seems somewhat morally/ethically arseways

I am not sure it has ever happened before were the Minister has stayed in their job.
There isn't a government anymore when that begins to happen.

I get the image of May lunging for the line here, desperate to get to 'pressure max' and the hope that pressure will get her deal through.
She is doing a lot of damage to parliamentary democracy.

FrancieBrady

lawred2 wrote: »

Just imagine the handpicking that will be done for that episode

When do they announce who is on panel? They will probably sterilise the audience and panel so much it will be a non event, thus giving the wrong impression of the strength of feeling.

McGiver

FrancieBrady wrote:

I get the image of May lunging for the line here, desperate to get to 'pressure max' and the hope that pressure will get her deal through. She is doing a lot of damage to parliamentary democracy.

Yes, she does but their democracy had never been strong, its a weak system. The English system has been exposed as totally unfit for purpose in the process. The fptp, the HoC lobbies, the divisions, the strange procedures with nothing in writing outlining what is legal or illegal - which anyway May can simply ignore if she wishes to, absence of a written codified constitution etc. If they had a PR system, a proper constitution and a constitutional court (like any other civilised country) they wouldn't be in this bloody mess, and the PM would be sued at constitutional court and have legislation a annulled if they tried to hold the Parliament in contempt!