Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

aidyhawse

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Regarding hard brexit (looking more and more likely now) our government has one card to play, which no one on this thread yet thought of.

They can call a referendum (we have one in May already right?) asking people to chose between a border in Northern Ireland or border on Irish Sea between us and EU.

Whatever the outcome then they can simply quote the "will of the people" when putting up the infrastructure.

No-one has thought of this before because that's exactly what the Brexiteer Politicians believed that they'd have been able to force Ireland into doing. On top of that, you are advocating for Ireland to either break the GFA, an international treaty, or to place a border between Ireland & the EU. Yeah, I can totally see why no-one has suggested that.

Hurrache

lawred2 wrote: »

why wasn't that male MP named?

If he said what was alleged then come out and say who it was that said it. What's the secrecy about?

A lot of people asking the same question of Krishnan. The good money is on Francois.

Professor Moriarty

Hurrache wrote: »

UK politicians aren't even trying anymore.
https://twitter.com/krishgm/status/1112999501277458432

My money would be on Mark Francois. This is from an interview he gave yesterday: "My message to Jeremy Hunt is 'Up yours'". Great to see the Tories maintaining party unity.

Peregrinus

Cryptopagan wrote: »

Corbyn supported 3 of the 4 options, and abstained on revoking Article 50. For all the shortcomings its leadership has displayed throughout this Brexit debacle, Labour cannot still be accused of failing to seek a way forward that involves compromise and consensus. Tory and DUP intransigence, and May’s insistence that her deal is the only legitimate vision for Brexit, are very clearly the barriers to Parliament agreeing to a version of Leave.

Corbyn did, but each of the four options offered was opposed by a number of Labour MPs, and in every case that number would have been enough to carry the option if those MPs had supported it, or even just abstained. I agree that the Tories and the DUP carry the primary responsiblity for this mess, but any notion of Parliamen taking over control and making a decision absolutely depends on the Labour party committing to that, and following through.

I think there's a way forward here, which is for the Labour Party and the SNP to agree that they will both support both a Customs Union and Common Market 2.0, provided in each case that there is to be a confirmatory public vote. If party discipline can be maintained, that should deliver indicative support for two models of Brexit, which should be enough to persuade the EU that it is worth while granting an extension so that one of these models, or some compromise between them, can be firmed up and put to the people in a "this package or remain" referendum.

Provided, of course, HMG can be got to do the will of parliament and request a long extension on that basis. Which is a whole other issue.

On edit: That requires signficant compromise from both parties - SNP, becasue it opens the door to a Brexit in which Free Movement is lost, and Labour, because it opens a door to a refernedum in which Brexit is lost.

Imreoir2

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Taoiseach meeting seperately with both French and German leaders in a couple of days is not exactly normal (the German Chancellor getting on a plane to come here too).

I wonder is something up? Pressure to be put on the government?

Or reaffirmation for the Brexiters of solidarity?

Macron statement going to be studied very carefully tomorrow?.

No-deal has moved from worst case scenario to most likely scenario, as Ireland is on the front line so to speak, this is hardly surprising. The idea that the EU are going to pressure the government over the backstop at this stage is laughable. One wonders if even a few years after Brexit and the backstop is in force people will still be suggesting that the EU is just about to throw Ireland under the bus.

Peregrinus

Imreoir2 wrote: »

No-deal has moved from worst case scenario to most likely scenario, as Ireland is on the front line so to speak, this is hardly surprising. The idea that the EU are going to pressure the government over the backstop at this stage is laughable. One wonders if even a few years after Brexit and the backstop is in force people will still be suggesting that the EU is just about to throw Ireland under the bus.

They are absolutely definitely not going to pressure the government over the backstop.

They are going to pressure the government over border controls. No-deal brexit and no backstop means border controls. They may be introduced gradually and stepped up over time, and there may be some forbearance and much sympathy and a good deal of supportive measures for Ireland, but the integrity of the Single Market must be assured. That's what Angela and Emmanuel are meeting Leo to discuss.

lawred2

Peregrinus wrote: »

Corbyn did, but each of the four options offered was opposed by a number of Labour MPs, and in every case that number would have been enough to carry the option if those MPs had supported it, or even just abstained. I agree that the Tories and the DUP carry the primary responsiblity for this mess, but any notion of Parliamen taking over control and making a decision absolutely depends on the Labour party committing to that, and following through.

I think there's a way forward here, which is for the Labour Party and the SNP to agree that they will both support both a Customs Union and Common Market 2.0, provided in each case that there is to be a confirmatory public vote. If party discipline can be maintained, that should deliver indicative support for two models of Brexit, which should be enough to persuade the EU that it is worth while granting an extension so that one of these models, or some compromise between them, can be firmed up and put to the people in a "this package or remain" referendum.

Provided, of course, HMG can be got to do the will of parliament and request a long extension on that basis. Which is a whole other issue.

On edit: That requires signficant compromise from both parties - SNP, becasue it opens the door to a Brexit in which Free Movement is lost, and Labour, because it opens a door to a refernedum in which Brexit is lost.

the public vote is a lottery where progress towards a softer Brexit could be entirely lost...

I don't get the clamour for it

Leroy42

And my reading of the situation in Ireland is that the majority A) understand the benefit of the EU to Ireland and understand what a complete shambles the UK have made of the whole thing.

On that basis, I would think (and it is based on nothing more than that) that people will accept that if a border does indeed end up going up then it is not due to the fault of the Irish. Sure, politicos will argue about whether Leo should have done this or that, but I don't think it will be a major voting issue as the parties are largely unified on this and it seems that the public are as well.

So whilst nobody wants it, it would appear that many accept that it is the outcome of the type of Brexit the UK wants.

Water John

Yes, hoping the options are narrowed down. I presume a lot of work goes on, behind the scenes between those backing various indicative options.
I know it's been said often before, but hopefully Wed.

Professor, long extension isn't an option, it's a process to deliver something else.
It's needed if any option outside of WA + CU is chosen. So, No Deal has been rejected by over 400 MPs, should be declared dead.
Choices WA
WA + CU
WA + CU + some SM
Confirmatory vote on any of the above.
Extension needed for 3 & 4.

Professor Moriarty

Peregrinus wrote: »

They are absolutely definitely not going to pressure the government over the backstop.

They are going to pressure the government over border controls. No-deal brexit and no backstop means border controls. They may be introduced gradually and stepped up over time, and there may be some forbearance and much sympathy and a good deal of supportive measures for Ireland, but the integrity of the Single Market must be assured. That's what Angela and Emmanuel are meeting Leo to discuss.

If I am the leader of a dissident Republican group, I am rubbing my hands with glee when I hear this. Border controls = Target practice.

Peregrinus

lawred2 wrote: »

the public vote is a lottery where progress towards a softer Brexit could be entirely lost...

I don't get the clamour for it

The public vote offers a real possiblity of remaining. Remainers would like that.

And, if the options in a public vote are (a) a Brexit which, while not as soft as possible, is still softer than May's Brexit or (b) Remain, that looks like a win-win for Remainers. Even if they lose the referendum, it's still a better outcome than supporting May's deal.

mickoneill31

Peregrinus wrote: »

They are absolutely definitely not going to pressure the government over the backstop.

They are going to pressure the government over border controls. No-deal brexit and no backstop means border controls. They may be introduced gradually and stepped up over time, and there may be some forbearance and much sympathy and a good deal of supportive measures for Ireland, but the integrity of the Single Market must be assured. That's what Angela and Emmanuel are meeting Leo to discuss.

Why do they need to pressure the government over border controls? All of the grown ups in the room know what no deal means.

To the UK if no deal happenss they'll go to the EU looking for a deal. So the EU will just say "about that backstop, take your time lads, no rush on the EUs side".

Imreoir2

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Regarding hard brexit (looking more and more likely now) our government has one card to play, which no one on this thread yet thought of.

They can call a referendum (we have one in May already right?) asking people to chose between a border in Northern Ireland or border on Irish Sea between us and EU.

Whatever the outcome then they can simply quote the "will of the people" when putting up the infrastructure.

That would be utterly self defeating. Firstly asking the population if maybe they might like to cut off their own legs (erecting a border with the rest of the EU) is what got the UK into this mess in the first place, why on earth would we want to take that risk?

Secondly, why should we vote on a border with NI? It is the setteled will of the Irish people that there be no border, there is no reason to revisit that question now. We have an international agreement with the UK to keep that border open and we are doing nothing to break that deal, they on other hand are. Why should we hold a referendum to either take responsibility for their bulls**t, or erect a barrier with our biggest trading partner, the EU, so that they can get away with their bulls**t without having to suffer the consequences.

Thirdly, you can't have a referendum that does not allow the public to choose the status quo, it cant be a choice between border with NI or border with EU. It would have to be Border with NI, Yes or No, and seperatly, border with EU - Yes or No. The only rational choice would be a resounding NO to both, which would then leave is exactly where we are and looking foolish for bothering with a couple of pointless referendums in the first place.

Infini

Imreoir2 wrote: »

No-deal has moved from worst case scenario to most likely scenario, as Ireland is on the front line so to speak, this is hardly surprising. The idea that the EU are going to pressure the government over the backstop at this stage is laughable. One wonders if even a few years after Brexit and the backstop is in force people will still be suggesting that the EU is just about to throw Ireland under the bus.

While some attempt's will be made to make sure the single market isnt compromised possibly by monitoring what goes through Dublin Port for example what will happen is massive pressure will be brought on the UK to agree to a proper trading relationship in the EU and Ireland's favour. Simple truth is Ireland wont be thrown under the bus for Westminster's utter incompetence and lack of judgement. The EU also know's of the border situation not being your normal one since this is one violence will easily flare up on if not handled carefully.

It should be said though that if there's a Hard Brexit the border will likely only be a short to mid term problem. I'd expect a significant surge in support for reunification if NI is utterly wrecked economically by the Brexit Bullshítters and likely the fact that the government in Dublin actually cared and had more concern for those in the North than the government in Westminster will not be lost on people. Let's not forget the Scottish factor either if they get a 2nd indyref and leave the 2nd time round, Irish reunification wont be long behind it.

lawred2

Peregrinus wrote: »

The public vote offers a real possiblity of remaining. Remainers would like that.

And, if the options in a public vote are (a) a Brexit which, while not as soft as possible, is still softer than May's Brexit or (b) Remain, that looks like a win-win for Remainers. Even if they lose the referendum, it's still a better outcome than supporting May's deal.

Yeah and it also offers the exact opposite

maynooth_rules

SNIP. No more talk of SF abstentionism please.

Anteayer

Sadly, it just shows the level of awareness or care that British politics has for Northern Ireland and if also shows exactly what the DUP really think.

Their MPs voted down a customs union option yesterday entirely. So clearly they're not just worried about being cut off from the UK, they are willing to vote down the only thing that would maintain the status quo too.

I think people need to stop being so gentle and careful about how they describe the DUP and the Tories. They've absolutely wrecked prospects for Northern Ireland.

As far as I'm concerned this is the DUP's border. They say they don't want it but they just do absolutely everything possible to ensure the damn thing happens but will then try and blame someone else.

They never subscribed to the GFA and it's pretty clear that this is just their opportunity to completely wreck it, undermine the institutions that it setup and probably cozy up to the idea of direct rule.

The Tories have some degree of excuse in the sense they're self absorbed and basically an English party but the DUP should and do know better than this. It's bloody mindedness that's driven this to where it is now.

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Regarding hard brexit (looking more and more likely now) our government has one card to play, which no one on this thread yet thought of.

They can call a referendum (we have one in May already right?) asking people to chose between a border in Northern Ireland or border on Irish Sea between us and EU.

Whatever the outcome then they can simply quote the "will of the people" when putting up the infrastructure.

So in other words you're looking for an Irexit vote?

BobbyBobberson

Just something on Mark Francois. I had never heard of him before he ripped up that Airbus letter live on air and started ranting about his old man in the army. Now I never see nor hear the end of him.

The British media's insistence on propping up mouth pieces who know sweet FA is part of the reason we are in this mess now.

Professor Moriarty

Water John wrote: »

Yes, hoping the options are narrowed down. I presume a lot of work goes on, behind the scenes between those backing various indicative options.
I know it's been said often before, but hopefully Wed.

Professor, long extension isn't an option, it's a process to deliver something else.
It's needed if any option outside of WA + CU is chosen. So, No Deal has been rejected by over 400 MPs, should be declared dead.
Choices WA
WA + CU
WA + CU + some SM
Confirmatory vote on any of the above.
Extension needed for 3 & 4.

I know, but they can't agree on what sort of Soft Brexit they want or whether they want to remain. So that's why I suggest three options. If May puts up No Deal, WA or long extension, then it essentially becomes binary as No Deal won't be supported.

So Brexiteers now have a choice. The WA or a long extension with strings attached. And it shouldn't be indicative, it should be binding and a free vote. In that case, she might have a slim chance of getting the WA through. A long extension should be good news for Remainers/Soft Brexiteers. May won't do any of this but it's what she should do in the country's interest.

Peregrinus

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

If I am the leader of a dissident Republican group, I am rubbing my hands with glee when I hear this. Border controls = Target practice.

The controls won't be actually at the border, for the most part.

Plus, not to be brutal, but the dissident republicans will have a preference for attacking UK government targets; most of them have a standing policy against direct attacks on Irish government targets. I think they might foment protests, obstruction, etc against Irish government measures to control the border, but for actual direct armed attacks they'll wait for the UK to do something attackable. They won't have to wait for long.

Leroy42

Peregrinus wrote: »

The public vote offers a real possiblity of remaining. Remainers would like that.

And, if the options in a public vote are (a) a Brexit which, while not as soft as possible, is still softer than May's Brexit or (b) Remain, that looks like a win-win for Remainers. Even if they lose the referendum, it's still a better outcome than supporting May's deal.

Where is the confidence that Remain would even be on the ballot?

It is likely that a confirmatory ref wil be tagged on to MV4 and it will get passed, but it will have to be quite descriptive to avoid TM simply making it WA or No Deal. Sure the Mp's will complain, but at this stage TM will be offering this as the only alternative to No Deal. Vote for TM deal to at least increase the possibility to avoid No deal, and with it get a longer extension from the EU.

TM has never shown any inclination to have any thoughts about Remain. None. But if they try to remove No deal from the MV4 motion (thus WA or remain) then all those in ERG etc will vote against it anyway.

ancapailldorcha

BobbyBobberson wrote: »

Just something on Mark Francois. I had never heard of him before he ripped up that Airbus letter live on air and started ranting about his old man in the army. Now I never see nor hear the end of him.

The British media's insistence on propping up mouth pieces who know sweet FA is part of the reason we are in this mess now.

He was in the Territorial Army which is a volunteer reserve force. Bit like comparing Dr. Pepper to a properly trained medical professional.

Akrasia

lawred2 wrote: »

Yeah and it also offers the exact opposite

People make judgements based on the potential outcomes. There is a reason why brexiteers are all so opposed to a 2nd referendum. They know that there is a very very good chance they'll lose

BobbyBobberson

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

He was in the Territorial Army which is a volunteer reserve force. Bit like comparing Dr. Pepper to a properly trained medical professional.

Ha, he wasn't trained to lose you know!

Professor Moriarty

Peregrinus wrote: »

The controls won't be actually at the border, for the most part.

Plus, not to be brutal, but the dissident republicans will have a preference for attacking UK government targets; most of them have a standing policy against direct attacks on Irish government targets. I think they might foment protests, obstruction, etc against Irish government measures to control the border, but for actual direct armed attacks they'll wait for the UK to do something attackable. They won't have to wait for long.

Indeed they will attack UK targets. Which is exactly what they are waiting for - targets. Labour's Shadow Minister for NI, Stephen Pound, put it very well:

“If you look at the border, 302 miles long, if you think that a camera up a pole can actually provide a border security alert – that will become a target.

If you have a target, you have to defend the target. If you have a defender, you have to have someone to actually protect the defender. Before you know where you are, you’ve got uniformed UK [Border Agency] or customs officers on the border.

If you do that – and I’m not being hysterical about this – then the peace process is finished, the minute you have uniformed troops on that border. If the peace process is finished, then peace on the island of Ireland is under huge threat."

BobbyBobberson

funkey_monkey wrote: »

I'm not fan of SF, but it should be taken into consideration that 89 MPs abstained on the Customs Union vote.

Also 66 abstained on Referendum, 95 abstained on Common Market and 155 abstained on Parlimentary Supremency.

Exactly. Do we honestly think that MP's would have voted the same if Sinn Fein had been there?

There is no way that the Conservative and Unionist Party propped up by the Democratic Unionist Party would have allowed Sinn Fein to dictate the UK's exit from the EU.

mikep

Thinking about the hard border, I heard someone from Dublin port on the radio saying they had infrastructure in place for inspections etc including space for extra storage if required. One can assume that the same is happening in Cork and Rosslare.
According to people from the border areas there have been Gardai redeployed to stations and the OPW and Customs have been inspecting border crossings.
Is it possible that plans are being put in place to carry out inspections here, but at such a pace, that the added costs (Quay rent, fresh produce spoilage, inspection costs etc) to business in the UK would have them up in arms about it fairly quickly and put whoever is negotiating the trade deal on notice that something similar to the current situation would have to be agreed quickly??

Peregrinus

mickoneill31 wrote: »

Why do they need to pressure the government over border controls? All of the grown ups in the room know what no deal means.

Mmm. Varadkar has tried hard not to acknowledge, or lead Irish public opinion towards an acceptance of, the fact that a no-deal Brexit will lead to border controls from the Irish side.

mickoneill31 wrote: »

To the UK if no deal happenss they'll go to the EU looking for a deal. So the EU will just say "about that backstop, take your time lads, no rush on the EUs side".

There is rush. No-deal will be incredibly painful for Ireland. In some ways its the worst of both worlds - growing levels of border control in Ireland, plus our trade with the EU-26 is disrupted because our routes through the UK, which are important to us, are gummed up. You're looking at shortages; you're looking at job losses; you're looking at business closures. We may blame the UK for this, but we will still be anxious to bring it to an end ASAP.

Our hope is, basically, that however bad it is for us it will be much, much worse for the UK, and therefore they will cave sooner rather than later, and come looking for a deal - hopefully before the cumulative effects on Ireland have got very far. But we will be very, very keen to see that deal completed becuse, the longer no-deal continues, the worse for us, and the harder to recover.

Imreoir2

Peregrinus wrote: »

They are absolutely definitely not going to pressure the government over the backstop.

They are going to pressure the government over border controls. No-deal brexit and no backstop means border controls. They may be introduced gradually and stepped up over time, and there may be some forbearance and much sympathy and a good deal of supportive measures for Ireland, but the integrity of the Single Market must be assured. That's what Angela and Emmanuel are meeting Leo to discuss.

Of course. The whole arguement that the backstop is unnecessary because Ireland won't enforce a border is bogus. Ireand is not planning to implement a border because Ireland is planning on holding the UK to it's obligations under the GFA even under a no-deal scenario. Ireland will insist that the UK implement the backstop, or provisions very like the backstop so that border infastructure is not required. If the UK fail to honor their obligations under the GFA, then Ireland will have no choice but to implement border checks.

These meetings are probably as much about preparing strategy for pressuirng the UK in a no-deal scenario to live up to its obligations, and the mechanics of making whatever ad-hoc arangements are necessary between the EU and UK to facliltate that, as they are about Irelands preparations for what it will have to do should the UK fail to meet its obligations.

The looking the other way, forebarance and symapthy in the initial months will not be aimless, they will be the public face of an intense diplomatic effort to hold the UK's feet to the fire, to make sure the gradual hardening of the border never needs to get off the ground.