Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

prawnsambo

Enzokk wrote: »

As an aside, Oakeshott also had one of her sources go to jail for a story she printed, James O'Brien pointed out she is as far as he knows the only journalist this has happened to.

Whoever leaked to her must be absolutely bricking it right now. Especially in light of that information.

Professor Moriarty

prawnsambo wrote: »

Whoever leaked to her must be absolutely bricking it right now. Especially in light of that information.

If I were her, I'd be very concerned. You don't piss the Foreign Office off by doing a hatchet job on one of their own.

Lackadaisical

InTheShadows wrote: »

He's done the right thing by going. If it happened here he'd brass neck it out until it was forgotten about. I greatly admire that about the UK political class unlike the cowards we have serving us here.

The guy did absolutely nothing but his job. His communication channels were compromised and someone broke the Official Secrets Act and he has been bullied out of his position by a foreign power.

I think he should have stood his ground and forced the British government to remove him. It's the government who is acting as cowards if he has been pushed.

This is a diplomatic disaster for the UK and reduces them to puppet state status.

ambro25

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

If I were her, I'd be very concerned. You don't piss the Foreign Office off by doing a hatchet job on one of their own.

According to Twitter noises (from reputable handles), the leak qualifies as an OSA breach; there's a goid chance Oakeshott wouldn't be able to rely on a public interest defence (so would go to jail with her source); and Sir Darroch has indicated that the Met is now involved...

...but then, we have to bear in mind how the Met has 'handled' the Electoral Commision findings and volumes of evidence to date. "Ah no, not us guv', not seen or heard nothing, we've been waiting on you".

Professor Moriarty

ambro25 wrote: »

According to Twitter noises (from reputable handles), the leak qualifies as an OSA breach; there's a goid chance Oakeshott wouldn't be able to rely on a public interest defence (so would go to jail with her source); and Sir Darroch has indicated that the Met is now involved...

...but then, we have to bear in mind how the Met has 'handled' the Electoral Commision findings and volumes of evidence to date. "Ah no, not us guv', not seen or heard nothing, we've been waiting on you".

They might not just depend on the police. The Foreign Office would be well acquainted with a lot of spooks.

Enzokk

Nick Boles, now independent MP is not holding back on this affair.

https://twitter.com/NickBoles/status/1148928540395614209

https://twitter.com/NickBoles/status/1148929897722798080

https://twitter.com/NickBoles/status/1148932212525608960

That is some criticism of Johnson. He has no chance of a easy time in Westminster. He could dare to call a GE, but with Brexit not delivered yet it will be suicide for the Tories. They could do it after they have left, but since the referendum that has been their only purpose and they have not succeeded. They will get hammered by the Brexit Party and if Labour is smart they will easily win a majority. But then again it is Labour of Corbyn so I expect them to mess it up as well.

trellheim

Lets imagine for the moment that one role of ambassadors is to give their warts and all impressions back to the Government ( as Darroch was doing ).

Now , its become evident that expediency means hanging you out by your unmentionables if you do just that for short term political gain.

Therefore any new ambassador will tell their masters what they want to hear , nullifying one of their major roles and making it harder for HMG to do its job

(Imagine the UK ambassadors to the French and German govts being asked "So what will they do about the backstop" ... answer "they'll roll over and give us whatever we want, fill your boots" /s ... thats now the way forward if you want to keep the post )

Theres not a bad case for whoever leaked this as treason as it is actually damaging to the UK State

mickoneill31

InTheShadows wrote: »

He's done the right thing by going. If it happened here he'd brass neck it out until it was forgotten about. I greatly admire that about the UK political class unlike the cowards we have serving us here.

Jesus, have you been watching the political class in the UK over the last couple of years. Any time I think ours are idiots I just look over there and think we could have it so much worse.

Admittedly I think you're correct about his resignation. His job was untenable because of the toddler. Unfortunately for the UK they're so screwed that they can't really give out to the US about it too much. The UK now needs to keep Trump happy (part of that taking back control)

Water John

Alan Duncan really lets Boris have it:
Sir Alan Duncan, a Foreign Office minister, said Johnson had thrown Darroch “under the bus to serve his own personal interests ” and accused him of “contemptible negligence”.

Duncan told the BBC: “I’m upset and angry. And there are a lot of people here in the Commons who are very, very angry and feel he has lost so much respect for having done what he’s done. His disregard for Sir Kim Darroch and his refusal to back him was in my view pretty contemptible, but also not in the interests of the country he’s trying to lead.”

DOCARCH

Seems a bit crazy to be having these public/televised debates, between the Tory leader candidates, after some Tory members have already voted!

VinLieger

DOCARCH wrote: »

Seems a bit crazy to be having these public/televised debates, between the Tory leader candidates, after some Tory members have already voted!

Exactly what Boris wanted and why he refused the earlier debates

BluePlanet

So Britain wants to torpedo the economy here.

I disagree with Coveney's mealy-mouthed, 'fudge' on having border checks offsite somewhere, away from the actual border. This only strengthen's Brexiteer's POV about the need for the border, and will likely inject inefficiencies in the transit of goods, will also add additional circumvention of controls.

Eventually our EU partners may balk at this fudge, imagine the fallout when something gets exposed (like the horsemeat scandal) and our inspection regime is revealed as inadequate. Not good.

This is why we should go big: clear and unambiguous defense of the SM, with clear border infastructure and no fudging. This will also carry the added benefit of physically isolating NI which will drive unification.

Professor Moriarty

BluePlanet wrote: »

So Britain wants to torpedo the economy here.

I disagree with Coveney's mealy-mouthed, 'fudge' on having border checks offsite somewhere, away from the actual border. This only strengthen's Brexiteer's POV about the need for the border, and will likely inject inefficiencies in the transit of goods, will also add additional circumvention of controls.

Eventually our EU partners may balk at this fudge, imagine the fallout when something gets exposed (like the horsemeat scandal) and our inspection regime is revealed as inadequate. Not good.

This is why we should go big: clear and unambiguous defense of the SM, with clear border infastructure and no fudging. This will also carry the added benefit of physically isolating NI which will drive unification.

That's a fair way of looking at it. I suppose the 'abandoning" of nationalists wouldn't play out too well though. Even if the long term gain might be a UI.

Sam Russell

What do you think the American Ambassador to the Court of St James is sending to the US State Dept about what is going on in Westminster?

Maybe Trump should leak a few of those telegrams.

A Dub in Glasgo

DOCARCH wrote: »

Seems a bit crazy to be having these public/televised debates, between the Tory leader candidates.

Should have just put a fullstop there

It is surreal to me that 160k Tories are going to decide yet the TV companies are broadcasting this guff to the public as if they can decide

Stop moaning ffs

Listened to it again today. Moderator was woeful. She went really hard on Hunt and let Johnson run riot. She never even chased him to answer the questions. He didn’t answer a single one directly.

Such a pointless excercise all in all

BluePlanet

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

That's a fair way of looking at it. I suppose the 'abandoning" of nationalists wouldn't play out too well though. Even if the long term gain might be a UI.

It's perfectly ok as nationalists in NI already feel abandoned by the Republic and carry open disdain for the FG party in particular.
FG are in way, perfectly positioned to absorb their scorn.

Strazdas

BluePlanet wrote: »

So Britain wants to torpedo the economy here.

I disagree with Coveney's mealy-mouthed, 'fudge' on having border checks offsite somewhere, away from the actual border. This only strengthen's Brexiteer's POV about the need for the border, and will likely inject inefficiencies in the transit of goods, will also add additional circumvention of controls.

Eventually our EU partners may balk at this fudge, imagine the fallout when something gets exposed (like the horsemeat scandal) and our inspection regime is revealed as inadequate. Not good.

This is why we should go big: clear and unambiguous defense of the SM, with clear border infastructure and no fudging. This will also carry the added benefit of physically isolating NI which will drive unification.

I think Coveney was being deliberately vague here. Use the words "hard border" and they would instantly be seized upon by the Brexiteers and the British press and they would even claim they were blameless and it was Ireland putting up the hard border.

Stop moaning ffs

Strazdas wrote: »

I think Coveney was being deliberately vague here. Use the words "hard border" and they would instantly be seized upon by the Brexiteers and the British press and they would even claim they were blameless and it was Ireland putting up the hard border.

They’ve been saying that already but it’ll be shouted loud by one and all MPs and media at some point to come

BluePlanet

Strazdas wrote: »

I think Coveney was being deliberately vague here. Use the words "hard border" and they would instantly be seized upon by the Brexiteers and the British press and they would even claim they were blameless and it was Ireland putting up the hard border.

Agreed, however to fudge it by having border checks away from the border provides Borris Johnson a boost and also the 'alternative arrangements' they like to flout. It plays into the argument that the border was never needed, never really an issue and was being used cynically to hurt Brexit.

And let's them claim the whole thing was a ruse to trap NI into a customs union with the EU, a sort of annexation of part of the United Kingdom.


Personally i think your proposed Brexiteer sound bite is easier to argue against, than the one I have posted.

An Claidheamh

BluePlanet wrote: »

So Britain wants to torpedo the economy here.

I disagree with Coveney's mealy-mouthed, 'fudge' on having border checks offsite somewhere, away from the actual border. This only strengthen's Brexiteer's POV about the need for the border, and will likely inject inefficiencies in the transit of goods, will also add additional circumvention of controls.

Eventually our EU partners may balk at this fudge, imagine the fallout when something gets exposed (like the horsemeat scandal) and our inspection regime is revealed as inadequate. Not good.

This is why we should go big: clear and unambiguous defense of the SM, with clear border infastructure and no fudging. This will also carry the added benefit of physically isolating NI which will drive unification.

Coveney cannot allow us to become less of a member of the EU due to the whims of a jingoistic Britain which wants to destroy us because they don't know what they want, but it's somebody else's fault.

It would unforgivable.

An Claidheamh

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

That's a fair way of looking at it. I suppose the 'abandoning" of nationalists wouldn't play out too well though. Even if the long term gain might be a UI.

They were abandoned a long time ago.

They are unwilling subjects of another country.

But, no self respecting Irish person in the North would regard a FG Taoiseach as their leader.

Fine Gael have never defended nationalists rights, they have supported anti-Irish terrorists, collaborated with the British to undermine Ireland, sought to re-write history and regurlarly blame nationalists for the failings of the British/unionists - all out of cowardice.

They are essentially (and unapologetically) Uncle Toms.

The British brought Brexit and the Border.

If Coveney has a problem with British rule in the North, he may say it, he is not making Ireland the problem child of the EU through his fudges and fencesitting.

An Claidheamh

prawnsambo wrote: »

This has already been done. At EU level, Look up the North Sea Mediterranean corridor.


A border poll is solely in the gift of the SoS for NI. We have no role in deciding when it should happen or calling for it to happen. If we did, it would have the opposite effect on attitudes in NI than the one you seem to desire.


All of this can be done, but publicly? Totally counter productive.

1) I think the trade shipping needs to be permanent and intensified.

2) The Irish government could easily apply the pressure, call them on it, the NI sos is a dose, the government have a right to aspire to a united Ireland just like the UK do to avoid one.

3) About time these things were made public, the shots fired at us are.
How else are they to understand?
They don't get subtlety

Leroy42

FG are the only ones looking after the nationalists interest the last few years.

DUP are hell bent on destroying NI, Tories and Labour don't seem bothered either way and SF are busy standing by their principles to bother actually doing anything at all.

trellheim

I am not getting into NI politics here But the NI trade and business numbers I posted up-thread are shockingly bad its falling off a cliff up there. I suppose my point is here that if the UK wont or cant help then lets build silicon Drogheda or Silicon Letterkenny or something ffs , 24/7 rail service and buses every 15 minutes.

Here's the pic



and heres the report, scary stuff

https://ulstereconomix.com/2019/07/08/downturn-deepens-in-northern-ireland-private-sector/

BluePlanet

Leroy42 wrote: »

FG are the only ones looking after the nationalists interest the last few years.

DUP are hell bent on destroying NI, Tories and Labour don't seem bothered either way and SF are busy standing by their principles to bother actually doing anything at all.

This is dragging the conversation off topic.
If FG want to claim to represent northern nationalists they can bloody well stand a candidate for election there.

Stop moaning ffs

It’s been said by many up north in farming and industry that the current Dublin government have done more to protect their interests in brexit than their British counterparts, Who have done the usual of just ignoring NI and not taking it into account at all.
Unfair to say FG/current government don’t care when the opposite is actually true.
And I’m no fan of FG

Seth Brundle

An Claidheamh wrote: »

They were abandoned a long time ago.

They are unwilling subjects of another country.

But, no self respecting Irish person in the North would regard a FG Taoiseach as their leader.

Fine Gael have never defended nationalists rights, they have supported anti-Irish terrorists, collaborated with the British to undermine Ireland, sought to re-write history and regurlarly blame nationalists for the failings of the British/unionists - all out of cowardice.

They are essentially (and unapologetically) Uncle Toms.

The British brought Brexit and the Border.

If Coveney has a problem with British rule in the North, he may say it, he is not making Ireland the problem child of the EU through his fudges and fencesitting.

That's your pro-SF nonsense there.
It's easy to see which party has been standing up for the rights of people of NI. SF chooses to not represent them and spends it's time hurling from the ditches.
SF has done nothing constructive for the people of NI regarding Brexit

An Claidheamh

Seth Brundle wrote: »

That's your pro-SF nonsense there.
It's easy to see which party has been standing up for the rights of people of NI. SF chooses to not represent them and spends it's time hurling from the ditches.
SF has done nothing constructive for the people of NI regarding Brexit

It's not pro-SF, it's anti-FG.

FG does not run candidates in the North, it refuses and has always done so, to condemn attacks on nationalists.

SF has no power to stop Brexit, it campaigned against it and has supported the Irish government's position on it like the rest of the Dáil.

There is nought SF can do until the British make a move.

How are they refusing to represent their electorate? :
Not being the slave of a foreign sectarian queen - which FG won't do?
Not negotiating with the British far right?
Or, not challenging the DUP's trampling of their rights and management of the North?

Sounds like they're doing representing their electorate just fine.

Joe_ Public

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Listened to it again today. Moderator was woeful. She went really hard on Hunt and let Johnson run riot. She never even chased him to answer the questions. He didn’t answer a single one directly.

Such a pointless excercise all in all

Caught up with it today too. It was horrible all the way through, Johnsons cackling and snide one liners were particularly nauseating. Incredible that he's still trotting out the tariff free A24 fantasy line. Hunt vigorously refuted it, but it was clear he doesnt really fully understand it himself. They need to pass the WAB for GATT24 to become relevant. That's all he needed to say to put that lie to bed.