Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

J Mysterio

Laois_Man wrote: »

They've already spent £4.2 Billion and are still nowhere near ready!

Javid committed another 1.5B or thereabouts in the last day or so, bringing the total to over. 6.5B.

Edit: 2.1B

Strazdas

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Wasn't the blitz spirit largely a fiction invented in the decades after the war.

One would expect a great deal of disharmony if the consequence is a deep recession. They're wasn't much blitz spirit here during the 2008-12 crisis, one would expect similar or worse in a relatively similar country.

Even during the War in fact. The British propagandists were very worried by the prospect of civil unrest and riots on the streets and created a myth of a stoic and unified community going about their business and untroubled by the bombs.

In truth, historians say people were terrified out of their wits, fed up and often angry and resentful (most people living in the cities were working class while the rich were out in the countryside).

BonnieSituation

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

I only found out today that if we have a UI ref, we have to have one every seven years?
Is that if it doesn’t pass we try again in 7 years? Or if it does pass we have one every 7 years?
Or both? Really confused on this anyone know for sure?

No, what happens is that we can't have another one again for at least 7 years. There is no compulsion to keep having them. The SoS continues to have the veto/decision making power.

Shelga

J Mysterio wrote: »

Unbelievable. 60? Determined to destroy their country. As they wish.

Is their grip on sanity actually missing?

What do they think will be better for the average UK citizen after a no-deal Brexit? I think I just still sometimes struggle with such a large number of people in power genuinely not caring at all for the negative consequences of their actions, and how it will affect people who are already struggling.

Do they really not care? Or have they reached levels of delusion I didn’t think possible?

The ERG is a poisonous group indeed.

BonnieSituation

Imreoir2 wrote: »

In the event of a UI, there is no land border to harden. Joining Schengen before a UI happens would be a breach of the GFA.

After a UI the GFA would most likely have to be replaced by a successor agreement, though this is not spelled out in the GFA itself. It is likely that there would be a new agreement between Ireland and Britain setting out the new relationship and allowing for the contiuation of some of the provissions of the GFA like continued access to dual citizenship in NI and the continuation of the GFA institutions like the British/Irish Council and possibly a devolution settlement for NI within the Irish state.

Why would any Nationalist want a devolution settlement in the event of a UI that has them continuing to be a minority in Fermanagh, Antrim, Tyrone, Derry, Armagh and Down (FATDAD)?

A unified Ireland with just NI tacked onto the ROI just can't be allowed to happen. A new settlement should be considered. But that's not it.

Stop moaning ffs

Shelga wrote: »

Is their grip on sanity actually missing?

What do they think will be better for the average UK citizen after a no-deal Brexit? I think I just still sometimes struggle with such a large number of people in power genuinely not caring at all for the negative consequences of their actions, and how it will affect people who are already struggling.

Do they really not care? Or have they reached levels of delusion I didn’t think possible?

The ERG is a poisonous group indeed.

He could as easily be bullsh!tting let’s not forget.

BobbyBobberson

One aspect Brexiteers forget about when they talk about WW2 and the Blitz Spirit is that no one voted for a war. I can only imagine the spirit in London Underground shelters had 52% of people voted for the war.

J Mysterio

Shelga wrote: »

Is their grip on sanity actually missing?

What do they think will be better for the average UK citizen after a no-deal Brexit? I think I just still sometimes struggle with such a large number of people in power genuinely not caring at all for the negative consequences of their actions, and how it will affect people who are already struggling.

Do they really not care? Or have they reached levels of delusion I didn’t think possible?

The ERG is a poisonous group indeed.

Tory twits living in a Westminster Brexit bubble. Going to secretive meetings and clapping each other on the back as they insult the EU and reminisce about the empire and 'winning WWII'.

Is Francois estranged from his Italian mother? Maybe she has passed on. Would be tough for her to see her progeny behaving in such a way you would imagine. How could anyone follow such a turnip?

Imreoir2

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Why would any Nationalist want a devolution settlement in the event of a UI that has them continuing to be a minority in Fermanagh, Antrim, Tyrone, Derry, Armagh and Down (FATDAD)?

A unified Ireland with just NI tacked onto the ROI just can't be allowed to happen. A new settlement should be considered. But that's not it.

NI nationalists won't rule the roost in a new UI. Unionists will be fully entitled to protections agaisnt being overwhelmed by their neighbours. Devolution allowing unionism some protection within a region of the new Irish state is one option. But regardless, unionism won't disapear, there will still be unionist dominated councils in a UI for example.

Strazdas

I see Javid referred to "the undemocratic backstop" today. They (Tory spokesmen) appear to be under strict instructions from Cummings to do so.

Stop moaning ffs

Strazdas wrote: »

I see Javid referred to "the undemocratic backstop" today. They (Tory spokesmen) appear to be under strict instructions from Cummings to do so.

Earlier O Brien asking why aren’t we calling it the undemocratic no deal.
Nobody voted for it

BonnieSituation

Imreoir2 wrote: »

NI nationalists won't rule the roost in a new UI. Unionists will be fully entitled to protections agaisnt being overwhelmed by their neighbours. Devolution allowing unionism some protection within a region of the new Irish state is one option. But regardless, unionism won't disapear, there will still be unionist dominated councils in a UI for example.

I'm sorry imreoir. You're falling into that trap of the assumption that those with am Anglo-centric culture will likely be treated in the way Nationalists were on the creation of the Statelet in 1922.

Of course they won't disappear. And I fully expect the State to treat them as one would expect of any minority.

But a carved off autonomous region is not the answer and will just continue the us v them attitude.

Imreoir2

Strazdas wrote: »

I see Javid referred to "the undemocratic backstop" today. They (Tory spokesmen) appear to be under strict instructions from Cummings to do so.

Has anyone actually asked them what is the basis of calling the backstop undemocratic, or antidemocratic as I have also heard?

fash

robinph wrote: »

Irish citizens have more rights in the UK than UK citizens do in Ireland, admittedly it is only referendums and presidential elections that UK citizens don't get to take part in.

UK citizens have reciprocal rights in relation to the respective constitutions.
When Irish can elect the Queen and vote to change the UK Constitution, they will be entitled to do so in Ireland

VinLieger

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

I wish someone would point out "undemocratic" PM Boris elected by less than one percentage of population

Who made some very negative public remarks when Gordon Brown was elected PM by the exact same means

Boris Johnson (2007) wrote:

“They voted for Anthony Charles Lynton Blair to serve as their leader. They were at no stage invited to vote on whether Gordon Brown should be PM… They voted for Tony, and yet they now get Gordon, and a transition about as democratically proper as the transition from Claudius to Nero. It is a scandal. Why are we all conniving in this stitch-up? This is nothing less than a palace coup… with North Korean servility, the Labour Party has handed power over to the brooding Scottish power-maniac.”


“The extraordinary thing is that it looks as though he will now be in 10 Downing Street for three years, and without a mandate from the British people. No one elected Gordon Brown as Prime Minister…”

Tell me how

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

I wish someone would point out "undemocratic" PM Boris elected by less than one percentage of population

Or that every single piece of legislation ever enacted was undemocratic because the entire electorate did not specifically vote on it.

Any media person allowing the Brexiteers to use the 'undemocratic backstop' line without questioning them on the veracity of the phrase is negligent in their own role.

prawnsambo

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Has anyone actually asked them what is the basis of calling the backstop undemocratic, or antidemocratic as I have also heard?

It would be just as silly to call it democratic. It's the result of a negotiation, the same as any other negotiation outcome.

Laois_Man

jem wrote: »

If labour had a decent leader I am very confident they would lead the next UK govt however it is dam hard to get rid on him as was shown in 2016 when the vast majority of the parlimentary party wanted rid but the members (mainly momentium) voted him back in with a higher % than he got the first time.
I believe that H benn would have the best chance of beating corbyn with his family history (tony Benn) and his own ability.

There's been a lot of water under the bridge since 2016 though. That combined with the need to out him to get in government should see him voted out. But they'd have to do it in a hurry and I'm not familiar with the Labour leadership contest procedure timelines!

Shelga

They need another protest in London, with 10+ million people.

What is happening is absolutely staggering. £2 billion spent on this stuff is absolutely criminal. The average person should be doing everything in their power to stop this insanity.

And yet they’re still going to sleepwalk into no deal, because the people who are against this are still not motivated enough. I wouldn’t even call them remainers anymore, just normal people FFS!

fash

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Has anyone actually asked them what is the basis of calling the backstop undemocratic, or antidemocratic as I have also heard?

Especially given that the backstop is merely putting in writing one of the guarantees given by all leave campaigners during the referendum campaign - that there would be no change on the border.
Hence the backstop has at least 52% support.

jem

robinph wrote: »

If Johnson says he doesn't have the confidence then the HoC gets two weeks to come up with an alternative I think before a GE is triggered. As long as someone other than Corbyn becomes the figure head then they could probably be PM for the duration of a couple of weeks and do "something" else.

The something could be merely to request an extension and then call a GE themselves

Sam Russell wrote: »

No, if he goes to Her Maj, she cannot call a GE without 2/3rd approval of the HoC. Instead they can suggest a PM who can command a majority. Now if 30 or so Tories back a Gov of National Unity, then they form such with a PM nominated by the combined opposition, and they form the Gov.

First item would be Revoke Art 50 and be done with Brexit.

lads that wont happen.
Remember JC is and always has been anti EU.
If he has the opportunity of a general election he will run with it.
Also the is not a chance that he will stand back to allow someone else to be PM.
Wishful thinking I fear

Infini

Imreoir2 wrote: »

NI nationalists won't rule the roost in a new UI. Unionists will be fully entitled to protections agaisnt being overwhelmed by their neighbours. Devolution allowing unionism some protection within a region of the new Irish state is one option. But regardless, unionism won't disapear, there will still be unionist dominated councils in a UI for example.

If there's a united ireland ultimately while things will change but they arent going to just be left behind. If anything the North will likely be the target of serious investment and development both politically and with EU support to try and get the place to be able to stand on its own feet, not the situation where its essentially neglected by Westminster.

What ultimately will have to happen though in regards to politics is that they'll need to face the new reality though and start thinking constructively instead of this "flegs and never never" approach that has poisoned and paralysed the place for many years. They'll also need to realise that many fears about a UI are either overblown or utterly outdated, this isnt 1950s Ireland and I wonder if some up there dont realise just how much things changed down here in the last 3 decades. If anything its a major oppertunity for them not to mentiom Ireland is many governed by coalitions so they'd likely be able to have a share of power anyway provided they got reasonable and constuctive policies and not populist ojes.

Also the likes of the DUP will have to take responsibility when they mess up not the carryon that Arlene pulled by refusing to step aside when she messed up and wasted huge amounts of money on a defective scheme.

briany

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Has anyone actually asked them what is the basis of calling the backstop undemocratic, or antidemocratic as I have also heard?

The referendum was DEMOCRACY because 17.4 MILLION PEOPLE !! voted to leave the UNDEMOCRATIC EU. The backstop is something NO-ONE voted for. When the UK voted to leave, we were meant to LEAVE, not have one bit of the UK trapped in the EU by UNELECTED, globalist EU bureaucrats !!



This is basically a summation of most Daily Mail and Youtube comment sections. See, there's a certain class of Brexiteer who need to be told where the emphasis should be in sentences, and they feel compelled to use the technique themselves, too...



Like talking to a wall of yet-to-be-achieved hardness.

Strazdas

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Has anyone actually asked them what is the basis of calling the backstop undemocratic, or antidemocratic as I have also heard?

The phrase doesn't even make the slightest bit of sense - it seems to be just a meaningless slogan

McMurphy

Ok guys, excellent thread, and I only occasionally dip in and out.

From what I am hearing, it would seem that the most likely upcoming scenario (most likely but not a cert) we are facing could be a border in the Irish sea.

I would assume this would be the best possible scenario we could hope for? And in layman's terms, how "bad" would this be for us in the long run, if at all?

Thanks in advance.

Mezcita

Shelga wrote: »

They need another protest in London, with 10+ million people.

Can't see it happening. That's my biggest problem with this whole thing. Living here it's as if the vast majority of people I speak with simply expect the whole thing to be sorted out eventually. That nothing really bad will happen even in the event of no deal. Even when people get round to actually protesting the numbers are still relatively small beans.

Russman

Strazdas wrote: »

The phrase doesn't even make the slightest bit of sense - it seems to be just a meaningless slogan

Exactly, in a similar vein to how they managed to make "take back control" the defining slogan of the original referendum and debate.
How it was rarely (if ever) seriously challenged is beyond me.

Stop moaning ffs

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Ok guys, excellent thread, and I only occasionally dip in and out.

From what I am hearing, it would seem that the most likely upcoming scenario (most likely but not a cert) we are facing could be a border in the Irish sea.

I would assume this would be the best possible scenario we could hope for? And in layman's terms, how "bad" would this be for us in the long run, if at all?

Thanks in advance.

Border in the sea would be a massive boost and success for NIs economy. Thee have the best of both worlds.

Our dear friends in the DUP are blocking it because an imaginary border in the water somehow makes them less British and taken out of the United Kingdom to use their language.

So the whole of Northern Ireland is going to suffer because of their identity insecurities.


That said it’s looking like Boris is lining up to find support / votes elsewhere so he can dump the DUP, put the border in the sea and hey presto brexit is delivered.


The unionists all know this is happening if twitter is any indication. The dogs in the street everywhere know this is the most likely and only sensible option remaining

trellheim

Any time someone posts about 500 million for some Brexit thing, someone comes along on twitter and points out its just money already allocated being called Brexit money. There's been no budget to vote through more cash yet

BluePlanet

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Ok guys, excellent thread, and I only occasionally dip in and out.

From what I am hearing, it would seem that the most likely upcoming scenario (most likely but not a cert) we are facing could be a border in the Irish sea.

I would assume this would be the best possible scenario we could hope for? And in layman's terms, how "bad" would this be for us in the long run, if at all?

Thanks in advance.

After BoJo had a private dinner with the DUP i am highly doubting he's going to turn around the throw them under the bus.
We are hard brexiting and i believe there'll be no border poll.