Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

Leroy42

The solution in the next 30 days could just as easily mean that Johnson gets the WA through HoC could it not?

Why are the UK assuming that it means anything other than that? And even if they come up with something, how can they prove it can be implemented prior to end of transition to get it removed from WA. And if they are confident that it can be done, then simply sign the WA with the clear knowledge that the backstop will never come into play.

briany

How did the backstop agreed in Dec 2017 differ from the Oct/Nov 2018 one again?

brickster69

bobmalooka wrote: »

As far as I can tell it’s very much a case of show us what you’ve got Boris in a polite manner from Merkel.

Some Brexity commentators are loving the 30 day comment, watching it being spun immediately in real time is something else.

See this take from the telegraphs chief political correspondent:

https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/1164214171589840896?s=21

Now contrast that with the preamble to the 30 day comment:

https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1164225222423273474?s=21

He does a little fist bump when he hears the translation, he knows his boys have their headline. The actual substance and context dont matter once he gets the right headline and he knows it instantly. It’s incredible

Maybe it’s a good thing. Maybe it will provide the space which allows BJ to reshape the political declaration & reword the backstop and claim the victory he needs to claim in order to sell it.
I don’t think anything Merkel said there contradicts the substance of the WA.

Or maybe it lets him **** about for another 30 days pressure free because the papers thinks the EU are ready to do what they can’t do.

Maybe it stops a VONC in early September also.

bobmalooka

Leroy42 wrote: »

The solution in the next 30 days could just as easily mean that Johnson gets the WA through HoC could it not?

Why are the UK assuming that it means anything other than that? And even if they come up with something, how can they prove it can be implemented prior to end of transition to get it removed from WA. And if they are confident that it can be done, then simply sign the WA with the clear knowledge that the backstop will never come into play.

It’s a huge logic leap - and a leap which you can only make if you pretend you have t heard anything else she said.
And that’s exactly what’s happening.

She speaks about knowing with absolute clarity what the future relationship will be as a means to overcoming the backstop.

Interpretation - move your red lines and enshrine the position will also make the backstop disappear.

Be interesting if he attempted thus route - he set his stall out as removing the backstop. This would satisfy what he said he’d do. Although would require an overall ‘soft brexit’

Presumably ERG would implode but he could secure DUP and some Labour MP’s that way.

I know I’m reading way too much into this and presuming there’s some sort of strategy - the reality is we’re probably seeing opportunistic reactions in real time

Capt'n Midnight

Strazdas wrote: »

Wrong....Ireland only uses British ports because of speed and convenience. If the worst comes to the worst, Ireland can simply bypass GB and ship straight to the continent and back (it means delays but that's all).

TIR means customs sealed through traffic doesn't need to be inspected.

So the only delay is checking the driver and an Irish Passport cuts through that. Or use unaccompanied trailers.

The UK need it for trade with the EEA countries that passes through the EU Customs Union. And for food from Turkey. And North Africa and parts to the East of the EU. Yes there is a direct ferry to Norway but it's only twice a week. Or you can drive there via the Channel Shuttle train and Øresund Bridge regardless of the weather.

It would be needed for a lots of trade that goes via Rotterdam instead of waiting weeks for the next direct ship between the UK and the Far East.

BonnieSituation

briany wrote: »

How did the backstop agreed in Dec 2017 differ from the Oct/Nov 2018 one again?

The original backstop was NI only. Then May got a concession to make it UK-wide. It was a huge win for the Brits.

bobmalooka

brickster69 wrote: »

Maybe it stops a VONC in early September also.

Could do.
Although I doubt the people willing to vote no confidence in BJ are the same people who are suckered in by the type of takes the telegraph are offering

briany

BonnieSituation wrote: »

The original backstop was NI only. Then May got a concession to make it UK-wide. It was a huge win for the Brits.

Wouldn't the 2017 version stand a better chance of getting voted through?

J Mysterio

Here it is with subtitles in place of dubbing.

Now we just have to wait and see what ol' Boris comes up with in 30 days :pac:

Varta

Ireland and the EU are at war with the UK. Not a war with bullets or missiles, but a war of words. The UK has declared this war.

bobmalooka

BonnieSituation wrote: »

The original backstop was NI only. Then May got a concession to make it UK-wide. It was a huge win for the Brits.

Massive win - somehow now regarded as a surrender.

Joe_ Public

Watching that press conference, it seems fairly obvious to me that the solution Merkel is referring to is the WAB passing the hoc. If it was somehow the case she was alluding to alternative arrangements or some other unicorn then that would be nothing other than pointless trolling and whatever else she is, she is most definitely not that kind of politician.

Charles Babbage

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

The only way I can see a credible game-changer emerging in 30 days would be if Johson shifts towards the NI-only backstop. Hard to see him doing that as the DUP would immediately bring down his government.

The DUP bringing down his government on the issue of forcing the backstop to apply to GB might suit him quite well. He gets an election and has got rid of the backstop, I'm sure he can think of a new name for his new NI only proposal, something like filet de sécurité would sound good and confuse the DUP. Something with Ulster in it would be even better.

Flex

J Mysterio wrote: »

Here it is with subtitles in place of dubbing.

Now we just have to wait and see what ol' Boris comes up with in 30 days :pac:

The way that they’ve edited and cut the conference to create that clip is very frustrating. To me its trying to make it sound like Chancellor Merkel is nearly as eager as Johnson to ditch the backstop and that negotiations have in fact reopened so it’s no wonder ‘no deal’ is so popular in the UK; ordinary English people seeing this might think “wow, the EU is backing down, we have them on the ropes, the Brexiteers were right” and buy in more to this idea that Brexit will make them better off and the forecasts and analysis saying otherwise are just project fear. And what’s worse is Katya Adler will be insufferable after this... ;P

Professor Moriarty

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Watching that press conference, it seems fairly obvious to me that the solution Merkel is referring to is the WAB passing the hoc. If it was somehow the case she was alluding to alternative arrangements or some other unicorn then that would be nothing other than pointless trolling and whatever else she is, she is most definitely not that kind of politician.

It was kind of pathetic to watch. Johnson wagging his tail furiously as Merkel patted his head. You have 30 days to come up with a solution to the backstop, now run along.

briany

Charles Babbage wrote: »

The DUP bringing down his government on the issue of forcing the backstop to apply to GB might suit him quite well. He gets an election and has got rid of the backstop, I'm sure he can think of a new name for his new NI only proposal, something like filet de sécurité would sound good and confuse the DUP. Something with Ulster in it would be even better.

That's where I see this all going.

...if it goes anywhere...

bobmalooka

Flex wrote: »

The way that they’ve edited and cut the conference to create that clip is very frustrating. To me its trying to make it sound like Chancellor Merkel is nearly as eager as Johnson to ditch the backstop and that negotiations have in fact reopened so it’s no wonder ‘no deal’ is so popular in the UK; ordinary English people seeing this might think “wow, the EU is backing down, we have them on the ropes, the Brexiteers were right” and buy in more to this idea that Brexit will make them better off and the forecasts and analysis saying otherwise are just project fear. And what’s worse is Katya Adler will be insufferable after this... ;P

Don’t worry, Macron up next

J Mysterio

Flex wrote: »

The way that they’ve edited and cut the conference to create that clip is very frustrating. To me its trying to make it sound like Chancellor Merkel is nearly as eager as Johnson to ditch the backstop and that negotiations have in fact reopened so it’s no wonder ‘no deal’ is so popular in the UK; ordinary English people seeing this might think “wow, the EU is backing down, we have them on the ropes, the Brexiteers were right” and buy in more to this idea that Brexit will make them better off and the forecasts and analysis saying otherwise are just project fear. And what’s worse is Katya Adler will be insufferable after this... ;P

Thats not so much how I read it. It is Merkel saying the backstop is an insurance mechanism and suggests it stands untill arrangements can be found in 2 years, or 30 days

So, at no point does she say, 'yes, we will remove the backstop'. She makes clear it's insurance until there is a solution. She does offer some positivity - 'why not!' - but how can she now be seen as being intransigent with that daring do! And, she has now put that onus on Boris.

BonnieSituation

briany wrote: »

Wouldn't the 2017 version stand a better chance of getting voted through?

That's the whole point!

If the DUP hadn't kicked up a hissy fit in December 2017 just as it was being announced then we would have long moved on. Obviously to something else the Brexiters didn't like. But we may be over the Backstop at least.

BonnieSituation

bobmalooka wrote: »

Massive win - somehow now regarded as a surrender.

It wouldn't be like the DUP to be on the wrong side of history.

Never has a party been so wrong so often.

briany

BonnieSituation wrote: »

That's the whole point!

If the DUP hadn't kicked up a hissy fit in December 2017 just as it was being announced then we would have long moved on. Obviously to something else the Brexiters didn't like. But we may be over the Backstop at least.

It's only the DUP who are really against an NI-only backstop. The ERG, I believe, can be talked round. Business leaders in NI were in favour of the proposal. The majority of NI voted to remain in the EU. Do Brexiteers in the rest of the UK really care what's done with NI? They don't seem to care about it the rest of the time.

If Johnson went back to the EU with the new-old proposal of the NI-only backstop, would they accept, or has that ship sailed?

Christy42

briany wrote: »

It's only the DUP who are really against an NI-only backstop. The ERG, I believe, can be talked round. Business leaders in NI were in favour of the proposal. The majority of NI voted to remain in the EU. Do Brexiteers in the rest of the UK really care what's done with NI? They don't seem to care about it the rest of the time.

If Johnson went back to the EU with the new-old proposal of the NI-only backstop, would they accept, or has that ship sailed?

Why not? It solves the border issue. There is no real downside for the EU in comparison to the whole country version.

EU leaders have repeatedly said that if a new solution is come up with (or an old one accepted) then they are happy to get rid of the backstop.

briany

Christy42 wrote: »

Why not? It solves the border issue. There is no real downside for the EU in comparison to the whole country version.

EU leaders have repeatedly said that if a new solution is come up with (or an old one accepted) then they are happy to get rid of the backstop.

It would at least be a development of a sort to see the UK do this.

What I don't understand is why when the UK agreed to the 2017 backstop in principle, and then turned around and said, "Actually, this probably won't work for us...", the EU didn't turn around and say, "Well, then, stage 2 of talks won't work for us." and force the British to confront the reality of not sorting a border solution much sooner.

fash

briany wrote: »

It would at least be a development of a sort to see the UK do this.

What I don't understand is why when the UK agreed to the 2017 backstop in principle, and then turned around and said, "Actually, this probably won't work for us...", the EU didn't turn around and say, "Well, then, stage 2 of talks won't work for us." and force the British to confront the reality of not sorting a border solution much sooner.

Because the government never went that far.

beggars_bush

You'd just love for the DUP to be shafted in all this manoeuvring

AlmightyCushion

Laois_Man wrote: »

Simon Coveney's full 23 minute interview with Miriam O'Callaghan this morning where he clearly wished he could absolutely burst her a few times!

https://twitter.com/rtenews/status/1164101137492062208

I honestly don't know how Coveney put up with Miriam for so long. He must have the patience of a saint. She's an absolute eejit and hasn't a clue what she's talking about. He, on the other hand, comes across very well.

Pedro K

brickster69 wrote: »

What was he talking about " an un-elected prime minister ". Who elected him ot Varadkar. Even the EU President just scraped in after being elected by heads of government and was the only name on the ballot sheet.

I don't know why I'm bothering.... But. Varadkar, for all his faults (and I really don't like him) was elected by the Dail. Every member of the Dail got a vote, and every member of the Dail was voted in there by their constituents.

Alexander Johnson was appointed PM after the conservative party members, and only the conservative party members, voted him to lead the party.

Ironically, but not surprisingly, Alexander Johnson absolutely excoriated Gordon Brown in one of his articles when Brown became PM after Blair for ascending to the premiership in the exact manner Johnson has now ascended by.

Spanish Eyes

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

I honestly don't know how Coveney put up with Miriam for so long. He must have the patience of a saint. She's an absolute eejit and hasn't a clue what she's talking about. He, on the other hand, comes across very well.

Sorry, my post may be deleted for saying this, but she is some dose alright!

She should have had some questions fair enough, but really should have based them on allowing Coveney to reassure us all. But no. FF to her fingertips. Give them Blueshirts no quarter.

A totally rubbish interview, being belligerent for the sake of it IMV. Now is not the time for that. We are trying to be united, and in fairness we are.

Now Miriam, please do not demean decent and effective politicians with your inanity for the sake of it.

Honestly.

Kermit.de.frog

Macron has come out this evening and busted things up pretty bad.

Spoke of war recently in Ireland, and said under no circumstances at all is the WA going to be changed. Britain can take it or leave it he said.

TCDStudent1

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Macron has come out this evening and busted things up pretty bad.

Spoke of war recently in Ireland, and said under no circumstances at all is the WA going to be changed. Britain can take it or leave it he said.

What did he say? Link?