Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

Bit cynical

prawnsambo wrote: »

That really depends what solution Ireland has. And I believe (and all indications are) that the border will be in the Irish Sea in the case of a hard brexit. There may be some leakage through Larne if the British don't play ball, but it will be small and manageable.

Yes, it is going to be messy on both sides I think. Customs possibly on both sides will be operating over a larger area than that in conventional borders but I think both sides will be keen to avoid watch towers at the border itself and such infrastructure that could be construed as violating the GFA.

prawnsambo

Bit cynical wrote: »

Yes, it is going to be messy on both sides I think. Customs possibly on both sides will be operating over a larger area than that in conventional borders but I think both sides will be keen to avoid watch towers at the border itself and such infrastructure that could be construed as violating the GFA.

It's the blindingly obvious solution for the short term anyway. Everything continues as normal and the expanded facilities at Dublin port (and the others) can handle it.

Bit cynical

prawnsambo wrote: »

Economically it's not. Your insistence that the UK is somehow trapped by the EU is contingent on you being colour blind to all the red lines they erected around themselves and the political necessity of kow-towing to the DUP. All avoidable and all within their power to avoid except for bad decision piled on bad decision. It's been a slow motion car crash from day one.

Well it's a hard landing but postponed. While they are in the transition period everything is fine. But the basic problem (and why they are having trouble entering that transition period by signing the WA) is not essentially solved (from their perspective). They still face the hard landing if they don't propose something that makes the same guarantees as the backstop, and if it is unacceptable now, it will be unacceptable then. And if they don't agree to it then, it is out without a deal just like now. So given that you can possibly see that they may choose the no deal now.

Don't get me wrong. Had they done things differently they (and we) would not be in this situation. You mention the red lines, but you could also mention the referendum itself and their electorates choice to vote a particular way. Any number of things but it doesn't solve the problem we face now.

bobmalooka

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Sorry but if you mant to maintain open borders for Northern Ireland with the other parties to the agreement (some people claim that open borders are in the BA although they can never say where) then the border will have to be between Ireland and the EU. maintaining the integrity of the Single Market, you see.

Re open borders: done to death, it’s not explicit but implicit in the cross border strand and also arguably in the section on social cohesion.
I suspect you know this already

prawnsambo

Bit cynical wrote: »

Well it's a hard landing but postponed. While they are in the transition period everything is fine. But the basic problem (and why they are having trouble entering that transition period by signing the WA) is not essentially solved (from their perspective). They still face the hard landing if they don't propose something that makes the same guarantees as the backstop, and if it is unacceptable now, it will be unacceptable then. And if they don't agree to it then, it is out without a deal just like now. So given that you can possibly see that they may choose the no deal now.

Don't get me wrong. Had they done things differently they (and we) would not be in this situation. You mention the red lines, but you could also mention the referendum itself and their electorates choice to vote a particular way. Any number of things but it doesn't solve the problem we face now.

I don't disagree with your assessment. But it doesn't account for a change in the political landscape in the UK over time. We all know that the original backstop would have been a shoo-in had Theresa May not had a fit of hubris and tried to win a bigger majority. Some think the ERG would have balked at it, but I don't believe so. The extension of the backstop to cover the entire UK was the real problem. They'd have dumped NI without a second thought otherwise. But further down the line, a new government could be formed that would not depend on their votes. Be that a Labour/SNP or Tory/LD or any other combination that didn't need them and it's out the other end of the TP with nary a bother in the world.

prawnsambo

bobmalooka wrote: »

Re open borders: done to death, it’s not explicit but implicit in the cross border strand and also arguably in the section on social cohesion.
I suspect you know this already

I think if you search his history you'll find he's asked this question before and (if I'm not mistaken) you answered him.

Strazdas

bobmalooka wrote: »

Re open borders: done to death, it’s not explicit but implicit in the cross border strand and also arguably in the section on social cohesion.
I suspect you know this already

If one half of the NI community believes the GFA has been breached, then it has been breached. Getting into the legal and technical details of the GFA text is completely missing the point.

Mr.Nice Guy

Add Robert Peston to the list of UK commentators spectacularly missing the point of Merkel's comments:

https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1164296528523071488

This is reminiscent of the time when the British papers were convinced Macron was going to help May out by undermining Michel Barnier's position. Boy, did they call that wrong. Good thread here from a German commentator with her thoughts on Merkel's remarks:

https://twitter.com/HeleneBismarck/status/1164253328458620930

Charles Babbage

Bit cynical wrote: »

Yes, it is going to be messy on both sides I think. Customs possibly on both sides will be operating over a larger area than that in conventional borders but I think both sides will be keen to avoid watch towers at the border itself and such infrastructure that could be construed as violating the GFA.

Impeding trade breaches the GFA, infrastructure is only a symptom.

maebee

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

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.

She was appalling this morning. She was like a woman possessed. Coveney did well in reigning her in. I've never voted FG but I think that Varadker & Coveney are playing a blinder now.

fash

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Not at all, have you seen how many candidates from the minority ethnic groups in the UK the Brexit Party has. I imagine its at least in line with the percentage the Irish Parties have and well in advance of the EU as a whole..

Which considering the long term established migrant populations in the. UK would be exceptionally bad reflection of the population in general - and it should be noted that (as with UKIP), the veneer of "I'm not racist but" is graphene layer thin and involves token minorities only - as is pitifully obvious from UKIP's immediate lurch to the BNP end of things after Brexit.

.

If you want to throw accusations of Naziism around, you'll have great difficulty in finding a British Prime Minister who supported him, let alone visiting the minister at the German legation to express their condolences at Hitler's death.

Aside from the fact that it is British prime ministers who have committed and condoned similar atrocities and acts of genocide to Mr Hitler - including against our state - unlike any Irish Taoiseach, it is it note that both the current any former prime minister rely on the support of a party and a member of parliament who approved the the early 90's a plan for the extermination of over 50% of the population of northern Ireland.
This is aside from Mr Farage himself (your leader - or Führer in German) who spent a significant amount of his childhood running around singing Nazi songs.
I am sure you agree that in the truly evil stakes, the British state is quite possibly the most sordid and despicable in world history.
I am sure you can also agree that, in that context, giving condolences to ambassadors of states who have struggled and fought yet lost against such an evil entity (and also suffered brutal atrocities at the hands of the evil British state - the various and deliverate mass exterminations of civilian populations, the deliberate targeting and fire bombings of civilian centres etc. - war crimes which went unpunished) is certainly understandable.

fash

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Sorry but if you mant to maintain open borders for Northern Ireland with the other parties to the agreement (some people claim that open borders are in the BA although they can never say where)
.

Perhaps you should read it and what the experts say in it more carefully.
It is of note that the British and Irish government disagree with you - and indeed the Joint Report goes into the matter in considerable detail.

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

then the border will have to be between Ireland and the EU. maintaining the integrity of the Single Market, you see.

Certainly if it was Ireland that intended on leaving the EU, it would be for Ireland to make the relevant concessions, respect the will of its people and stick to the various previous commitments given by it as a state, its government and its promises in whatever campaign there was to leave.
Otherwise of course, it is for the UK to do so.

Peregrinus

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Sorry but if you mant to maintain open borders for Northern Ireland with the other parties to the agreement (some people claim that open borders are in the BA although they can never say where) then the border will have to be between Ireland and the EU. maintaining the integrity of the Single Market, you see.

As any arsewit can see, a border between Ireland and the EU-26 does the precise opposite of maintaining the integrity of the Single Market.

An approach to implementing Brexit which relies on maintaining that black is white is not going to yield good results. Brexit's biggest problem is that its most vociferous supporters can't come up with a realistic, deliverable way of doing it.

Kermit.de.frog

Think it's safe to say a reality check is coming today based on Macron's comments yesterday. Looks like he is going to put it to Johnson that the deal is on the table and you take it or leave it, the WA will not be renegotiated and no deal is UK choice.

dresden8

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Not at all, have you seen how many candidates from the minority ethnic groups in the UK the Brexit Party has. I imagine its at least in line with the percentage the Irish Parties have and well in advance of the EU as a whole.

If you want to throw accusations of Naziism around, you'll have great difficulty in finding a British Prime Minister who supported him, let alone visiting the minister at the German legation to express their condolences at Hitler's death.

Chamberlain gave Hitler Czechoslovakia.

"Thrown under a bus.........."

kuro68k

The reneging on the promises over freedom of movement are causing so much stress and anxiety. We are not bargaining chips!

VinLieger

dresden8 wrote: »

Chamberlain gave Hitler Czechoslovakia.

"Thrown under a bus.........."

Boris et al are literally asking for appeasement from Germany at this stage.

ArmaniJeanss

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Not at all, have you seen how many candidates from the minority ethnic groups in the UK the Brexit Party has. I imagine its at least in line with the percentage the Irish Parties have and well in advance of the EU as a whole.

These are the MEPs - I don't know most of them individually so I'm visually looking to see which are from minority groups. And on that basis it doesn't strike me as particularly representative of UK demographics.
https://thebrexitparty.org/meet-our-meps/

Especially in an election that was done on a list system, so the party could have quite easily placed BAME candidates at the top of the list.

LuckyLloyd

All Merkel said was that Brexit is a British problem requiring British solutions and Britain need to propose a credible alternative solution to the backstop. I am baffled at how the British press and Brexiteers have tried to present this as a “victory”.

lawred2

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

All Merkel said was that Brexit is a British problem requiring British solutions and Britain need to propose a credible alternative solution to the backstop. I am baffled at how the British press and Brexiteers have tried to present this as a “victory”.

And if they want to present a solution they can do it in 30 days or 2 years but a solution must be forthcoming..

54and56

brickster69 wrote: »

She was clearly asked if the Eu would keep the border open and refused to answer. Johnson firmly said they will not place checks on the border.

They cannot even say that Ireland will be forced to carry out checks at the border.

Your thinly disguised trolling is not only predictable and boring but is side tracking an otherwise informative discussion thread.

FYI Ireland won't be forced to do anything. Ireland is a fully committed member of the EU and it is in our interest to protect the integrity of the Single Market. The UK's decision to walk away from the WA it's government negotiated and potentially implement a no deal Brexit forces Ireland to strike a balance between it's duty to protect the integrity of the Single Market and it's desire to protect the Good Friday Agreement.

The UK can try to paint the EU as the ones erecting a hard border or that they are somehow bullying Ireland to do so but no one who matters is paying any attention to idiots who are name calling others whilst simultaneously blowing up their own economy and social structure.

kowloon

From the BBC this morning:

BBC wrote:

On Wednesday, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said the onus was on the UK to find a workable plan.

Is this correct? I heard Johnson say the onus was on the UK, and it is, but are they trying to reframe his slip up? Did Merkel also say it?

black forest

It is really interesting to see how anyone could spin the “..30 days...” into a challenge or a possible retracting from the Back Stop or whatever else. Starts at 46:20 and the main point is at 47:30.

A transcript of this press conference in german can be found and downloaded here. For translation i’ll recommend deepl.com.

Merkel:We are of course following the discussions in the British Parliament and know that the backstop was the subject of the discussion. After all, it is also a construction that was created because people asked what would happen if no rules were found on how the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland could deal with each other on the border of the internal market. It is basically an expression of an unresolved problem. At the moment when we are dealing with it and saying: 'We imagine this and that how it could be solved' , this backstop is no longer necessary as a placeholder. Because then we will know what the future relationship will be between the European Union and Great Britain - especially between Northern Ireland and the Member State Republic of Ireland.

This means that the backstop has always been a fallback position. If you dissolve this position, if you have a solution, how you want to do it - - - You have said: we will probably find it in the next two years. - But it may also be possible to find them in the next 30 days. Why not? Then we will be a whole step ahead. We have to make an effort to find something like that.

That presupposes, though, if I may add, that we have clarity as to what the future relations of Great Britain with the European Union should look like. I believe that this clarity has now increased. That is why we still have a great deal to discuss this evening.

Very astonishing to see the BBC, Sky and others to have an acute attack of selective hearing and a dose of wishful thinking at the same time. Let’s see what today’s blunder will be.

lawred2

kowloon wrote: »

From the BBC this morning:


Is this correct? I heard Johnson say the onus was on the UK, and it is, but are they trying to reframe his slip up? Did Merkel also say it?

Sure who else would she say it's up to?

Peregrinus

kowloon wrote: »

From the BBC this morning:

Is this correct? I heard Johnson say the onus was on the UK, and it is, but are they trying to reframe his slip up? Did Merkel also say it?

This has always been the EU view. EU's position is that the backstop as negotiated and agreed and as set out in the WA is perfectly satisfactory; does not need to be replaced. EU has no reason to come up with alternative versions of the backstop. It's the UK that wants the backstop removed and replaced with "something else". They can't expect any kind of response to that, or progress on it, until they can say what the something else might be. They can hardly expect the EU to accept, reject or even comment on a proposal which they haven't yet put forward.

While various people in the UK have talked about what might be substituted for the backstop as negotiated, HMG have never endorsed or put forward suggestion.

brickster69

Well she did say we and not you.


"If one is able to solve this conundrum, if one finds this solution, we said we would probably find it in the next two years to come but we can also maybe find it in the next 30 days to come.

First Up

black forest wrote: »

It is really interesting to see how anyone could spin the “..30 days...” into a challenge or a possible retracting from the Back Stop or whatever else. Starts at 46:20 and the main point is at 47:30.

Very astonishing to see the BBC, Sky and others to have an acute attack of selective hearing and a dose of wishful thinking at the same time. Let’s see what today’s blunder will be.

Not astonishing but it is fascinating to witness.

Professor Moriarty

brickster69 wrote: »

Well she did say we and not you.


"If one is able to solve this conundrum, if one finds this solution, we said we would probably find it in the next two years to come but we can also maybe find it in the next 30 days to come.

So, today, Merkel has dozens of civil servants running around trying to cobble together an answer to the backstop? No.

Tell me how

brickster69 wrote: »

Well she did say we and not you.


"If one is able to solve this conundrum, if one finds this solution, we said we would probably find it in the next two years to come but we can also maybe find it in the next 30 days to come.

That's different to the translated text provided with the video above.

prawnsambo

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

All Merkel said was that Brexit is a British problem requiring British solutions and Britain need to propose a credible alternative solution to the backstop. I am baffled at how the British press and Brexiteers have tried to present this as a “victory”.

It's more fundamental than a solution to the backstop. If you read the transcript above (or watch the video), she is clearly referring to the future relationship. Which has always been open to change. If that future relationship eliminates the need for the backstop then QED. And that future relationship can be proposed and agreed at any time up to the end of the transition period.