Brexit discussion thread XI (Please read OP before posting)

Professor Moriarty

10000maniacs wrote: »

Peter Lilley comparing Northern Ireland to Corsica and the Straits of Messina on Newsnight now.
"Imagine if France was to have customs procedures on trade between mainland France and Corsica. Or Italy was to have checks on goods on the Straits of Messina passing between Italy and Sicily". These guys are fruitloops.

Peter Lilley is far from a fruitloop and he's well educated. He knows the reality. He's lying.

Strazdas

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Yes, many of these contributors on Newsnight seem to think what cuts the mustard in Westminster solves the issue. A dialogue with themselves yet again.

Brexit has always been an internal Tory / UK crisis and is scarcely even about Europe at all.

A Dub in Glasgo

Good blog about the carry on today

https://weegingerdug.wordpress.com/2019/10/08/quo-vadis/

The question quo vadis doesn’t just ask where a person is going physically, it’s a question about their moral and ethical destination. In this context it is a question about the ethics and morals of the British Prime Minister. It’s saying that Johnson is putting himself and his own interests before those of the UK. It’s not so much a question as it is a statement calling him a coward and a hypocrite. Boris Johnson is fleeing from his responsibilities. This reference would be very clear to a Polish audience.

Mr.Nice Guy

On Lilley's point about different customs arrangements, thought I read somewhere the Canary Islands, which are part of Spain, aren't in the same customs arrangement?

prawnsambo

Shelga wrote: »

Peter Lilley on Newsnight now saying "we obviously have to focus on what can get through the House of Commons"- never mind it it destroys the GFA, never mind if the 27 other countries of the EU think it's a disaster, never mind if it shatters the supposed impartiality of the government towards NI, as it gives the DUP a veto- it's all about the UK.

The arrogance of the man is sickening.

It's been like this since the beginning. They've been negotiating with themselves to the exclusion of everyone else. And they are eternally surprised when somebody says no to them.

maebee

If the UK is serious about peace on this island then there will never be a discussion about the border.

Peace in Ireland never did and still doesn't feature in the minds of Brexiteers. The border was never mentioned in the 2016 ref. None of them, from Cameron the whole way down to BoJO never gave it a thought. Turns out it's right at the core of this whole Brexit shítshow. None of the Brexiteers have a clue.

Spanish Eyes

The political knowledge of most of UK is down to the colour of the rosette on the candidate.

The FPTP system has led them to this pass, and no one cares either, it is an accepted fact now.

WomanSkirtFan8

Shelga wrote: »

Peter Lilley on Newsnight now saying "we obviously have to focus on what can get through the House of Commons"- never mind it it destroys the GFA, never mind if the 27 other countries of the EU think it's a disaster, never mind if it shatters the supposed impartiality of the government towards NI, as it gives the DUP a veto- it's all about the UK.

The arrogance of the man is sickening.

It's not arrogance. It's delusion. Pure unadulterated delusion and nothing else. :rolleyes:

Valhallapt

54and56 wrote: »

Equally the way to put a time limit on the backstop without actually putting a time limit on the backstop (constructive ambiguity for optics) is to amend the WA such that the backstop remains in place unless and until replaced by arrangements in a newly negotiated FTA or "Alternative Arrangements" which are legally certain and operable or, and this is the new bit, until the NI assembly votes to ditch EU alignment which it can do after 4 years add then every 4 years unless the backstop has been replaced by arrangements agreed in a new FTA or legally operable "Alternative Arrangements".

This is my thinking also, but perhaps it has to have a referendum element/ no petition of concern. It can be spun brilliantly. Not only did BJ get a time limit, he also got a unilateral exit mechanism. Britain is free to do the best trade deals in the world, and NI can join in those deal at the time of its choosing. It’s also not undemocratic.

boggerman1

Shelga wrote: »

Peter Lilley on Newsnight now saying "we obviously have to focus on what can get through the House of Commons"- never mind it it destroys the GFA, never mind if the 27 other countries of the EU think it's a disaster, never mind if it shatters the supposed impartiality of the government towards NI, as it gives the DUP a veto- it's all about the UK.

The arrogance of the man is sickening.

And that's what has got England in the place it finds today.an overinflated opinion of their position in the world.plus imagine being members of a club for over 40 yrs and only discovering today how the rules of the club operates.the days of empire were so simpler

prawnsambo

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

On Lilley's point about different customs arrangements, thought I read somewhere the Canary Islands, which are part of Spain, aren't in the same customs arrangement?

They are in the customs union, but not in the VAT area. They have their own sales tax system.

Spanish Eyes

Why is there no obvious opposition to the DUP stance can anyone tell me.

But I suppose there is no point, as in... if they are idiots, let them at it now or something.

Seth Brundle

Trouble ahead for the UK if there's a crash out?

Roll Britannia: UK is warned toilet paper supplies may not withstand no-deal Brexit
Tissue manufacturer says border delays and panic buying could threaten supply

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/uk/roll-britannia-uk-is-warned-toilet-paper-supplies-may-not-withstand-no-deal-brexit-1.4044456

briany

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Why is there no obvious opposition to the DUP stance can anyone tell me.

There is obviously loads of opposition to the DUP stance. It's just with Stormont not sitting, their opponents don't really haven't much of a way to translate this opposition into effective political action. Best thing they can do is sign petitions to the EU and so on.

Actually, what they could do is move to reconvene Stormont. Or well maybe it's too late now for that, but when you think of how much a sitting Stormont would have changed matters, it would have been worth Sinn Fein's while to at least call the DUP's bluff. Have to say that Sinn Fein have been pretty useless in this whole fiasco.

woohoo!!!

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

If one assumes the Telegraph describes the official UK position, then Johnson will return to Dublin, and the meeting is viewed as the only means of preventing no deal:

https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1181673265871425536

It should be pointed out that Johnson, as supplicant, is coming here asking for a favour. I fully expect him to be briefed against by a source afterwards painting Varadkar as the enemy etc. Varadkar knows this is coming and it is an opportunity to get retaliation in first with some home truths starting with the very obvious one, the UK by leaving is seeking to change existing border arrangements on this island, therefore they need to agree with us a solution. Be refusing to engage as they are, they're setting in motion the return of war in NI.

Mr.Wemmick

This is indeed the monster the tory party/two party system created. Keep folks ignorant, pumped full of lies and then wait for the explosion. It never dawned on the tory party that this monster would smash the party into smithereens via brexit.

This is the reason, the only reason, Boris is loud, belligerent, monster like himself - he is trying to keep the tory party from splitting. The only trouble is he needs the EU and Ireland to play ball and be the ones at fault.. ’tis a pity it’s not working out the way he wants. Bless.

gooch2k9

Did they prorogue Parliament for herself's speech or what? Not a peep about that in the news.

Ben Done

gooch2k9 wrote: »

Did they prorogue Parliament for herself's speech or what? Not a peep about that in the news.

I was wondering if the queen might find herself indisposed for the queen's speech.

Would she send a flunky in her place?

L1011

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Finally a good use for those tabloids.

Jokes aside when Soviet union collapsed, closest historic event similarish to Brexit, the propaganda newspapers such as Pravda (the truth) found a good trade as the shop shelves were empty and toilet paper a luxury good.

Newscorp have stockpiled newsprint (it's also imported) - raids on the warehouses may be imminent!

Ben Done wrote: »

I was wondering if the queen might find herself indisposed for the queen's speech.

Would she send a flunky in her place?

She skipped it twice when pregnant. Not possible at this stage but it does mean the procedure is there.


Does anyone expect the speech to be passed? It'll be another mess when it's voted down of course.

woohoo!!!

L1011 wrote: »

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Finally a good use for those tabloids.

Jokes aside when Soviet union collapsed, closest historic event similarish to Brexit, the propaganda newspapers such as Pravda (the truth) found a good trade as the shop shelves were empty and toilet paper a luxury good.

Newscorp have stockpiled newsprint (it's also imported) - raids on the warehouses may be imminent!

Ben Done wrote: »

I was wondering if the queen might find herself indisposed for the queen's speech.

Would she send a flunky in her place?

She skipped it twice when pregnant. Not possible at this stage but it does mean the procedure is there.


Does anyone expect the speech to be passed? It'll be another mess when it's voted down of course.

I expect it to be voted down continuing Johnson's losing streak. The first time since 1924. There is zero reason for the opposition majority to endorse Johnson's propaganda. So obviously the next flash point.

Enzokk

woohoo!!! wrote: »

I expect it to be voted down continuing Johnson's losing streak. The first time since 1924. There is zero reason for the opposition majority to endorse Johnson's propaganda. So obviously the next flash point.

Seeing that the vote on the Queen's Speech is taken a few days after she has made it, would that be after the 19th October? If it is and Johnson has sent the extension letter then it will fail, no doubt. If not, well then I don't know what will happen. The opposition has to make Johnson send that letter or defy the law.

devnull

From RTE:

The Times newspaper has reported that Culture Secretary Nicky Morgan, Northern Ireland Secretary Julian Smith, Justice Secretary Robert Buckland, Health Minister Matt Hancock and Attorney General Geoffrey Cox are all on a "resignation watch list".

Surprised to see Cox there, bearing in mind how vocal he was for Johnson's side very recently.

Enzokk

Interesting tweet from a former spokesperson at the EU,

https://twitter.com/StefaanDeRynck/status/1181822594984611841?s=20

Makes sense, why would the EU be waiting for an outcome they have no control over and is not likely to happen?

Leroy42

devnull wrote: »

From RTE:


Surprised to see Cox there, bearing in mind how vocal he was for Johnson's side very recently.

Nicky Morgan has lost any credibility she may have had. A classic example of a career politician. You can see it in her interviews. She doesn't believe what she is saying and when pushed she always falls back to the point that everyone needs to compromise.

Which in other words means she did and she wants people to understand why she did.

Peregrinus

gooch2k9 wrote: »

Did they prorogue Parliament for herself's speech or what? Not a peep about that in the news.

Will be prorogued this evening, but only for 3 or 4 days. Still possibly politically controversial, but not illegal.

Ben Done wrote: »

I was wondering if the queen might find herself indisposed for the queen's speech.

Would she send a flunky in her place?

Has been done before, but only when the monarch genuinely indisposed. Given the speech from the throne is part of the monarch's job, and the culture is strongly that you don't refuse to do the job just because you don't like it. Even more, you don't refuse to do the job in order to make a political statement, because the monarch doesn't make political statements.

If the queen doesn't turn up, it will be because she's indisposed. Which, you know, isn't impossible; she's 93, after all.

L1011 wrote: »

Does anyone expect the speech to be passed? It'll be another mess when it's voted down of course.

Quite possible won't be; Johnson has yet to win a vote on any matter.

Convention is that voting down the Queen's speech is tantamount to a vote of no confidence. Debate on the Queen's speech lasts for several days, so it won't be for some time that we know the outcome of the vote. In the past losing the vote on the Queen's speech would lead to the PM resigning and/or an immediate general election, but now, under the Fixed Term Parliament Act, it can't lead to a general election unless Parliament also goes on to pass, by a 2/3rds majority, a vote for an early GE. Not clear what happens if the Queens speech is voted down but Parliament refuses to authorise an early GE.

Peregrinus

devnull wrote: »

From RTE:


Surprised to see Cox there, bearing in mind how vocal he was for Johnson's side very recently.

He is vocal for Johnson's "Brexit do or die" policy, but not for Johnson's threats to breach the Benn Act. If Johnson does that, Cox will almost certainly immediately resign.

woohoo!!!

Enzokk wrote: »

woohoo!!! wrote: »

I expect it to be voted down continuing Johnson's losing streak. The first time since 1924. There is zero reason for the opposition majority to endorse Johnson's propaganda. So obviously the next flash point.

Seeing that the vote on the Queen's Speech is taken a few days after she has made it, would that be after the 19th October? If it is and Johnson has sent the extension letter then it will fail, no doubt. If not, well then I don't know what will happen. The opposition has to make Johnson send that letter or defy the law.

Oh I was under the impression that the debate and a vote took place the same day. Such odd traditions.

Peregrinus

woohoo!!! wrote: »

Oh I was under the impression that the debate and a vote took place the same day. Such odd traditions.

The debate lasts several days; the vote is taken at the conclusion of the debate.

woohoo!!!

Peregrinus wrote: »

woohoo!!! wrote: »

Oh I was under the impression that the debate and a vote took place the same day. Such odd traditions.

The debate lasts several days; the vote is taken at the conclusion of the debate.

Thanks for the clarification. Yet more delays.

lawred2

devnull wrote: »

From RTE:


Surprised to see Cox there, bearing in mind how vocal he was for Johnson's side very recently.

Matt Hancock? Give me a break.

They are on cynical career watch more than anything else