Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Brexit discussion thread XI (Please read OP before posting)
Comments
-
Join Date:Posts: 15023
ToBeFrank123 wrote: »This is true. Which effectively means NI could be trapped forever in the backstop, unless the UK can come up with an arrangement that satisfies everyone.
And we have seen how difficult that is.
Well , Exactly.
The UK Red lines are incompatible with an acceptable solution and they know it, so they have to shift on those red lines.
Those red lines only exist because Theresa May got cocky and called a totally unnecessary election. If the DUP hadn't been propping up the Tories for the last 18 months , this would have been over long ago.0 -
Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »Precisely, such is the nature of the fruit of the Brexit tree -
You reap what you sow, which sometimes backfires when you don't know what seeds you planted.
So you agree with the UK view the Backstop could be permanent at worst and decades long at best?0 -
The UK view is that the backstop is permanent and simultaneously that there are readily available technologies that dispense with the need for it.ToBeFrank123 wrote: »So you agree with the UK view the Backstop could be permanent at worst and decades long at best?0 -
Join Date:Posts: 15023
ToBeFrank123 wrote: »So you agree with the UK view the Backstop could be permanent at worst and decades long at best?
But the UK public position is not based on what they know to be true.
They know that they cannot solve the problem whilst maintaining their red lines.
But - They tell the world that the reason they don't like the backstop is because of the risk of "bad faith" actors in the EU "keeping them prisoner" and other puerile rhetoric.
They are the bad faith actors here , trying to lay the blame for something that is entirely of their creation at others doors.
If the UKGOV came out and laid out the Truth to their Parliament and people , people would at least respect them somewhat.
That truth being that there is no solution without the UK compromising on their Red lines.
Give people the real options and let them choose - NI in the CU/SM , UK in SM/CU etc.
But for any real progress to be made here , the UK Government have to stop lying about the realities here.0 -
Here we go (I'm not seeing anything positive in that!)...
https://twitter.com/LeoVaradkar/status/11822978152314716180 -
Advertisement
-
Boris is going to have to write the letter, he knows it, we know it. i think he wants to hedge his bets as he goes into the upcoming election.
on one hand he wants to be able to blame the eu and the remains for tying his hands but he also wants to be able to say, look i can do a deal its close give me a a majority and send me back to finish it off.0 -
ToBeFrank123 wrote: »So you agree with the UK view the Backstop could be permanent at worst and decades long at best?
Yes, of course - the main reason being that Brexit - in any form - is not compatible with the GFA or the UK's commitments and responsibilities in Northern Ireland. That is the reality.0 -
Seth Brundle wrote: »Here we go (I'm not seeing anything positive in that!)...
https://twitter.com/LeoVaradkar/status/1182297815231471618
Rather non committal. I imagine we'll have to wait for briefings or leaks, it's very short on detail.0 -
But the UK public position is not based on what they know to be true.
They know that they cannot solve the problem whilst maintaining their red lines.
But - They tell the world that the reason they don't like the backstop is because of the risk of "bad faith" actors in the EU "keeping them prisoner" and other puerile rhetoric.
They are the bad faith actors here , trying to lay the blame for something that is entirely of their creation at others doors.
If the UKGOV came out and laid out the Truth to their Parliament and people , people would at least respect them somewhat.
That truth being that there is no solution without the UK compromising on their Red lines.
Give people the real options and let them choose - NI in the CU/SM , UK in SM/CU etc.
But for any real progress to be made here , the UK Government have to stop lying about the realities here.
Given that the Conservatives lurch further and further to the right and towards a harder line on Brexit, because of the looming figure of Farage and the Brexit Party, who by the way should never have been given any serious credence, including by Cameron, its unlikely they will opt to remain in the SM/CU. That just represents to them abiding by rules they have little or no say over, which doesn't equate to a proper exit for them.
As ever, this is not my position, its what I have observed from following the debates in the UK on the subject.
It would be great if it was different, but its not. There was a vote on remaining in the Customs Union back in March and it failed unfortunately.0 -
Ireland leading the race to be the next country out of the EU.......................that's according to......Andrew Brdigen
https://twitter.com/nealerichmond/status/1182219518837481472
In this instance, it is worth clicking through to listen to the piece where he says it.
Outside from nonsense about Ireland being out in the Atlantic, he talks about how simultaneously, a European army is going to be a big problem for Ireland and that we will have to have a referendum in order to join it and that we are not unknown to vote against the EU. Surely that implies we would not vote to join the army if we have a problem with it Andrew?0 -
Advertisement
-
I cannot find the post . I think the contributers name is Cryptocurrency who wrote it. He is pro brexit. The post I am referring to he said only few democrats in America support Ireland and he was downplaying the links between Ireland and America , Irish Americans etc.
One thing that is noticeable about Brexit is the British no nothing if very little about Ireland. One area they have completely undervalued and ignored is the Irish influence in America. When Bonnie Greer spoke about Irish America on Question Time last week , u could see the shock of the audience and panelist. An American on British Tv saying the Irish have more influence in the states. U could see their head shaken in disbelief. But the fact is the real special relationship is not UK and the USA , its Ireland and the USA . Yes the Yanks like a bit of Downtown Abbey now and again. But when it comes to politics, Washington and US politics in general, it has always had a strong Irish connection , links and influence running right through it.
The fact is in the US, Irelands impact in that country is nothing short of extraordinary. For a countries Irelands size it really is quite extraordinary the influence the impact the Irish have had in America. Sometimes in Ireland we can sneer at the Yanks taking about their great grandfather from Cobh. But if you ever live in the states which I did , you will find the connection between both countries is very strong indeed and very real for many Americans . And when the yanks talk about the old country its not England , its Ireland they are talking about.
Take St Patricks Day. St Patricks after 4th July is one of the few national days of celebration in US. Many people have called it to be a US public holiday. And If doesnt matter if you are African American or Italian American you celebrate St Patricks day. On St Patricks Day 2017 , US Consumers spent 4.8 billion dollars on that day. St Patricks day really is an Irish American festival where there are parades and celebrations, the lenght and breath of America. There is nothing in America comparable to it. In terms of another country being celebated or honoured one day a year in the USA, nothing comes close. Other counties like Italians with Columbus Day have tried to copy it. , but nothing is comparable .
Cyrtocurrency said 33 million out of 330 million r Irish American and he was downplaying this.. Its actually 35 million Irish Americans in the last American census There are more Irish Americans then Italian American. There are more Irish Americans then English Americans, Scot Americans and Welsh Americans put together.
Largest Groups in America
1 German Americans 49 million
2 African Americans 41 million
3 Irish Americans 35 million
4 Mexican Americans 31 million
5 English Americans 26 million
6 Italian Americans 17 million
7 Polish Americans 9 million
8 French American 9 million
9 Scot American 5 million
10 American Indian 5 million
others Dutch American 4 million , Chinese American 3 million and Welsh American 2 million .
But its in two areas the Irish have really made an impact. Across all parts of American life eg business ( Henry Ford , Ford Cars ) , literature ( F Scott Fitzgerald ) , military ( James Barry founder of US navy ) , musicians ( Kurt Cobain ) the Irish have made a serious impact , But its in two areas where the Irish have made an incredible impact far beyond its size and thats in the entertainment industry particularly Hollywood and secondly in US politics.
In Britian the main area that the Irish have impacted is also entertainment especially music ( The Beatles , The Smiths , Oasis , Johnny Rotten , Dusty Springfield, Elvis Costello, The Kinks ) and comedy ( Peter Kay , Steve Coogan , Jimmy Carr , Spike Milligan, nearly every top comedian in Britian is Frist or second generation Irish ). Also. in the states the impact in entertainment indusry is eye catching.
Walt Disney, John Ford and John Houston, three of the most important figures in US cinema all have strong Irish backgrounds. Oscar the statue was created by an Irish man and from then on Irish have ruled hollywood. lets not even mention actors and actresses today who are Irish Americans. Here is list of Irish American stars from the past eg Gene Kelly, Grace Kelly, Bing Crosby, James Cagney , lucille Ball , Rita Hayward , Burt Lancaster, Robert Mitchum , Gregory Peck , Spencer Tracy , John Wayne , Joan Crawford , Buster keaton , Marlon Brando , Judy Garland , Robert Redford , Harrison Ford , Diane Keaton , Martin Sheen and many many more. I havent even mentioned any modern actors. The list is to long.
The other area is politics. Cyrtocurrency
said there was just a few democrat who were supportive of Ireland, thats it. This is not correct . Across politics in the US , Republicans and Democrats have strong links to Ireland. Mike Pence the current Republican Vice President has strong Irish connections. Former speaker of the house another republican is Paul Ryan, another politician with a strong Irish background. The most celebrated republican president in last 100 years is Ronald Reagan. His actual name was Ronald O' Regan . He dropped the O after falling out with father. But Reagans family come from Tippearey. Richard Nixon also has strong Irish connections his family came from Timahoe in County kildare. Its not just JfK who had links to Ireland.
And the Irish Americans have always had a big say in the US presidential race. There are huge Irish American populations in the two big swing states of Ohio and Pennyslania. Notice how even Trump never criticises the Irish. Even he knows saying anything bad about Ireland is a non runner in the states. He will criticise Danes or Swedes or Australians, but not the Irish. Being from New York he knows how the Irish control politics especially in a city like New York. A city the Irish dominated politically for generations .
Anyway Here is a list of just current US Republican senators who are Irish American eg
Dan Sullivan Alaska Republican , Martha McSally Arizona Republian , Jerry Moran kansas Republican ,
Mitch McConnell kenucky Republican , Rand Paul Kentucky Republican ,
John Kennedy Republican ,
Bill Cassidy lousiana Republican , Susan Collins Marine Republican ,
Ed Marckey Masshuchueets Republican ,
Pat Twomey Republican Pennslyvania .
Thats just the list of US Republican senators who are Irish American, there is also a massive list of democrats who are Irish American and in the congress the numbers are huge also. To be sucessful politican in US it doesnt matter if u r Republican or Democrats being Irish American is an advantage and both parties have strong links with Ireland.
There has never been an Italian American president or an Mexican American president or an Asian American President or an Jewish American president and just 1 African American president yet around half of the US presidents have been Irish American. 22 of the 44 American presidents were Irish American. Andrew Jackson the first Democrat President both his parents where from Ireland. On the Declaration of Independence there w a 56 signatures. Of the 56 signatures there was 8 Irish American signatures and 3 signatures by individuals born in Ireland. Even in the foundation of early US politics and their country in 1776 the Irish played a significant role. Irish Men like Thomas lynch Jnr and Charles Carroll. No other country had any sort of such connection with Declaration of Independence.
The Irish have controlled and ran politics in America cities like New York , Chicago and Boston for generations. If u want to be sucessful American politican u need to spell out ur Irishness. And its not just big cities the Irish had influence. In the south and mid states Ireland has strong links. Take the term rednecks. This term comes from when tge5 Irish first arrived to the states , and they were working hard labour all day in the sun. They would arrive in to local towns with burnt red necks from the sun. They were given the nickname "rednecks". And thats were the name redneck originates. And you can also see massive influence of Irish music on country music in the states. Country music roots stretchs back to Irish folk music. So its not just the big cities, the Irish had influence it across the whole nation.
And it is a two way street. American influence in Ireland is huge. U could say Ireland is 51st state. The whole Irish economy for better or worse is built on US multinationals. Yes they came for low tax rates , but also the links between the countries has been a factor. U hear so many times American businesaman saying he came to Ireland to where his great grandfather came from. And When the Americans talk about the old country its not England , its Ireland they are talking about.
US multinationals have invested more in Ireland then in China , Russia , Brazil and India combined. US multinationals have invested more in Ireland per capita then.any other country in the world. US multinationals have invested 450 billion dollars into Ireland. So having a strong Irish economy and peace in Ireland is important to America. For personal reasons and also business reasons. Thats why Nancy Pelosi , the politican who has and can block trade deals , Nancy Pelosi , the speaker said if there is any damage to peace process she will block trade agreement with Uk. Shes a very shrewd politican she placing the Irish peace process over a trade deal.with the Uk. There are 35 million reasons in the US why she is doing this and 450 billion dollars invested in Ireland, why she is doing this.
When it comes politics in the US the Irish have always had massive influence and power for a country our size. The Brits dont realise this.
The one thing Brexit has shown the Irish is that the Brits no nothing about Ireland. And their ignorance towards the influence of the Irish in US is just another example of ignorance towards Ireland.
I was in Idaho Falls last week (on my way to Yellowstone) and in a coffee shop the lady behind the counter told me "Ireland is the only European country me and my husband would like to visit". Kinda funny she compliments Ireland while throwing shade at the rest of Europe but its not surprising considering its big MAGA territory with the Gun store next door to the coffee shop that they probably hate liberal Europe while still romanticizing about Ireland.
I live in Boston so you get people wearing the ear off ya talking about Ireland all the time but the American love for Ireland spreads far out from the major Irish hubs of Boston, NYC and Chicago.0 -
ToBeFrank123 wrote: »This thread is just round and round blame gaming and point scoring.
It's hardly going round and round. It's pretty unidirectional. The border difficulty is entirely down to the UK's decisions.
They decided to leave the EU, requiring border controls unless a solution could be realised. They never even considered the border problem in the first place. Then, when negotiations began they set down the three sides of the impossible triangle:- No border on the island of Ireland
- No border between Northern Ireland and Great Britain
- The UK leaves the Single Market and Customs Union
You can only pick two. Either they leave entirely, and a border goes up on the island of Ireland. Or they leave NI within the customs union and single market, and a border goes up in the Irish Sea. Or they keep the whole UK inside the Single Market and Customs Union (like the EEA nations), which breaks the last one.
There is no way around this impossible trinity without upsetting some part of the UK. They set the lines themselves, and they voted down every single option available to them in Parliament. They voted down No Deal, they voted down May's Deal, they voted down all the suggested alternatives (none of which they'd looked to see if the EU would even be okay with them, not that it wound up mattering), they voted down a second referendum. About the only thing they can agree on is an endless cycle of extension, after extension, after extension until the EU's goodwill and patience wears out.
And after all of that, they now insist on blaming Ireland and the EU while simultaneously hurtling us all towards the resurgence of war in Northern Ireland. They insist, to themselves and the international community, that we're stopping Brexit - as if we have any direct control over their Parliament and Government at all. And all the while their public isn't watching news, they're watching overwhelmingly anti-EU propaganda that has been continually lying about the EU to sell papers and stir up Eurosceptic sentiment in the nation. Those same papers which have lambasted the Speaker, the Courts, Labour, Liberal Democrats, bankers, treasury officials, their own civil servants all as "enemies of the people" or "traitors" or "EU lapdogs" or other similar things. Not to mention they very much appear to have lied about the "double majority" idea and the phone call with Merkel. I wouldn't be surprised if their media starts reporting on some horrific thing Varadkar did or said in their hidden meeting from a "Downing Street source" in tomorrow's newspapers.
So yes, this thread leans into being a cycle of blaming Britain for everything. Because it's their fault, and they are lying about it. I realise you don't support the UK's position, but surely you understand why the people following this might be a little irate at the UK government and their actions? I think we've earned a few rounds of frustration venting here on Boards over this.0 -
You seem to have forgotten that Farage said (among many others during the referendum campaign) that leaving the EU would not involve leaving the SM and anyone who said otherwise was propagating 'project fear'. They also spoke about confirmatory referendums and EEA/EFTA membership. Which brings us all the way back to May's red lines.ToBeFrank123 wrote: »Given that the Conservatives lurch further and further to the right and towards a harder line on Brexit, because of the looming figure of Farage and the Brexit Party, who by the way should never have been given any serious credence, including by Cameron, its unlikely they will opt to remain in the SM/CU. That just represents to them abiding by rules they have little or no say over, which doesn't equate to a proper exit for them.0 -
It's hardly going round and round. It's pretty unidirectional. The border difficulty is entirely down to the UK's decisions.
They decided to leave the EU, requiring border controls unless a solution could be realised. They never even considered the border problem in the first place. Then, when negotiations began they set down the three sides of the impossible triangle:- No border on the island of Ireland
- No border between Northern Ireland and Great Britain
- The UK leaves the Single Market and Customs Union
You can only pick two. Either they leave entirely, and a border goes up on the island of Ireland. Or they leave NI within the customs union and single market, and a border goes up in the Irish Sea. Or they keep the whole UK inside the Single Market and Customs Union (like the EEA nations), which breaks the last one.
There is no way around this impossible trinity without upsetting some part of the UK. They set the lines themselves, and they voted down every single option available to them in Parliament. They voted down No Deal, they voted down May's Deal, they voted down all the suggested alternatives (none of which they'd looked to see if the EU would even be okay with them, not that it wound up mattering), they voted down a second referendum. About the only thing they can agree on is an endless cycle of extension, after extension, after extension until the EU's goodwill and patience wears out.
And after all of that, they now insist on blaming Ireland and the EU while simultaneously hurtling us all towards the resurgence of war in Northern Ireland. They insist, to themselves and the international community, that we're stopping Brexit - as if we have any direct control over their Parliament and Government at all. And all the while their public isn't watching news, they're watching overwhelmingly anti-EU propaganda that has been continually lying about the EU to sell papers and stir up Eurosceptic sentiment in the nation. Those same papers which have lambasted the Speaker, the Courts, Labour, Liberal Democrats, bankers, treasury officials, their own civil servants all as "enemies of the people" or "traitors" or "EU lapdogs" or other similar things. Not to mention they very much appear to have lied about the "double majority" idea and the phone call with Merkel. I wouldn't be surprised if their media starts reporting on some horrific thing Varadkar did or said in their hidden meeting from a "Downing Street source" in tomorrow's newspapers.
So yes, this thread leans into being a cycle of blaming Britain for everything. Because it's their fault, and they are lying about it. I realise you don't support the UK's position, but surely you understand why the people following this might be a little irate at the UK government and their actions? I think we've earned a few rounds of frustration venting here on Boards over this.
Who do you mean by they?
The WA was agreed by May and the EU. Both cited it as the best deal that could be got in the circumstances.
It was roundly condemned once May came back to the UK. It was soundly defeated by a combination of Labour, ERG, DUP, SNP and others.
Oddly enough the majority of Conservatives voted for it.
Who is at fault here?
Those who opposed the WA shafted Ireland. It was the only deal on offer from the EU and instead they shot it down in the hope of something better. They played partisan politics with it, trying to sell their own vision of Brexit, which only a minority supported.
If those parties had supported the WA, the deal would be done, everyone would be happy. We certainly wouldn't have Johnson and Rees Mogg calling the shots.
So you can thank those parties for the mess we are currently in, where No Deal is a very real possibility. They were certainly no friend of Ireland when it counted.
Re the blame game, its a waste of time and energy in my view. At this stage, we need to agree a deal because I don't think No Deal is a viable option. As I posted yesterday, the Irish Central Bank have estimated 110,000 job loses and 6% drop in growth which would put us into recession. And they can hardly be accused of being part of Project Fear.0 -
prawnsambo wrote: »You seem to have forgotten that Farage said (among many others during the referendum campaign) that leaving the EU would not involve leaving the SM and anyone who said otherwise was propagating 'project fear'. They also spoke about confirmatory referendums and EEA/EFTA membership. Which brings us all the way back to May's red lines.
Indeed, UKIP, Vote Leave, ERG and the right wing press would have been happy enough with SM membership before they 'won' the referendum.
What seems to have happened in the meantime is that they have all shifted to the far right, have become extremely greedy and destructive and are now demanding the Govt smash up the UK-EU relationship forever and are even claiming the 17m voted for this. "Moving the goalposts" is the expression.0 -
ToBeFrank123 wrote: »Who do you mean by they?
The WA was agreed by May and the EU. Both cited it as the best deal that could be got in the circumstances.
It was roundly condemned once May came back to the UK. It was soundly defeated by a combination of Labour, ERG, DUP, SNP and others.
Oddly enough the majority of Conservatives voted for it.
Who is at fault here?
Those who opposed the WA shafted Ireland. It was the only deal on offer from the EU and instead they shot it down in the hope of something better. They played partisan politics with it, trying to sell their own vision of Brexit, which only a minority supported.
If those parties had supported the WA, the deal would be done, everyone would be happy. We certainly wouldn't have Johnson and Rees Mogg calling the shots.
So you can thank those parties for the mess we are currently in, where No Deal is a very real possibility. They were certainly no friend of Ireland when it counted.
The EU, nor I - have any real concern or cares for internal UK politics, the EU (including Ireland) are trying to deal with a country that is leaving the Union, whether that country is governed by the tories, Labour, Lib Dems or The Official Monster Raving Loony Party is irrelevant to the negotiations.
The Brits need to realise that noone outside of the UK gives a fiddlers who is at the helm of the ship, we are dealing with the ship.0 -
ToBeFrank123 wrote: »Who do you mean by they?
The WA was agreed by May and the EU. Both cited it as the best deal that could be got in the circumstances.
It was roundly condemned once May came back to the UK. It was soundly defeated by a combination of Labour, ERG, DUP, SNP and others.
Oddly enough the majority of Conservatives voted for it.
Who is at fault here?
Those who opposed the WA shafted Ireland. It was the only deal on offer from the EU and instead they shot it down in the hope of something better. They played partisan politics with it, trying to sell their own vision of Brexit, which only a minority supported.
If those parties had supported the WA, the deal would be done, everyone would be happy. We certainly wouldn't have Johnson and Rees Mogg calling the shots.
So you can thank those parties for the mess we are currently in, where No Deal is a very real possibility. They were certainly no friend of Ireland when it counted.
"They" is "the UK". More specifically, the UK government and the "State". The EU and Ireland don't care who sits in the chair, they just care about what is presented to them as the State they must deal with.
To get even more specific....the whole bloody lot of them in Parliament who have done nothing at all of substance for two years. Even if they'd shot down the WA but the opposition had managed to unite behind anything at all I'd be a much happier man. At least there'd be the possibility of a second referendum or a revocation, or a full border in the Irish Sea (ie, the original backstop). Or a VONC to try and oust the Conservatives from their seats (although on this I understand their apprehension - there's a risk it would grant the Conservatives a majority again, which anti-Brexit parties obviously don't want to risk happening).
They're all partially responsible, certainly. Every party anyway, even if some individual politicians have spoken sense and tried their best, Parliament as a whole has led to this mess. So by "they" I suppose I mean "Parliament".
But let's not pretend that the Conservatives (and DUP, who are propping them up and are the reason the NI-only backstop was killed on arrival) aren't the ones with the majority of the blame. They've been playing games to stay in power, shutting down Parliament and wasting time, and many of them (or their friends at the very least) stand to make millions with a hard Brexit by betting against their own country.0 -
Indeed, UKIP, Vote Leave, ERG and the right wing press would have been happy enough with SM membership before they 'won' the referendum.
What seems to have happened in the meantime is that they have all shifted to the far right, have become extremely greedy and destructive and are now demanding the Govt smash up the UK-EU relationship forever and are even claiming the 17m voted for this. "Moving the goalposts" is the expression.
I think people had a vague idea what they were voting for.
We all know the general mass of people are not the most sophisticated and find it difficult to tease out the various issues around single market, customs union, and later down the road, backstop.
What people understood is they were leaving the EU.
The politicians then had to explain after the referendum what leaving actually meant or else distill what the people voted for.
I don't condone them leaving or remaining - I'm just saying that's what appears to have happened. People voting with a vague knowledge of what they were voting for, without a full understanding of the many implications that would come from leaving.0 -
ToBeFrank123 wrote: »I think people had a vague idea what they were voting for.
We all know the general mass of people are not the most sophisticated and find it difficult to tease out the various issues around single market, customs union, and later down the road, backstop.
What people understood is they were leaving the EU.
The politicians then had to explain after the referendum what leaving actually meant or else distill what the people voted for.
I don't condone them leaving or remaining - I'm just saying that's what appears to have happened. People voting with a vague knowledge of what they were voting for, without a full understanding of the many implications that would come from leaving.
You wouldn't allow a child to vote to leave their parents house even though they might have found it difficult to tease out various issues beforehand such as food, security and accommodation and then try to enforce their decision.
If you admit that most people were incapable of understanding the situation previously, then it absolutely implies it should not have been decided by referendum.
If you still want to argue for a referendum the facts should have been displayed so people could make an educated choice. The facts have now been displayed. If people still want to leave for no other reason then they want to leave, then majority should rule, given the facts are now known.0 -
ToBeFrank123 wrote: »
The politicians then had to explain after the referendum what leaving actually meant or else distill what the people voted for.
It's actually the politicians job (politicians on both sides of the debate) to explain what leaving means BEFORE the referendum - which they did - but the Leave side and Teresa May changed the story after it!0 -
Advertisement
-
ToBeFrank123 wrote: »So you agree with the UK view the Backstop could be permanent at worst and decades long at best?
But the backstop is an ideal situation for the NI. It would take industry away from the republic but would transform NI economy and allow people to identify as irish or uk or both.
Why on earth would NI want to leave such an advantageous position?0 -
Tell me how wrote: »Ireland leading the race to be the next country out of the EU.......................that's according to......Andrew Brdigen
https://twitter.com/nealerichmond/status/1182219518837481472
In this instance, it is worth clicking through to listen to the piece where he says it.
Outside from nonsense about Ireland being out in the Atlantic, he talks about how simultaneously, a European army is going to be a big problem for Ireland and that we will have to have a referendum in order to join it and that we are not unknown to vote against the EU. Surely that implies we would not vote to join the army if we have a problem with it Andrew?
Bridgen is not somebody to be taken in any way seriously. Last time i heard him speak, in the very recent past, he was still banging the drum about the UK leaving with no deal and then trading on GATT24 terms. I honestly dont believe he's fully conversant with reality, like a few of his hard right tory brethern.0 -
Joe_ Public wrote: »Bridgen is not somebody to be taken in any way seriously. Last time i heard him speak, in the very recent past, he was still banging the drum about the UK leaving with no deal and then trading on GATT24 terms. I honestly dont believe he's fully conversant with reality, like a few of his hard right tory brethern.
I know, he also is the guy who thought all English people could apply for an Irish passport automatically.
It's the absurdity of the position that makes it some bit interesting.0 -
SeaBreezes wrote: »But the backstop is an ideal situation for the NI. It would take industry away from the republic but would transform NI economy and allow people to identify as irish or uk or both.
Why on earth would NI want to leave such an advantageous position?
I'd have no real problem with the backstop, but then again I don't have a vote on the issue in the HoC.
It would definitely be advantageous to NI, but the DUP appear to have taken the view it undermines the United Kingdom. They've put sentimentality ahead of economic sense. Its hard arguing with that kind of illogical rationale, in fact impossible. The DUP are very set in their ways and their attachment to the Union.0 -
ToBeFrank123 wrote: »Re the blame game, its a waste of time and energy in my view. At this stage, we need to agree a deal because I don't think No Deal is a viable option. As I posted yesterday, the Irish Central Bank have estimated 110,000 job loses and 6% drop in growth which would put us into recession. And they can hardly be accused of being part of Project Fear.
Have they done any estimates for what doing a deal that would effectively eject ourselves from the single market would cost ? Genuinely asking.
The only two ways I can see for us to compromise on (and we're rightly never going to do it) are concede on the backstop which would mean tacitly agreeing to a border at some point down the line when UK/EU trade negotiations inevitably fail due to UK demands/exceptionalism, or join them in aligning with UK standards as was suggested a few weeks ago by the UK - both options IMO would be a disaster for us.0 -
So Pat Leahy seems to think that there's been movement on the CU, but no idea if Varadkar has offered something in return. But even if this is true and there's movement towards a deal, parliament is now shut, it can only re-open with a QS and there's very little likelihood of that being passed, so it kind of seems a bit moot.0
-
Have they done any estimates for what doing a deal that would effectively eject ourselves from the single market would cost ? Genuinely asking.
The only two ways I can see for us to compromise on (and we're rightly never going to do it) are concede on the backstop which would mean tacitly agreeing to a border at some point down the line when UK/EU trade negotiations inevitably fail due to UK demands/exceptionalism, or join them in aligning with UK standards as was suggested a few weeks ago by the UK - both options IMO would be a disaster for us.
They did.In comparison, Mr Cassidy said if a deal similar to the Withdrawal Agreement could be reached, then the Central Bank expected output would be 1.75% less than predicted and it would result in 20,000 fewer jobs.
https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/central-bank-warns-of-110000-fewer-jobs-in-event-of-no-deal-brexit-931774.html0 -
prawnsambo wrote: »So Pat Leahy seems to think that there's been movement on the CU, but no idea if Varadkar has offered something in return. But even if this is true and there's movement towards a deal, parliament is now shut, it can only re-open with a QS and there's very little likelihood of that being passed, so it kind of seems a bit moot.
Christ we can't keep anything to ourselves can we? This is a potential breakthrough and we've got to keep a lid on it and not give oxygen to the DUP etc.0 -
That's for the then WA. Which would have had a backstop in it. So not at all like the situation the OP was asking about: Namely having a messed up border and our position in the SM diluted.ToBeFrank123 wrote: »0 -
Advertisement
-
Panrich wrote:Christ we can't keep anything to ourselves can we? This is a potential breakthrough and we've got to keep a lid on it and not give oxygen to the DUP etc.
There's too little time left to be keeping everything under wraps, and if the past few days of leaks from No. 10 is anything to go by it is the correct decision to make public statements. The DUP have already lost their balance of power, but if there is a proper possibility of a compromise or deal there's the potential to replace the DUPs 10 votes elsewhere.0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement