Brexit discussion thread XI (Please read OP before posting)

Itssoeasy

Bigboldworld wrote: »

Can i ask folks, and it’s something that has bothered me for a while, I notice one group in all of the brexit news that are very seldom mentioned and appear to be very quiet almost too quiet, what is the position of loyalist paramilitaries in all that is going on particularly if the unionists come out with a deal they are unhappy with, is there any risk of them starting up again? I hope not, I remember the bad days all too well and just seems the focus is on the risk from dissident republicans and nothing about the other side.

Unfortunately, I think there is a better than good chance that one of the local mensa branches up there will kick off and the other will respond. I genuinely hope I'm wrong on that.

lightspeed

prawnsambo wrote: »

I'm not sure if you're slagging The Examiner's 'explainer' or believe it.

I actually went to the link thinking it was some parody site.

"A 'free trade'" Jesus wept.

im confused what your "jesus wept" means or why the doubt of the validity of the examiners information in which it has quoted this tariff free arranged listed in a political declaration?

The EU is not lead by a donald trump like character opposed to free trade deals. Is it not the case that tariff free agreements have been made between EU and Japan, Canada in recent years?

Why do you believe the same wont be agreed with Britain despite evidence to the contrary?

NotToScale

I think they will be agreed, eventually. However if you look at the EU's history of negotiations on trade deals it neither moves quickly nor is it driven to bend to compromise quickly.

Look at how long CETA took and TTIP has basically proven to be impossible.

I think you could be looking at an EU-UK trade deal but probably in 5 to 10 years and with huge compromise on the UK side.

Christy Sweets

Hard remainer myself and I have to say I think this will pass the House of Commons with probably double figures in terms of Labour defections.

I think Brexit fatigue will be a key factor in this. But the deal looks terrible and it will be a case of not voting for it on the basis of its merits but voting for old rope because it's a "deal". These defectors will ensure Labour loses the election.

The deal is bad for Ireland, bad for Britain, and bad for the North. It undermines the Good Friday Agreement, will build a siege mentality among Unionists and promote uncertainty so won't benefit the North's economy.

One bad Stormont election result and there's your hard border. Britain itself can leave on no deal terms at the end of 2020.

May's deal was bad but way more palatable than this.

Bigboldworld

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Unfortunately, I think there is a better than good chance that one of the local mensa branches up there will kick off and the other will respond. I genuinely hope I'm wrong on that.

Yes that would be my concern here too, I’ve just done a bit of reading and it appears their leadership is taking a wait and see approach, if they feel they are cornered I can see them kicking off, again all too quiet for my liking and people shouldn’t forget that it’s not just republicans who are capable of launching a murderous campaign, can’t see them sitting on their hands and taking if they feel they are being shafted

prawnsambo

lightspeed wrote: »

im confused what your "jesus wept" means or why the doubt of the validity of the examiners information in which it has quoted this tariff free arranged listed in a political declaration?

The EU is not lead by a donald trump like character opposed to free trade deals. Is it not the case that tariff free agreements have been made between EU and Japan, Canada in recent years?

Why do you believe the same wont be agreed with Britain despite evidence to the contrary?

Because that 'explainer' looks like it was written by an intern in their first week on the job. It's incomprehensible rubbish. There is no such thing as a "free trade" in that way of speaking. It's a free trade agreement and they take years to complete. The transition period will be ancient history before there's one agreed.


And tariffs aren't the only component of free trade agreements. It's a tiny amount.

joeysoap

I’m confused too. Does the UK have to pay the €39b or not?

Is there ongoing payments or is that part of future negotiations? I know Norway pays.

They are claiming EU and British citizens rights are protected. Does this mean freedom of future movement and right to work between the 28 or just people already in situ?

prawnsambo

Christy Sweets wrote: »

The deal is bad for Ireland, bad for Britain, and bad for the North. It undermines the Good Friday Agreement, will build a siege mentality among Unionists and promote uncertainty so won't benefit the North's economy.

That's a bit of a DUP talking point right there. Which is ironic since they hate the GFA. Sinn Fein, on the other hand have given it a lukewarm assent, mostly because it pushes a UI referendum back up the calendar a fair bit. As for the NI economy, NI Manufacturing have welcomed it for the fact that it ends uncertainty and protects business. So one of you are right. I think I'll go with NI Manufacturing.

MrMusician18

joeysoap wrote: »

I’m confused too. Does the UK have to pay the €39b or not?

Is there ongoing payments or is that part of future negotiations? I know Norway pays.

They are claiming EU and British citizens rights are protected. Does this mean freedom of future movement and right to work between the 28 or just people already in situ?

UK had to pay the 39bn
Citizens rights for those that move up to the end of transition are protected.

At the moment there are no ongoing payments (apart from those related to the withdrawal settlement). Payment for enhanced market access will form part of the next phase of talks.

I expect these talks to break quickly down in acrimony.

prawnsambo

joeysoap wrote: »

I’m confused too. Does the UK have to pay the €39b or not?

Is there ongoing payments or is that part of future negotiations? I know Norway pays.

They are claiming EU and British citizens rights are protected. Does this mean freedom of future movement and right to work between the 28 or just people already in situ?

Just people in situ. For the avoidance of doubt, this is 64 pages changed of May's original 585 pages. So pretty much everything the same except the backstop is a front stop and the UK isn't in it.

Mr.Nice Guy

prawnsambo wrote: »

That's a bit of a DUP talking point right there. Which is ironic since they hate the GFA. Sinn Fein, on the other hand have given it a lukewarm assent, mostly because it pushes a UI referendum back up the calendar a fair bit. As for the NI economy, NI Manufacturing have welcomed it for the fact that it ends uncertainty and protects business. So one of you are right. I think I'll go with NI Manufacturing.

Manufacturing NI said this 24 hours ago:

https://twitter.com/ManufacturingNI/status/1184559228641513472

And they haven't said it ends uncertainty. They've said they're giving it a 'guarded welcome' and that there are additional administrative burdens, with issues to be decided in a FTA. They've basically calculated it's the least worst option compared to the potential of a crash-out Brexit, which from their point of view is correct.

No surprise SF have endorsed it since it puts them in the position of guarantors of Ireland's economic future. The Mary Lou-stop is now of crucial importance for the policy to last.

The DUP, as much as I loathe them, do have a point that these proposals undermine the GFA. The Petition of Concern was brought in as a Stormont mechanism to prevent one community from having a principle foisted upon it that it didn't agree with. It's pretty apparent that the majority of unionism oppose the customs principle agreed today. But under the revised plans for what constitutes consent, the PoC is to be discarded precisely because the two governments know it would be used by unionism to scupper the plan.

Of course they brought this folly on themselves by not endorsing May's deal, which would have given them far less to worry about and kept all of the UK in the same scenario.

Christy Sweets

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Manufacturing NI said this 24 hours ago:



And they haven't said it ends uncertainty. They've said they're giving it a 'guarded welcome' and that there are additional administrative burdens, with issues to be decided in a FTA. They've basically calculated it's the least worst option compared to the potential of a crash-out Brexit, which from their point of view is correct.

And in Britain itself business reaction has not been good, with this deal compared unfavourably to May's deal.

Shelga

I really feel for Labour MPs in headbanger Leave constituencies tonight, ie Lisa Nandy of Wigan.

It’s a completely lose-lose situation for both her and her ignorant constituents. If she votes for Johnson’s deal, she is voting to make the daily lives of her constituents significantly worse, and selling out her Labour principles.

If she votes against it, she will undoubtedly face even more vile death threats and online abuse. If I was her, I’d be seriously concerned for my safety.

Westernyelp

IMO the only way this is going is: Labour votes backing the deal subject to a confirmatory vote. unclear what happens then (I reckon fairly narrow remain) but at least the electorate will have voted with the full facts available.

Some grumbling and then move o.n

Joe_ Public

Shelga wrote: »

I really feel for Labour MPs in headbanger Leave constituencies tonight, ie Lisa Nandy of Wigan.

It’s a completely lose-lose situation for both her and her ignorant constituents. If she votes for Johnson’s deal, she is voting to make the daily lives of her constituents significantly worse, and selling out her Labour principles.

If she votes against it, she will undoubtedly face even more vile death threats and online abuse. If I was her, I’d be seriously concerned for my safety.

But then you've had lots of people vilifying the Labour leadership for vacillating over its brexit position and basically not swinging behind a firm remain position which would pretty much have abandoned the likes of Lisa Nandy to her fate. Damned if you do, damned if you don't kind of position really.

reslfj

joeysoap wrote: »

I’m confused too. Does the UK have to pay the €39b or not?

Is there ongoing payments or is that part of future negotiations? I know Norway pays.

Officially there is no £39bn, but a large number of 'line items' (like on an invoice) the UK will pay to the EU27 and some 'line items' that the EU will pay to the UK.

The £39bn was an estimate from a long time ago. The estimate today is the UK will pay around £32bn as the UK has paid its running EU contributions that was included in the earlier (£39bn) estimate.

The estimate includes - iirc - the UK's running contributions during the first transition period to end of 2020, but not any running EU contributions for possible extended transition periods in 2021 and 2022 which seems unavoidable for the UK.
You should not even rule out the UK will ask for more transition periods post 2022 - and of course pay full membership fee for.

But there is no future longer term ongoing payments as such payments will be related to the UK participate in EU27/EEA ongoing activities. Say the UK will be allowed to participate in "European Union Aviation Safety Agency" - EASA - the UK will have to pay ongoing (surely it's a bargin compared to a full national UK safety agency).

Lars

jimmycrackcorm

Bigboldworld wrote: »

Can i ask folks, and it’s something that has bothered me for a while, I notice one group in all of the brexit news that are very seldom mentioned and appear to be very quiet almost too quiet, what is the position of loyalist paramilitaries in all that is going on particularly if the unionists come out with a deal they are unhappy with, is there any risk of them starting up again? I hope not, I remember the bad days all too well and just seems the focus is on the risk from dissident republicans and nothing about the other side.

What can they do? Go out in boats and plant mines in the sea against the border? Or start street protests with placards saying : "what do we want? TARIFFS! How much do we want? 50% on meats"

The reality is life will go on as normal as it is today which was the point of not having a hard border.

Tell me how

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

What can they do? Go out in boats and plant mines in the sea against the border? Or start street protests with placards saying : "what do we want? TARIFFS! How much do we want? 50% on meats"

The reality is life will go on as normal as it is today which was the point of not having a hard border.

I don't think it is as simple as that.
They might not wage an active campaign in relation to Brexit but they may decide to become more active on other matters in some form of an effort to blow off some steam over this.

July 12th orange celebrations may be celebrated more vociferously in the next few years along with any other opportunity to display their allegiance.

I think there is some path whereby Ireland and Northern Ireland could end up in a play off for a place in the Euro Championships, that might be the first big even where we will get an indication as to how the communities on the ground see this.

LuckyLloyd

Christy Sweets wrote: »

Hard remainer myself and I have to say I think this will pass the House of Commons with probably double figures in terms of Labour defections.

I think Brexit fatigue will be a key factor in this. But the deal looks terrible and it will be a case of not voting for it on the basis of its merits but voting for old rope because it's a "deal". These defectors will ensure Labour loses the election.

The deal is bad for Ireland, bad for Britain, and bad for the North. It undermines the Good Friday Agreement, will build a siege mentality among Unionists and promote uncertainty so won't benefit the North's economy.

One bad Stormont election result and there's your hard border. Britain itself can leave on no deal terms at the end of 2020.

May's deal was bad but way more palatable than this.

As a “hard remainer”, have you been engaging in determined protest or civil disobedience? Because the lack of any effective remain protest has allowed the lunatics to win the argument comprehensively. This deal is the only outcome in such a context.

The EU will squeeze the UK economy like a grape on services.

Tell me how

joseywhales wrote: »

Barnier!

There's something very impressive about that picture.
If I was Simon Coveney, I'd replace the entirety of my CV with just that one picture.

Glad Helen McEntee is in there as well. Very well done by the Irish team all round with Mairead McGuinness cleaning up on TV throughout the day on Thursday also and Leo Varadkar on stage with Barnier, Tusk and Juncker for the key press conference.

SeaBreezes

Bigboldworld wrote: »

Can i ask folks, and it’s something that has bothered me for a while, I notice one group in all of the brexit news that are very seldom mentioned and appear to be very quiet almost too quiet, what is the position of loyalist paramilitaries in all that is going on particularly if the unionists come out with a deal they are unhappy with, is there any risk of them starting up again? I hope not, I remember the bad days all too well and just seems the focus is on the risk from dissident republicans and nothing about the other side.

Seldom mentioned? Seriously?
After the DUP CONSULTED with the UVF terrorists (not the NI farmers or the NI business groups) before making decisions? After they threaten to bomb Limerick if they don't get their way?

And you've heard nothing about it?
Check your news sources as they sound incredibly biased if they're not reporting that disgraceful behaviour.

McMurphy

Bigboldworld wrote: »

Yes that would be my concern here too, I’ve just done a bit of reading and it appears their leadership is taking a wait and see approach, if they feel they are cornered I can see them kicking off, again all too quiet for my liking and people shouldn’t forget that it’s not just republicans who are capable of launching a murderous campaign, can’t see them sitting on their hands and taking if they feel they are being shafted

The DUP voted for brexit, pushed back against s soft brexit, and rejected Mays deal and then the slightly rewritten deal Boris came back with.

They ended up being thrown under the bus by the Tory's and British because they wanted their version of brexit done, regardless of the DUP/people of the north because ultimately they're irrelevant to them, as has been foretold/predicted from day zero.

The Nationalist/Republican/Irish community didn't vote for brexit, indeed the vast majority of unionists didn't want it either.

If, and it's only an if, loyalist paramilitaries kick off again, I cannot envisage them attacking the DUP for voting for brexit, (when the rest of the island of Ireland were pretty content with the status quo) nor the British government - who ultimately shafted them in the long run (as many here said would happen)

The DUP must be held solely accountable for the corner hardcore unionists in the north feel they have been backed into, the lure of kingmaker was always too much for their ego's to resist, but ultimately they ended up becoming sh1tmakers.

Saturday's TV will be epic now.

fash

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

The DUP voted for brexit, pushed back against s soft brexit, and rejected Mays deal and then the slightly rewritten deal Boris came back with.

They ended up being thrown under the bus by the Tory's and British because they wanted their version of brexit done, regardless of the DUP/people of the north because ultimately they're irrelevant to them, as has been foretold/predicted from day zero.

The Nationalist/Republican/Irish community didn't vote for brexit, indeed the vast majority of unionists didn't want it either.

If, and it's only an if, loyalist paramilitaries kick off again, I cannot envisage them attacking the DUP for voting for brexit, (when the rest of the island of Ireland were pretty content with the status quo) nor the British government - who ultimately shafted them in the long run (as many here said would happen)

The DUP must be held solely accountable for the corner hardcore unionists in the north feel they have been backed into, the lure of kingmaker was always too much for their ego's to resist, but ultimately they ended up becoming sh1tmakers.

Saturday's TV will be epic now.

Just a thought: something which may have explained the "DUP on board/not on board" could be someone (DUP or even just UK government) claiming they were on board to get as "acceptable to DUP as possible" agreement as possible - then once agreement done, reneging on the "on board" to allow them to play victims.

Christy42

Christy Sweets wrote: »

Hard remainer myself and I have to say I think this will pass the House of Commons with probably double figures in terms of Labour defections.

I think Brexit fatigue will be a key factor in this. But the deal looks terrible and it will be a case of not voting for it on the basis of its merits but voting for old rope because it's a "deal". These defectors will ensure Labour loses the election.

The deal is bad for Ireland, bad for Britain, and bad for the North. It undermines the Good Friday Agreement, will build a siege mentality among Unionists and promote uncertainty so won't benefit the North's economy.

One bad Stormont election result and there's your hard border. Britain itself can leave on no deal terms at the end of 2020.

May's deal was bad but way more palatable than this.

Britain can leave on no deal terms tomorrow if it wishes. What is anyone going to do about it?

It won't because it would be a crazy move. Even Hardline Boris had to back down as quickly as he could and go for a backstop by any other name.

The key is that England can't get out of this deal. It has to NI voters. Even then whoever pulled the trigger would be taking complete and total responsibility for the violence.

Nody

lightspeed wrote: »

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/amp.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/brexit-explainer-whats-in-the-deal-and-what-happens-now-957882.html


"Q8: So what about the future?
Very importantly, both the EU and the UK have agreed to a “free-trade” where no tariffs will apply in a document called the “political declaration.”"

So its clear as i mentioned EU leaders have surrendered to ensure Britain will get to have its cake and eat it.

Britain gets the following:

1.a tariff free deal,

EU already offered 100% FTA from the start; nothing new there. The issue is not in the tariffs but the paperwork which was always the case.

2.complete control of immigration

Except they have to accept EU people moving there and settle; third party immigration was already under their control so nothing changed there.

3. no longer have to pay into EU budget

Correct; instead they are going to take a 7.5% hit on their BNP which is about 10x as much as their net payment to EU.

4. Also will be able to take back its fishing waters.

Wrong; fishing waters is in the deal as part of them being allowed to export fish to EU.

North Macedonia and Albania due to join EU despite French opposition. That will mean more immigration one way and id assume further contributions from existing member states required.

You mean that EU has somehow changed the rules that one country can't block the start of or accepting a new member? By all means do share the secret cabal who made that possible; or maybe you should consider getting a news source that actually knows what it talks about?

We will also have many of the french, spanish etc boats fishing in uk waters now hoovering up fish in irish waters.

Exactly as many as before since the EU fishing qoutas still apply as before.

Im at a loss which part of this deal irish people should be celebrating?

The lack of a hard border which was stated as a primary goal for the Irish state perhaps?

The uk parliment passed the Benn act demanding no deal not an option. It clearly would have been better for all especially EU if they refused to negotiate further and ensured new referendum was held in hope it would be remain and all this mess all forgotten about.

No, it demanded the PM to request an extension which the PM could follow up with a second letter telling them to ignore or simply attach silly terms such as "We request an extension and you need to pay us 50 gazillion euros because you are a bunch of banana suckers etc" to make sure it would not go through. The Benn act was not as you seem to believe somehow forcing the PM to avoid a hard brexit no matter what; there were ways around it to ensure a crash out and be compliant to the act and that does not include the option of simply ignoring it completely and crash out (in the same route as lying to the queen to prorogue the parliament).

FrancieBrady

Jeffery Donaldson blows about in the wind so much and manages always to keep a holier than thou tone to his voice.
He was just on the radio there trying to take the moral high ground but basically it has come down to the GFA and rogue members of the Labour party that he is depending on to save the DUP and the Union.

lightspeed

Nody wrote: »

EU already offered 100% FTA from the start; nothing new there. The issue is not in the tariffs but the paperwork which was always the case.
Except they have to accept EU people moving there and settle; third party immigration was already under their control so nothing changed there.
Correct; instead they are going to take a 7.5% hit on their BNP which is about 10x as much as their net payment to EU.
Wrong; fishing waters is in the deal as part of them being allowed to export fish to EU.

You mean that EU has somehow changed the rules that one country can't block the start of or accepting a new member? By all means do share the secret cabal who made that possible; or maybe you should consider getting a news source that actually knows what it talks about?

Exactly as many as before since the EU fishing qoutas still apply as before.

The lack of a hard border which was stated as a primary goal for the Irish state perhaps?

No, it demanded the PM to request an extension which the PM could follow up with a second letter telling them to ignore or simply attach silly terms such as "We request an extension and you need to pay us 50 gazillion euros because you are a bunch of banana suckers etc" to make sure it would not go through. The Benn act was not as you seem to believe somehow forcing the PM to avoid a hard brexit no matter what; there were ways around it to ensure a crash out and be compliant to the act and that does not include the option of simply ignoring it completely and crash out (in the same route as lying to the queen to prorogue the parliament).

can you provide a source stating EU members will continue to have access to UK fishing waters?

Also please provide same source stating britain cannot restrict movement of people from EU who wish to work ans live in UK?

Dyr

prawnsambo wrote: »

That's a bit of a DUP talking point right there. Which is ironic since they hate the GFA. Sinn Fein, on the other hand have given it a lukewarm assent, mostly because it pushes a UI referendum back up the calendar a fair bit. As for the NI economy, NI Manufacturing have welcomed it for the fact that it ends uncertainty and protects business. So one of you are right. I think I'll go with NI Manufacturing.

SFs low profile on this has more to do with the whole Brexit thing completely wrong footing them. They're a party who are tied into ideological knots in this era.

They're not going to give out about the NI assembly thing because it will suggest that they're not confident about continued success in assembly elections

Dyr

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I

*Can you withdraw that remark about me 'finally accepting that it is a compromise' please?

You are correct, I mixed you up with someone else who was completely wrong

Mea Maxima Culpa as the bishop said to the inquiry

VinLieger

Bambi wrote: »

SFs low profile on this has more to do with the whole Brexit thing completely wrong footing them. They're a party who are tied into ideological knots in this era.

They're not going to give out about the NI assembly thing because it will suggest that they're not confident about continued success in assembly elections

Indeed their history of campaigning against every EU referendum shows their true feelings on the EU.


Much like the DUP tried to do they are simply using this situation for their own benefit, however they are going about it far smarter way by shutting the hell up and letting FG push the agenda for them here and have the DUP stomp all over everything up North, whatever the result SF's hands are completely clean both North and South, its very clever.