Will Britain piss off and get on with Brexit II (mod warning in OP)

ambro25

Not to dismiss the GFA argument/thing, but after Gove's latest signalling on frictionfull trading, and its non-trivial relevance to GB-NI trade channels under the WA, I'd say it's rather trivial in the grand scheme of keeping the lights on in NI...

I was a professionally-trained and -qualified import-export specialist about 28 years ago, fully-conversant with Incoterms, letters of credit and other WTO trading-typical procedural niceties. If there's an urgent training need in t'UK and/or NI, I've got some free weekend time for moonlighting, rates negotiable and availability until 31/12/20 latest

Boredstiff666

Peregrinus wrote: »

Possibly your belief that the British people are as stupid as you seem to think they are is necessary to sustain you in your dismissal of their democratically expressed wishes?

You're the guy who came in to say that Varadkar had behaved offensively; you're the guy who posted a link to this report in support of your view. If you don't want that view challenged, it's probably unwise to post it to a discussion board. And, if you do post it to a discussion board and it gets challenged, it's not a good look to ignore the challenge and just go off on a rant. It makes your position look very, very insecure; that's probably not the look you're reaching for.

Varadkar's view that the British people wanted a second referendum is validated by the fact that they voted for one. If you're not prepared to address that, you'd serve the Brexit cause better by not posting at all.

Tis true I posted on the interviews and speechs he and his mate did. Its all there on the internet I think with Sky News and Sophie Ridge and reported in newspapers of same.

But I have better things to do and trawl internet for you or anybody....go look yourself.

Like i said this morning....your trawling over stuff and arguing with yourself. Brexit has come and you aint gonna change it. Leo has most probably gone and you aint gonna change the result.

It is that fella and the boxing video over and over again.

Whats next arguing over who won WW2 or possibly Trump didnt win in 2016.

It really is mindless and waste of my keyboard.

Leroy42

Leroy42 wrote: »

What? Your question was a RoI breaking the agreement. That discussion, about HMG, has been had many times over.

You asked a question, were given a response. You raised the possibility the SF in government in RoI would break the GFA. On what grounds are making that assertion?

a response that no one can back up with any actual facts.

it looks to me like the usual Sinn Fein hypocrisy,

Leroy42

Aegir wrote: »

a response that no one can back up with any actual facts.

it looks to me like the usual Sinn Fein hypocrisy,

What facts do you want? You asked if it contravened the GFA and it was pointed out it didn't. You want them to prove a negative?

On what basis do you think it does? You need to provide a basis so that people have some way of arguing against it.

volchitsa

Leroy42 wrote: »

What facts do you want? You asked if it contravened the GFA and it was pointed out it didn't. You want them to prove a negative?

On what basis do you think it does? You need to provide a basis so that people have some way of arguing against it.

Well apparently he thinks it doesn't, so obviously he can't.

What he thinks is that this proves that the DUP in Westminster also didn't break the GFA. Not sure why or how, TBH, since the GFA makes several mentions of the island of Ireland as a whole, eg. if the people of Ireland decide to reunify, Westminster/UK won't try to block it - which would seem to make the presence of the DUP in the Westminister government very problematic, unless they withdrew from any meetings about NI's status, which seems unlikely.

There's no equivalent obligation in the RoI government to remain neutral, they're more like the equivalent of the NI Assembly in the GFA text.

So I think we can assume the poster doesn't have a clue what he's on about.

Leroy42

Leroy42 wrote: »

What facts do you want? You asked if it contravened the GFA and it was pointed out it didn't. You want them to prove a negative?

On what basis do you think it does? You need to provide a basis so that people have some way of arguing against it.

Here is what I posted. It is pretty clear.

Aegir wrote: »

It does beg the question though, does this break the GFA?

When the DUP gave the Tories their vote of confidence, the shinners were crying that this breaks the GFA as the government is no longer an honest broker.

If SF go into government with FF, can the unionists throw a tantrum as well?

so what is your opinion?

As Francie thanked the post, I would particularly like to hear his opinion on this.

I don't think the DUP confidence agreement broke the GFA, but lots of people on here do. If so, what is different about Sinn Fein going in to government in Ireland?

volchitsa

volchitsa wrote: »

Well apparently he thinks it doesn't, so obviously he can't.

What he thinks is that this proves that the DUP in Westminster also didn't break the GFA. Not sure why or how, TBH, since the GFA makes several mentions of the island of Ireland as a whole, eg. if the people of Ireland decide to reunify, Westminster/UK won't try to block it - which would seem to make the presence of the DUP in the Westminister government very problematic, unless they withdrew from any meetings about NI's status, which seems unlikely.

There's no equivalent obligation in the RoI government to remain neutral, they're more like the equivalent of the NI Assembly in the GFA text.

So I think we can assume the poster doesn't have a clue what he's on about.

where does it say the British government has to be neutral?

Why don't you go ask the people who said X, Y and Z rather than randomly asking people here? It's a bit bizarre.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Why don't you go ask the people who said X, Y and Z rather than randomly asking people here? It's a bit bizarre.

This is a discussion forum is it not? This is a subject/allegation that was discussed at length on here.

Are you saying that because it is an awkward question I contact every poster who made that allegation by PM?

Now that is bizarre.

Peregrinus

Aegir wrote: »

This is a discussion forum is it not? This is a subject/allegation that was discussed at length on here.

Are you saying that because it is an awkward question I contact every poster who made that allegation by PM?

Now that is bizarre.

You raise a fair question. But there's not much point in repeatedly putting it to people you're now in conversation with, if they themselves never made the point that you are seeking to rebut.

Fionn1952

Aegir wrote: »

Here is what I posted. It is pretty clear.




so what is your opinion?

As Francie thanked the post, I would particularly like to hear his opinion on this.

I don't think the DUP confidence agreement broke the GFA, but lots of people on here do. If so, what is different about Sinn Fein going in to government in Ireland?

I don't think this breaks the GFA, nor do I think the DUP/Tory C&S agreement did, but the difference in the two scenarios is quite clear.....the Irish government aren't in a position to call a border poll, so SF will not be in a position to push their own preferred outcome ahead by calling a poll as part of the Irish government.

Calling a border poll IS within the power of the British government, via the secretary of state for NI, and by the same logic, delaying a border poll would be within their power. There's where the conflict regarding having the DUP as part of the government arises. A scenario clearly not mirrored in having SF as part of the Irish government.

Boredstiff666

Fionn1952 wrote: »

I don't think this breaks the GFA, nor do I think the DUP/Tory C&S agreement did, but the difference in the two scenarios is quite clear.....the Irish government aren't in a position to call a border poll, so SF will not be in a position to push their own preferred outcome ahead by calling a poll as part of the Irish government.

Calling a border poll IS within the power of the British government, via the secretary of state for NI, and by the same logic, delaying a border poll would be within their power. There's where the conflict regarding having the DUP as part of the government arises. A scenario clearly not mirrored in having SF as part of the Irish government.

Having SF as part of or the Irish Gov has just thrown the biggest spanner into Ireland that could have ever happened..........even besides Brexit.

The aim is a united Ireland and they will never let this go.....At every opportunity regardless of cost etc......until now that is.

Because also it means the Republic may inherit a large number of people who hate, object, disagree and all the other stuff with being ruled by Dublin. Not to mention the massive costs for the Republic.

A referendum is the first step. But the people must go with the result. If the result is unification then it is a united Ireland and of course everybody will just bow down to the Dublin Gov and be quiet...........NOT.

But this time it will be the Republics problem to sort out because now it is a united Ireland.

For the first time I can see SF making every excuse possible not to have a Unification referendum and telling it's people to not to speak of a United Ireland.

It's easy to critisise when you are in opposition.:)

Leroy42

Boredstiff666 wrote: »

Having SF as part of or the Irish Gov has just thrown the biggest spanner into Ireland that could have ever happened..........even besides Brexit.

The aim is a united Ireland and they will never let this go.....At every opportunity regardless of cost etc......until now that is.

Because also it means the Republic may inherit a large number of people who hate, object, disagree and all the other stuff with being ruled by Dublin. Not to mention the massive costs for the Republic.

A referendum is the first step. But the people must go with the result. If the result is unification then it is a united Ireland and of course everybody will just bow down to the Dublin Gov and be quiet...........NOT.

But this time it will be the Republics problem to sort out because now it is a united Ireland.

For the first time I can see SF making every excuse possible not to have a Unification referendum and telling it's people to not to speak of a United Ireland.

It's easy to criticise when you are in opposition.:)

If a ref was held, and passed, then whom exactly would complain? Can't be the DUP, they are all for the Will of the People after all. Can't be the UK, as they are the same and surely must stand side by side with a smaller country trying to democratically remove itself from being run by people they never get to elect.

But cool your jets, its a long way off, even SF know that a border poll now would probably be lost and set them back years (they wil have seen how the Scottish are being treated). The idea is to bring the idea of a poll into normal discussion, have it as a natural thing to look for rather than simply a brain fart like Brexit is.

MLM even talked about this in an interview with BBC, saying that any constitutional change requires time, deep thinking, understanding of the possible implications.

ambro25

Were I SF -or not, irrespective- I'd expect that life in NI as part of the Brexited UK over the next few years, would influence the result of such a referendum, and political voting intentions, in only one direction. Because I understand that people have long memories there, right? (besides being a tad more aware of the benefits of EU membership, on the basis of the local 2016 ref result)

The exact same as if I were SNP -or not, irrespective- insofar as Scotland is concerned by the exact same issues and circumstances.

It might be "easy to criticise when you are in opposition". But it's even easier to generate goodwill and growth, when you've reached, and are then starting from, the bottom

RobMc59

Fionn1952 wrote: »

I don't think this breaks the GFA, nor do I think the DUP/Tory C&S agreement did, but the difference in the two scenarios is quite clear.....the Irish government aren't in a position to call a border poll, so SF will not be in a position to push their own preferred outcome ahead by calling a poll as part of the Irish government.

Calling a border poll IS within the power of the British government, via the secretary of state for NI, and by the same logic, delaying a border poll would be within their power. There's where the conflict regarding having the DUP as part of the government arises. A scenario clearly not mirrored in having SF as part of the Irish government.

A person's opinion on this clearly depends on their preconceived views of sinn fein,what they campaigned for sounds pretty decent but personally, as a british person it's difficult to get past their association with the ira and think they diminish Ireland's international standing.

Boredstiff666

Leroy42 wrote: »

If a ref was held, and passed, then whom exactly would complain? .........probably most protestants.

But cool your jets, its a long way off, even SF know that a border poll now would probably be lost and set them back years (they wil have seen how the Scottish are being treated). .......The scottish agreed to a referendum once in a generation.....that was the agreement......why should the English pay for their fancies? They give them billions already........let the English have a vote on that ****hole of a place (half my family scots descent before the racist stuff starts)......the English would chainsaw them free tomorrow given a chance.

MLM even talked about this in an interview with BBC, saying that any constitutional change requires time, deep thinking, understanding of the possible implications......I see....so it sunk in did it?

The Republic has really dropped itself in the ****e with this vote of Gov.

ambro25

Boredstiff666 wrote: »

If a ref was held, and passed, then whom exactly would complain? .........probably most protestants.

But cool your jets, its a long way off, even SF know that a border poll now would probably be lost and set them back years (they wil have seen how the Scottish are being treated). .......The scottish agreed to a referendum once in a generation.....that was the agreement......why should the English pay for their fancies? They give them billions already........let the English have a vote on that ****hole of a place (half my family scots descent before the racist stuff starts)......the English would chainsaw them free tomorrow given a chance.

MLM even talked about this in an interview with BBC, saying that any constitutional change requires time, deep thinking, understanding of the possible implications......I see....so it sunk in did it?

The Republic has really dropped itself in the ****e with this vote of Gov.

Where is that "generational limit" in the Scottish Independence Referendum Act 2013?

That's right, there isn't one.

Now, if you're going to base your argument on ultra vires political declarations like that 'once in a generation', this then brings the 'material change in circumstances' SNP manifesto pledge fully and legitimately into relevance, and 1st February 2020 was rather such a material change in circumstances indeed.

Which, given the SNP's overwhelming electoral majority in Scotland (serially over the GEs since IndyRef1), is a full and bona fide mandate ('will of the Scottish people', in British money) for that new IndyRef2.

I fully expect the facists currently holding the British reins of power to stall it for however long they can/the Scots let them, get away with it. Can't be doing with sprouting a hard border on the British isle itself and get fully geobracketed by an EU(-28 again).

Boredstiff666

ambro25 wrote: »

Boredstiff666 wrote: »

Where is that "generational limit" in the Scottish Independence Referendum Act 2013?

That's right, there isn't one.

Now, if you're going to base your argument on ultra vires political declarations like that 'once in a generation', this then brings the 'material change in circumstances' SNP manifesto pledge fully and legitimately into relevance, and 1st February 2020 was rather such a material change in circumstances indeed.

Which, given the SNP's overwhelming electoral majority in Scotland (serially over the GEs since IndyRef1), is a full and bona fide mandate ('will of the Scottish people', in British money) for that new IndyRef2.

If thats true then all the media have it wrong including in interviews with the SNP. Not my words. The generation thing is not my words but theirs.

If thats the case get shot of them tomorrow and close the borders permanently.

Leroy42

Boredstiff666 wrote: »

Leroy42 wrote: »

If a ref was held, and passed, then whom exactly would complain? .........probably most protestants.

But cool your jets, its a long way off, even SF know that a border poll now would probably be lost and set them back years (they wil have seen how the Scottish are being treated). .......The scottish agreed to a referendum once in a generation.....that was the agreement......why should the English pay for their fancies? They give them billions already........let the English have a vote on that ****hole of a place (half my family scots descent before the racist stuff starts)......the English would chainsaw them free tomorrow given a chance.

MLM even talked about this in an interview with BBC, saying that any constitutional change requires time, deep thinking, understanding of the possible implications......I see....so it sunk in did it?

The Republic has really dropped itself in the ****e with this vote of Gov.

You are all over the place.

Your original point was the SF in government in Ireland was a bigger problem than Brexit, but when I point out that even MLM has stated that any border poll would need serious consideration, time etc you simply say "so it sunk in did it?"!

So which is it. Is it that everything is now going to be a disaster or not?

As for who will complain, the protestants! But I am sure that you would agree that, just as the UK government have done to both Scotland and NI, if the vote passes anyone that complains will simply be ignored or worse called a traitor for going against the will of the people.

And as for your comment against the English happy to chainsaw the Scottish away, Johnson is going to actively work against the scots desire for another ref. Seems a strange thing to do if they are trying to get rid of them to actually forbid them from leaving!

Boredstiff666

Leroy42 wrote: »

Boredstiff666 wrote: »

You are all over the place.

Your original point was the SF in government in Ireland was a bigger problem than Brexit, but when I point out that even MLM has stated that any border poll would need serious consideration, time etc you simply say "so it sunk in did it?"!

So which is it. Is it that everything is now going to be a disaster or not?

As for who will complain, the protestants! But I am sure that you would agree that, just as the UK government have done to both Scotland and NI, if the vote passes anyone that complains will simply be ignored or worse called a traitor for going against the will of the people.

And as for your comment against the English happy to chainsaw the Scottish away, Johnson is going to actively work against the scots desire for another ref. Seems a strange thing to do if they are trying to get rid of them to actually forbid them from leaving!

You mentioned scots to prove your non existent rant. I gave the view of English people (ask them).

What politicians want/say/do is rarely what the ones who are affected by such and have to pay for such want........in other words the people. When English people get the chance to vote on things and actually have their say........as you now know..........it is not what those in power want and try their best to stop.:D

Boris has said he will build a bridge with NI.........not with English money he wont.

Poor Boris is losing face with those who elected him already........Any dithering on fishing in Brit waters and you will find he will soon be gone.......I think that will be the litmus test of his so called sturdyness.

Fionn1952

Fionn1952 wrote: »

I don't think this breaks the GFA, nor do I think the DUP/Tory C&S agreement did, but the difference in the two scenarios is quite clear.....the Irish government aren't in a position to call a border poll, so SF will not be in a position to push their own preferred outcome ahead by calling a poll as part of the Irish government.

Calling a border poll IS within the power of the British government, via the secretary of state for NI, and by the same logic, delaying a border poll would be within their power. There's where the conflict regarding having the DUP as part of the government arises. A scenario clearly not mirrored in having SF as part of the Irish government.

I would agree that they are two different scenarios, but the cry seemed to be fairly unanimous (in particular from a poster who is conspicuous by their absence) that the UK government was supposed to be neutral, which it isn't. the only obligation, on both governments, is that they act with rigorous impartiality.

Fionn1952

Aegir wrote: »

I would agree that they are two different scenarios, but the cry seemed to be fairly unanimous (in particular from a poster who is conspicuous by their absence) that the UK government was supposed to be neutral, which it isn't. the only obligation, on both governments, is that they act with rigorous impartiality.

Which would raise the question on how a government with responsibility for calling a border poll can act with rigorous impartiality, when made up in part by a group which vehemently opposes said poll being called. As I said, the Irish Government do not have the ability to call this poll, so they obviously differ in significance.

It certainly didn't present good optics for the Tory party across a lot of NI, but I'm confident that I was in the majority by considering it a bit dodgy and against the spirit of the GFA without explicitly breaking it as such.

IAMAMORON

Sajid Javid has resigned as chancellor after a staffing disagreement with Boris.

Joe_ Public

Do not like sajid javid at all but modicum of respect for at least standing up to the bullies. Johnson cant come out well out of this.

PHG

Boredstiff666 wrote: »

Leroy42 wrote: »

If a ref was held, and passed, then whom exactly would complain? .........probably most protestants.

But cool your jets, its a long way off, even SF know that a border poll now would probably be lost and set them back years (they wil have seen how the Scottish are being treated). .......The scottish agreed to a referendum once in a generation.....that was the agreement......why should the English pay for their fancies? They give them billions already........let the English have a vote on that ****hole of a place (half my family scots descent before the racist stuff starts)......the English would chainsaw them free tomorrow given a chance.

MLM even talked about this in an interview with BBC, saying that any constitutional change requires time, deep thinking, understanding of the possible implications......I see....so it sunk in did it?

The Republic has really dropped itself in the ****e with this vote of Gov.

Figures suggest (and they are not greatly kept) that when you compare what Scotland receives from the UK vs what is puts in, is approx. net 0. So good job there!! England keep their submarines in Scotland, particularly the nuclear ones they own, so cannot see them chopping it off.

Now, the Scottish referendum was based on Parliament saying that they would be staying in the EU, which has now been broken so definitely a contention for round 2.

Your posts come across as quite shouty, as in, I will shout very loud and thus I am right. Maybe look more to the facts than an isolated view.

Side note, I have been to Scotland and it is a very stunning place in the right weather conditions. maybe you should book a trip to Edinburgh or the Highlands!! Actually, is there any place you don't detest?

ancapailldorcha

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Sajid Javid has resigned as chancellor after a staffing disagreement with Boris.

I'd say it's more about Cummings. The man is a control freak. Ironic that Johnson used a bus to rise to prominence and is now throwing allies under it.

030802

I gave the view of English people (ask them).

I asked my wife (English). She says you're talking ****e (again)

cryptocurrency

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I'd say it's more about Cummings. The man is a control freak. Ironic that Johnson used a bus to rise to prominence and is now throwing allies under it.

Cummings is de man

cryptocurrency

030802 wrote: »

I gave the view of English people (ask them).

I asked my wife (English). She says you're talking ****e (again)

Does she speak for all English people

https://twitter.com/ColinBrowning14/status/1227906931450425344