Brexit discussion thread XIII (Please read OP before posting)

swampgas

mrunsure wrote: »

It is very good to see a unanimous response there. So different to the UK. I suspect the UK would still be in the EU had it not been expanded to central/eastern Europe and I'm almost certain that immigration was the main reason for the Leave vote.

Perhaps. However it looks like a certain group of influential people decided to get the UK out of the EU, and they targeted every possible issue, real or trumped up, that could be propagandised against the UK electorate. If eastern Europe wasn't an issue, they could have spun it as one, or moved their focus to something else - fishing perhaps.

The movers and shakers behind Brexit have their own motivations for it, which don't necessarily reflect the issues that they have found useful to sway the general public to vote the way they wanted.

Enzokk

So, as suspected the deal deadline really seems to be the 31st December.

https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1339540937027010561?s=20

I am sure everyone would have liked it to be ratified in time but there are ways to ensure chaos is down to a minimum if a deal is agreed.

Key phrase: IF A DEAL IS AGREED!

dogbert27

Just reading about the mini-trade deal for the US & UK before Trump leaves.

It would require access to the UK market for US agricultural products.

So will GM food and chlorinated chicken be arriving soon so that politicians can claim it as a Brexit victory?!

rock22

Interesting that Tony Connelly , RTE is talking about a deal being provisionally applied while Barnier is reported by the Guardian as saying that , there would have to be a period of no deal because no one agrees with provisional application.
Quote from above link "Barnier told MEPs that given all sides were against so-called provisional application of a deal, there may need to be a few weeks where no new arrangements were in place, raising the stakes for a deal in the next 72 hours."

Sam Russell

dogbert27 wrote: »

Just reading about the mini-trade deal for the US & UK before Trump leaves.

It would require access to the UK market for US agricultural products.

So will GM food and chlorinated chicken be arriving soon so that politicians can claim it as a Brexit victory?!

I think that would sink any prospect of a deal with the EU and make ratification by the EP impossible.

Enzokk

rock22 wrote: »

Interesting that Tony Connelly , RTE is talking about a deal being provisionally applied while Barnier is reported by the Guardian as saying that , there would have to be a period of no deal because no one agrees with provisional application.
Quote from above link "Barnier told MEPs that given all sides were against so-called provisional application of a deal, there may need to be a few weeks where no new arrangements were in place, raising the stakes for a deal in the next 72 hours."

Nice catch, although both sides being against it now doesn't mean they will be against it if a deal can be agreed before the 31st December.

Dymo

Enzokk wrote: »

So, as suspected the deal deadline really seems to be the 31st December.

I don't think there was every going to be another outcome unless the UK ask for another extension and I'm sure that's what they have up there sleeve encase of a no deal on the 31st of December

Strazdas

Dymo wrote: »

I don't think there was every going to be another outcome unless the UK ask for another extension and I'm sure that's what they have up there sleeve encase of a no deal on the 31st of December

Apparently an extension is legally impossible - the UK must leave the SMCU at midnight that night.

Dymo

Strazdas wrote: »

Apparently an extension is legally impossible - the UK must leave the SMCU at midnight that night.

I know but it still would not surprise me.

ancapailldorcha

Dymo wrote: »

I know but it still would not surprise me.

I don't think you even need to look at Europe. There is no political will at the top of the Conservative party for one.

Akrasia

Enzokk wrote: »

So, as suspected the deal deadline really seems to be the 31st December.

https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1339540937027010561?s=20

I am sure everyone would have liked it to be ratified in time but there are ways to ensure chaos is down to a minimum if a deal is agreed.

Key phrase: IF A DEAL IS AGREED!

If the last minute is New years eve, then this is when they'll announce their deal, ram it though parliament with zero oversight and expect the EU to implement it the next day.

This dithering and time wasting by Johnson is just showing a complete lack of respect for business owners and employees who will now have no idea what to expect on the 1st of January, what forms will they need to fill out, do they need to implement Standard Contractual Clauses to handle data protection across the border, will they need to pay duty or customs charges on imports/exports already in transit etc

There will likely need to be a grace period where nothing changes from the transition period, but this will only happen if a deal is agreed, If Johnson still refuses to sign, then it's a monumental cliff edge in the hour before the British start singing auld lang syne

Lumen

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I don't think you even need to look at Europe. There is no political will at the top of the Conservative party for one.

+1

Even taking the most charitable view of the UK negotiating strategy, knocking over each successive soft deadline only makes sense if it serves to amp up the brinkmanship before the big, hard one. And 1 Jan is really, really hard.

ambro25

mrunsure wrote: »

It has to be said for balance that a lot of British people have no issue with immigration.

Still more British people are arguably confused about immigration.

"I voted Brexit to stop immigration, the country is full, they're stealing jobs, council houses and free-riding our NHS"

"but I'm an immigrant. I came here from the EU 10 years ago, with nothing more than a suitcase and a HiFi in my battered old car. You've known me nearly that long. I married your child, and your grandkid is half-EU"

"oh but I don't mean you, you're one of us"

Times hundreds of thousands. At the very least.

lennymc

Strazdas wrote: »

Apparently an extension is legally impossible - the UK must leave the SMCU at midnight that night.

Technically, afaik it's midnight in Belgium who are GMT/DST +1 so the real deadline is 11pm 31st December local time in UK.

An Ciarraioch

The argument had been made before Brexit that as EU structural projects were funded by net contributors, the UK would match existing schemes pound-for-pound, but Invest NI has today discovered that its 2020 budget of £100m (Brussels-funded) will be reduced in 2021 to £11m (Westminster-funded):

https://twitter.com/mandy_mcauley/status/1339464456917684225

Lemming

forgottenhills wrote: »

The quotes were from MPs who were not in the UK government at the time and their remarks didn't form the actual terms of an eventual agreement. It is dangerous to react to every random utterance of a country's politicians as if it represents the policy of its government.

Your assertion that said MPs were (or are) not in government is simply not true. Those quotes were from Tory MPs; currently sitting on the "government benches" in Westminster. That point alone shoe-horns them into qualification as "the UK government". Perhaps not cabinet members but that's another level of distinction within the term "the UK government".

So with that said and done, crazy talk coming from the Tories carries a little more weight at the moment; certainly more than compared with a message board or the twitter hordes.

listermint

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

The argument had been made before Brexit that as EU structural projects were funded by net contributors, the UK would match existing schemes pound-for-pound, but Invest NI has today discovered that its 2020 budget of £100m (Brussels-funded) will be reduced in 2021 to £11m (Westminster-funded):

https://twitter.com/mandy_mcauley/status/1339464456917684225

Not very different from giving Dover Port only 33K Sterling for brexit prepardness.

33K... It wouldnt buy you a new VW Passat Estate!

Akrasia

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

The argument had been made before Brexit that as EU structural projects were funded by net contributors, the UK would match existing schemes pound-for-pound, but Invest NI has today discovered that its 2020 budget of £100m (Brussels-funded) will be reduced in 2021 to £11m (Westminster-funded):

https://twitter.com/mandy_mcauley/status/1339464456917684225

The Unionists will have their loyalty tested by this, It was always struggle between loyalty to the Crown,and loyalty to the half crown

fly_agaric

Lemming wrote: »

Your assertion that said MPs were (or are) not in government is simply not true. Those quotes were from Tory MPs; currently sitting on the "government benches" in Westminster. That point alone shoe-horns them into qualification as "the UK government". Perhaps not cabinet members but that's another level of distinction within the term "the UK government".

So with that said and done, crazy talk coming from the Tories carries a little more weight at the moment; certainly more than compared with a message board or the twitter hordes.

Priti Patel is certainly a high-muckety muck in the UK government now (even if she wasn't when she made her comment about using disruption to supplies coming via UK "landbridge" as leverage over Ireland during the withdrawal negotiations).

Rrrrrr2

paul71 wrote: »

The central and Eastern Europeans have made Ireland an infinitely better place than it was in the 1980s, as have the largest immigrant community in Ireland, the British.

What saddens me is the failure of society in the UK to embrace those people who went there and also made the UK better and wealthier.

Yep. Wouldn’t go back to the old boring Ireland I grew up in for love nor money. Broadly migration has greatly benefited Ireland economically and very much socially

Sam Russell

Akrasia wrote: »

The Unionists will have their loyalty tested by this, It was always struggle between loyalty to the Crown,and loyalty to the half crown

The half crown wins every time.

The DUP supported TM for a bung of a billion pounds. Not sure if they got it, or where it went, but it secured their support - well until they asked for more.

Strazdas

Rrrrrr2 wrote: »

Yep. Wouldn’t go back to the old boring Ireland I grew up in for love nor money. Broadly migration has greatly benefited Ireland economically and very much socially

Ireland arguably was in need of it - virtually no net immigration for the last 100 years or more.

An Ciarraioch

Similar story in Cornwall:

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-cornwall-55279468

BorneTobyWilde

It doesn't help that when ever a step is taking towards a deal the papers do with stuff like

'' boris has backed down, left talks with his tail between his legs crying like a girl''

or same with EU

A deal is a deal because both agree to it.

BorneTobyWilde

Give and take is not losing, it's agreeing .

eire4

I have a feeling we will be seeing quite a few more stories like the ones mentioned above about Cornish funding and then the earlier one about funding for INI being slashed.

yagan

Akrasia wrote: »

The Unionists will have their loyalty tested by this, It was always struggle between loyalty to the Crown,and loyalty to the half crown

Loyalists? The same Loyalists bound to eachother by covenant in 1912 who then sent Carson to Germany to see about swapping allegiance.

Their only Loyalty is to themselves.

ancapailldorcha

yagan wrote: »

Loyalists? The same Loyalists bound to eachother by covenant in 1912 who then sent Carson to Germany to see about swapping allegiance.

Their only Loyalty is to themselves.

They're not even really loyal to themselves. If it were that, they'd have pushed for remain. They literally had their cake and ate it. All they had to do was to tolerate the GFA. They got billions in handouts, subsidies and support from London, Dublin and Brussels. They could oppose the meanest little bit of progress with no consequence. Look at the RHI scandal. I'm not too familiar with it but Foster remains in post so I doubt she even got a slap on the wrist.

I went over this before in late 2019 here:

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I mean.... Jokes aside what were they actually thinking? They had everything. Free money from Westminster so they never had to face the consequences of spending all of their time spouting ideological nonsense instead of trying to chart a course for Northern Ireland. I'm a Unionist myself but obsessing over nonsense like the Irish language act or whatever isn't leadership. Meanwhile, you have people growing up in NI today wondering why these men with sashes and bowler hats keep ranting about homosexuals and generally being rather unpleasant, to put it politely.

Northern Ireland currently holds the world record for time spent without a government, 1,000 days as I write this (Give or take a day or two, Belgium at 400-odd was the previous record holder). The British taxpayer has spent over £12 million on salaries during this time.

The simple and somewhat snide thing might be to point the finger at the Treaty of Rome and maybe lament the fact that the Europeans couldn't have moved it to Florence, Naples or perhaps, ironically, Pompeii.

Levity aside, I think that the idea of a Brussels-centric project has always irked the DUP somewhat. Farming subsidies and investment into NI meant they could never really get properly on board the Eurosceptic bandwagon until 2016. Perhaps they think that Westminster will just up the subsidies to compensate for anything lost from Brussels. Who knows but it seems unlikely that a party so devoted to such an adversarial and sectarian culture based on flag burning and rubbing a nearly 340-year old victory into the faces of Northern Ireland's nationalists was every going to worry about such materialistic things as who'll be footing the bill for NI.

I think Brexit was a chance for them to make a show of their commitment to the Union. Maybe they expected defeat in which case it would have made for a nice gesture. Now, they've managed to place themselves squarely at the forefront of the British political arena only to show that they're the party most divorced from the traditional British values of fair play, tolerance and respect.

As ever, Brexit continues to reliably produce industrial levels of irony.

As far as I can tell they're loyal to a version of England that never existed outside of Enid Blyton books and episodes of programmes depicting rural, sunlight uplands where the men are in charge, Sunday is celebrated by all as the sabbath, women know their place and "undesirable degenerates" are shamed into keeping themselves to themselves.

They've, fittingly enough, refused to evolve in any way whatsoever and now the result is that they've all but killed Unionism in Northern Ireland. I'm from a Protestant, Unionist background and for the life of me I couldn't finish a sentence beginning with "I support the Union because..."

If they'd have sided with remain, we'd still be leaving the EU but they could have used their position to guarantee farmers and other people in NI, portraying themselves as the defenders of the people of NI. They could have forged a new narrative for the Union and tried to rally people to it going forward. All they had to do was to leverage May into protecting NI with subsidies and securing EU market access (with compromises if need be) for NI. NI would have been viable going forward and its people would have been spared the consequences of Brexit and Unionism would have a reason to appeal as a result.

Instead, they sold themselves out for meaningless concessions and a grubby little backhander.

lawred2

They are loyal to doing the opposite of what they think is in the interests of others

Imreoir2

mrunsure wrote: »

Is there any concern in Ireland about increased EU immigration because of people choosing Ireland instead of the UK?

Not really, migrants from the EU are a great bunch of lads, why should we be concerned?