Brexit discussion thread XIV (Please read OP before posting)

fly_agaric

20silkcut wrote: »

Why is there no mention of putting the protocol to a referendum. Is there a voting clause on the NIP after 5 years anyway.
Too divisive?
Would it be a De facto border poll?
Brexit was defeated in NI anyway.

I'd say UK government would expect they'd lose (given Brexit itself was defeated in NI). So they won't be suggesting that.
In fairness it would be a fairly acrimonious vote.
Not as bad as a "border poll", but it is touching on similar issues.
So that is probably why parties down here would not be quick to float the idea either.

I think the NI Assembly gets to vote on retaining the NI Protocol in 4 years.
Given how it is voted for + make-up etc it is very unlikely to vote to get rid of it.
(IMO) only way that happens is if UK changes how it is elected / rigs process or gerrymanders to favour the DUP/similar parties in some way. Would not be surprised if some in the Conservative party would consider that option in a dark corner of their minds somewhere.

Sam Russell

fly_agaric wrote: »

I'd say UK government would expect they'd lose (given Brexit itself was defeated in NI). So they won't be suggesting that.
In fairness it would be a fairly acrimonious vote.
Not as bad as a "border poll", but it is touching on similar issues.
So that is probably why parties down here would not be quick to float the idea either.

I think the NI Assembly gets to vote on retaining the NI Protocol in 4 years.
Given how it is voted for + make-up etc it is very unlikely to vote to get rid of it. Only way that happens is if UK changes how it is elected / rigs it to favour the DUP/similar parties in some way. Would not be surprised if some in the Conservative party would consider that option in a dark corner of their minds somewhere.

Changing the voting system in NI for the assembly would be like setting fire to the blue touch paper and waiting for the bang. Of course, in four years Biden might not be POTUS.

fly_agaric

Sam Russell wrote: »

Changing the voting system in NI for the assembly would be like setting fire to the blue touch paper and waiting for the bang. Of course, in four years Biden might not be POTUS.

Yeah, it would be foolish and playing with fire (even more than they've done to date), but I think we know current crowd running the UK are pretty reckless.
Not that reckless I hope though!

Sam Russell

I have always thought that allowing the NI Assembly a vote on retention of the Protocol was a very risky element in the WA. It should have required a more complex voting structure to make it more difficult to ditch it. For example ditching it would automatically call for a border poll (although that would not really work and would be better as a border poll).

54and56

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

You all want to believe Ireland will still be in the single market in 12 months time.

You all desperately want to believe that.

Despite your own denial of reality I have to say that is very unlikely.

The EU won't do what they should. That's unfortunate, it really is but no way will Ireland be in the single market this time next year.

That Politico article will be on reeling in the years in 20 years btw. Just saying.

This reminds me of the govt in 2009 - despite media forewarnings - "the IMF are not coming, don't be daft"

How about a €100 charity bet to back up your assertion? If RoI is out of the Single Market by June 12th 2022 I'll donate €100 to your favourite charity and post the payment receipt on this thread but if we're not out of the Single Market you donate €100 to https://www.lauralynn.ie and post the payment receipt to this thread?

Deal?

Sam Russell

54and56 wrote: »

How about a €100 charity bet to back up your assertion? If RoI is out of the Single Market by June 12th 2022 I'll donate €100 to your favourite charity and post the payment receipt on this thread but if we're not out of the Single Market you donate €100 to https://www.lauralynn.ie and post the payment receipt to this thread?

Deal?

Will this thread still be in existence in twelve months time? Maybe have a backup thread for the receipt.

Sam Russell

Sam Russell wrote: »

I am aware of that. They must have been the first country confused at the name they should be called as well. England, British Empire, Britannia, The UK, The United Kingdom, Great Britain, and - the list goes on. No wonder the Scots want out.

West Germany did not take long to drop the 'West'. The USSR did not take long to morph into 'the Russian Federation' and then 'Russia'.

Why have they taken so long to decide what they would like to be called?

I am convinced the lack of a unified identity is what is really behind Brexit.

Each term has a slightly different meaning based on the context in which it is being used, it's mainly people outside the UK who get confused.
But you know that already!

Another country that has problems with its name Is Nederlands.

54and56

Sam Russell wrote: »

I have always thought that allowing the NI Assembly a vote on retention of the Protocol was a very risky element in the WA. It should have required a more complex voting structure to make it more difficult to ditch it. For example ditching it would automatically call for a border poll (although that would not really work and would be better as a border poll).

The difficult piece was getting the NIP in place which was legislated for without the consent of the NI Assembly just as Brexit was legislated for without the consent of the NI Assembly.

In recognition of the importance of consent (whether window dressing or otherwise) the NI Assembly was given the right to confirm retention of the NIP every 4 years by a simple majority rather than the cross community mechanism which requires significant thresholds of both Unionists and Nationalists to approve thus effectively giving one community (Unionism is this case) the ability to veto.

A simple majority of MLA's voting to retain the NIP is a far easier thing to achieve than cross community consent.

The challenge with voting against retaining the NIP will be having an alternative solution which the EU will consent to ready to go and as long as the EU holds firm that the NIP is the only solution they will support short of a UK wide backstop the circular argument will continue and few MLA's will have an appetite for the chaos that would ensue by ditching the NIP without an agreed alternative being ready to go.

ClosedAccountFuzzy

The main thing is if a hard border goes up it needs to be referred to forevermore as "The Boris Border".

He's so fond of having things named after him, Boris Bikes, Borris Busses, Borris Burrows that it seems rather fitting that any future hard border should be named after him.

cameramonkey

54and56 wrote: »

How about a €100 charity bet to back up your assertion? If RoI is out of the Single Market by June 12th 2022 I'll donate €100 to your favourite charity and post the payment receipt on this thread but if we're not out of the Single Market you donate €100 to https://www.lauralynn.ie and post the payment receipt to this thread?

Deal?

Easy money for laura lynn.

Sam Russell

Deleted User wrote: »

Another country that has problems with its name Is Nederlands.

No, Nederlands (or Netherlands in English) is the name. Referencing Holland is not really appreciated by Dutch people - a bit gauche. A bit like referring to Southern Ireland - just ignorant.

Enzokk

Sam Russell wrote: »

I have always thought that allowing the NI Assembly a vote on retention of the Protocol was a very risky element in the WA. It should have required a more complex voting structure to make it more difficult to ditch it. For example ditching it would automatically call for a border poll (although that would not really work and would be better as a border poll).

Seeing that Unionists only occupy 39 of the 90 seats in the NI Assembly and the DUP seems to be losing support to either other more moderate Unionist partiers (is there such a thing) or to Alliance, I don't see how they will vote against the protocol as the vote for unionists is not increasing.

At the very least you could argue the vote between Unionist parties will remain stable, swapping one party for another. At worst they lose support and lose seats. There is always a chance that they will vote against it but it would take a mighty swing towards the DUP and Poots for this to happen. I just don't see people going for the creationist.

Sam Russell

Sam Russell wrote: »

No, Nederlands (or Netherlands in English) is the name. Referencing Holland is not really appreciated by Dutch people - a bit gauche. A bit like referring to Southern Ireland - just ignorant.

Thank you for proving my point, foreigners sometimes use the incorrect name for a country or region or group of countries.

Often they do it deliberately to antagonise the nationals.

L1011

Sam Russell wrote: »

No, Nederlands (or Netherlands in English) is the name. Referencing Holland is not really appreciated by Dutch people - a bit gauche. A bit like referring to Southern Ireland - just ignorant.

Except when they do it themselves, which is all the time

"hup Holland hup" football chat. Holland Herald KLM in flight magazine.

Sam Russell

Deleted User wrote: »

Thank you for proving my point, foreigners sometimes use the incorrect name for a country or region or group of countries.

Often they do it deliberately to antagonise the nationals.

L1011 wrote: »

Except when they do it themselves, which is all the time

"hup Holland hup" football chat. Holland Herald KLM in flight magazine.

What do they have on their stamps?

L1011

L1011 wrote: »

Except when they do it themselves, which is all the time

"hup Holland hup" football chat. Holland Herald KLM in flight magazine.

Yeah, Holland is the region to the west where most of the population of Nederland lives.

Sam Russell

Sam Russell wrote: »

What do they have on their stamps?

Nederland

Podge_irl

Sam Russell wrote: »

I have always thought that allowing the NI Assembly a vote on retention of the Protocol was a very risky element in the WA. It should have required a more complex voting structure to make it more difficult to ditch it. For example ditching it would automatically call for a border poll (although that would not really work and would be better as a border poll).

Considering a large part of the problem with Brexit is that NI was brought out of the EU against their wishes, I'm not entirely sure a NIP that removes all agency from them also is much better.

54and56

cameramonkey wrote: »

Easy money for laura lynn.

Only if @Kermit.de.frog has confidence in his assertion and is prepared to demonstrate that by taking the bet.

eire4

Sam Russell wrote: »

No, Nederlands (or Netherlands in English) is the name. Referencing Holland is not really appreciated by Dutch people - a bit gauche. A bit like referring to Southern Ireland - just ignorant.

Well no question the name of their country is Netherlands period. Holland is in fact just the name of 2 areas within the country of the Netherlands. No idea why anybody would say Holland other then ignorance.

paul71

54and56 wrote: »

How about a €100 charity bet to back up your assertion? If RoI is out of the Single Market by June 12th 2022 I'll donate €100 to your favourite charity and post the payment receipt on this thread but if we're not out of the Single Market you donate €100 to https://www.lauralynn.ie and post the payment receipt to this thread?

Deal?

I will make the same offer.

Padre_Pio

paul71 wrote: »

I will make the same offer.

Throw my name in the hat too.

eire4

Padre_Pio wrote: »

Throw my name in the hat too.

I'll join in the fun too put my name down.

54and56

C'mon @Kermit.de.frog, you've a chance to earn €400 for your favourite charity.

If you really believe RoI will be out of the Single Market in 12 months why not take the bet?

Is it possible you're just fishing for pike?

BonnieSituation

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

If a border goes up on this island we are heading back to civil war in the north. Not only that but you are opening up a whole new fault line in politics here by effectively saying that those who are pro EU would enhance partition of this country in order to be governed by Brussels.

Things could get nasty here.

There are only realistic options to avoid conflict. Either the EU makes the UK live up to the agreement it has signed or Ireland leaves the SM.

No Irish govt will be choosing a border.

What I would suggest is shifting your focus to Brussels and ask why meaningful action has yet to be taken.

And just for any avoidance of doubt I want a more distant relationship with the EU as long as the EU continues eroding sovereignty but I certainly don't want such decisions forced on Irish people at the behest of the British either.

I'd much prefer the EU took the resolute action it keeps paying lip service to.

If this was Germany or France or some other mid sized country in the core of the continent we would not be having this discussions. Measures would already be in place.

I'm about to read on, and probably discover that my point has been made, but 5 years of this monstrous paranoia has gone no where.

Nothing here will come to pass as you've stated. Nothing.

---

And, as oft as been repeated, "WE ARE THE EU!"

BonnieSituation

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Apparently an article by Allister Heath in today's Telegraph is setting the scene that the EU literally bullied the UK into signing the agreement.
It really is pathetic at this stage but I take it for granted that this hoodwinking of the British public will continue as it has for the last number of years.
The article is behind a paywall but the images from the tweet are below.

https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1402894867504799745

It's a wonder that Peter Foster ever lasted any length at the Telegraph when you read such a monstrous load of práisce.

---

"...handing over Britain's sovereignty in Northern Ireland..."

Quite.

BonnieSituation

liamog wrote: »

The 1977 European Law that forced us to stop discriminating on the grounds of sex and marital status?

Remember that time we lost the "sovereignty" to discriminate against homosexuals.

The big bold EC at it again.

BonnieSituation

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Hold my coat...

This is also from today's Telegraph. It's an opinion piece written by Nile Gardiner, Director of the Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom - part of the Heritage Foundation in Washington.

To put it very mildly, Mr Gardiner seems quite unimpressed by President Biden. Interestingly, it turns out that Biden is an Irish Nationalist and an IRA supporter.


Headline:
Joe Biden should keep his sneering anti-British, anti-Brexit views to himself

Article:
The revelation that the Biden administration issued a “demarche” or diplomatic dressing down to the British government last week over its handling of the Northern Ireland border should cause outrage in Britain. This is the kind of treatment that is normally dished out to enemies of the United States, such as Russia, and hardly ever issued against a close ally.
As both The Telegraph and The Times have reported, Biden’s most senior diplomat in London delivered a firm rebuke on June 3 on behalf of the president to Brexit minister Lord Frost declaring that Britain’s stance on the Northern Ireland Protocol was jeopardising the future of the Northern Ireland peace process. To make matters even worse, Yael Lempert, Washington’s chargé d'affaires in London, issued a thinly veiled warning, linking the prospect of a US/UK free trade deal with White House demands for the UK to follow the European Union’s directives on agricultural standards.

In many respects, this is Joe Biden's "back of the queue" moment. Barack Obama's now infamous anti-Brexit intervention didn't go down well back in 2016, and threats like this will always backfire with the British people, who don't appreciate being lectured to by US presidents, not least one who displays his anti-British sentiments on his sleeve.

Unlike Obama, however, who was encouraged to intervene ahead of the Brexit referendum by then Prime Minister David Cameron, Biden didn’t act at the prodding of Downing Street. Biden’s Northern Ireland warning was a political cruise missile strike aimed directly at Boris Johnson and his Conservative government, with the intention of forcing a change in British policy. As a staunch Irish nationalist, Biden has frequently been critical of Great Britain over Northern Ireland, and now that he is president sees an opportunity to take it to task.

There is no love lost between Biden’s team, many of whom served in the Obama administration, and Boris Johnson. Some of Biden’s extremely sensitive aides are still unhappy with the former Mayor of London for his sharp criticism of Barack Obama over the removal of the Winston Churchill bust from the Oval Office back in 2009. They also intensely dislike Brexit and Johnson’s formerly close partnership with the Trump presidency. In addition, they have been angered by the strong stance of the British government in the culture wars, with its firm rejection of the kind of “woke” liberal agenda that is now central to the thinking of the Biden operation. Indeed, on many issues, the US and British governments are worlds apart, and Johnson has been forced to work with the most Left-wing US presidency in American history.

The arrogance of the Biden administration ahead of the G7 meeting in Cornwall has been nothing short of breathtaking. This is no way to treat America's closest friend and ally. The British people didn't vote for Joe Biden and the Democrats. They voted for Brexit and Boris Johnson's Conservatives. They voted to leave the EU and take back control of Britain's destiny. They don't need to be lectured by a US president who as a senator adopted a sympathetic stance towards the Irish Republican Army, and opposed the extradition of Irish terror suspects to face trial in the United Kingdom.

Biden’s predecessor, Donald Trump, was outspoken in his criticism of then prime minister Theresa May for what he saw as her weak handling of the Brexit negotiations. But he never made threats against Britain and always championed a free trade deal with the United Kingdom. Trump respected the democratic will of the British people to leave the European Union, and his instincts were profoundly pro-British and extremely supportive of the Special Relationship. Trump loathed the EU, and believed that the British people would be far better off completely freed of the shackles of the European Union.

Biden takes a very different approach to Trump when it comes to Europe and Brexit. He is a Eurofederalist at heart, who as vice president under Obama remarked in a speech before the European Parliament in 2010 that Brussels had a legitimate claim to be the “capital of the free world”. Biden has paid lip service in the past to the importance of the partnership with Britain, but he views the transatlantic alliance largely through the lens of the US/EU relationship, attaching great value to the Paris-Berlin-Brussels axis that has ruled continental Europe for the last few decades.

There should be a furious response in London to the Biden administration’s demands of the British government. President Biden needs to mind his own business. It is not his place to lecture the British Prime Minister and British officials about Northern Ireland and Brexit. Joe Biden should keep his sneering anti-British and anti-Brexit views to himself. At the G7 this week, Boris Johnson must stand up to Biden, and remind him that he, and not the US president, represents the democratic will of the British people.

Have you ever listened to the rant of a dumped boyfriend?

That's it, that's it right there.

---

Tbh, I would have been more shocked at Obama, the black son of a Kenyan father, keeping Churchill's bust up.

I can only imagine how's such thin-skinned Britons would react on uttering Cromwell's name on this island.

BonnieSituation

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Those joint statements are very carefully considered and worded with a tooth comb after summit meetings. The fact it explicitly says unencumbered trade between Northern Ireland, GB and ROI (note: not the EU) leads me to believe the Celtic Sea border is on the table despite the panicked denials of the Politico story.

Interesting times ahead?

No.

BonnieSituation

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

You all want to believe Ireland will still be in the single market in 12 months time.

You all desperately want to believe that.

Despite your own denial of reality I have to say that is very unlikely.

The EU won't do what they should. That's unfortunate, it really is but no way will Ireland be in the single market this time next year.

That Politico article will be on reeling in the years in 20 years btw. Just saying.

This reminds me of the govt in 2009 - despite media forewarnings - "the IMF are not coming, don't be daft"

We are the EU