Brexit discussion thread XIV (Please read OP before posting)

BonnieSituation

Sam Russell wrote: »

I was always disappointed that the GFA did not define all the terms to be used, including the name of the agreement itself.

I am always annoyed by English British people referring to Southern Ireland, or Unionists referring to 'the Free State' or 'Ulster' or 'the six counties'.

Could they not have a section defining the words to be used when describing all the entities involved in 'the troubles'. Ireland nor Eire and not Southern Ireland. Northern Ireland not Ulster and not the Six Counties.

Plus all the other useful but mis-used mis-names. The Dublin Government is a good example.

If only.

They all have value.

Assigning proscribed names would be tantamount to defeat for some.

The agreement would never have gotten over the line if it meant that certain identifiers were off limits.

The last decade has seen a thorough embracing of "Northern Ireland" as a geographic identifier by the official "Republic" much to the chagrin of some citizens of "Mexico". You even had Shatter's ministry spelling Derry with an "L". You'd never see him spelling Israel with a "p" sure...

I have had such trouble rolling that second "n" into the 'i' of Ireland, that it made my employment at the water authority of the "Six Counties" rather difficult to explain to some folk.

"The North" will do just fine, thank you very much.

BonnieSituation

pixelburp wrote: »

Are there still Unionists who refer to the Republic as the "Free State"? I could just about see the rationale in doing so back during the Troubles, when those who lived during Partition were still alive, but nowadays? That seems petty, even for hardline Unionism. Unless used intentionally as a derogatory term, and there's no accounting for vulgarity anyway.

(apologies for the segue)

Most references to the "Free State" and "Mexico" have in my time come from Nationalist friends as it happens. Unionists in my time have been full of "down South" or "in the Republic", that's about it.

BonnieSituation

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The UK was the first country in the world to issue postage stamps, they didn't need to add the country name as at the time they were the only ones in the world, when other countries adopted them there was a need to add their country names to distinguish them from the UK stamps.

Prime example of their constant exceptionalism. The FA have a similar affectation.

schmoo2k

FuzzyThinking wrote: »

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.

I approve - could also call the current Irish Sea border "Boris Border 1"

rock22

eire4 wrote: »

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.

The Dutch ( another name) Government official website for tourism is called Holland.com

Back to the UK. their official tourist site for the whole of the UK is VisitBritain.com

SO even governments don't use naming consistently

fash

.
This Twitter account does get quite a few scoops - let's see if this turns out to be true.

Igotadose

fash wrote: »

.
This Twitter account does get quite a few scoops - let's see if this turns out to be true.

Mr. "Where's France" Raab yapped to the press during the G7 about this, said the EU is being 'bloody minded.'

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/dominic-raab-northern-ireland-g7-b1864608.html

fash

Igotadose wrote: »

Mr. "Where's France" Raab yapped to the press during the G7 about this, said the EU is being 'bloody minded.'

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/dominic-raab-northern-ireland-g7-b1864608.html

What I'd love to see is the US and EU targeting tariffs on e.g. Scotch that increase the momentum for an independent Scotland: i.e. "why are we Scots adorable collateral in an insane war by English Tories on the US and EU".

Nody

fash wrote: »

This Twitter account does get quite a few scoops - let's see if this turns out to be true.

I doubt it; as lazy and shallow Boris is and claims he will withdraw at any time I highly doubt that's a fight he wants to take in reality. To much work and negative impact without a positive; esp. with covid closure now extended and he knows his touted American FTA which would be the pinnacle of "Brexit is great" would fly out the window.

Leroy42

Nody wrote: »

I doubt it; as lazy and shallow Boris is and claims he will withdraw at any time I highly doubt that's a fight he wants to take in reality. To much work and negative impact without a positive; esp. with covid closure now extended and he knows his touted American FTA which would be the pinnacle of "Brexit is great" would fly out the window.

Fight with who? He won't get any fight in the UK, in fact he will cheered and applauded.

Its actually more work for him to stick with the deal. Its easy to just to walk away and let others deal with the fallout.

He will simply say its up to the EU to build a border and the UK will continue on as if everything is the same.

Nody

Leroy42 wrote: »

Fight with who? He won't get any fight in the UK, in fact he will cheered and applauded.

Its actually more work for him to stick with the deal. Its easy to just to walk away and let others deal with the fallout.

He will simply say its up to the EU to build a border and the UK will continue on as if everything is the same.

Except he'll lose his FTA with Europe and that means a lot of pissed businesses. On top of that he loses his chance for a FTA with USA which is the pinnacle of Brexit wins. Hence while walking away may look easy on paper the losses he gets for no real gain and the additional work to make up for it (job losses, no headline FTA with USA etc.). If there was an election called for 3 months from now it would be worth it possibly; but an election in 3 years is a whole different kettle of fish for him.

Remember Boris is route of least resistance and work but at the end of the day if companies keep having to shut down because they lost the FTA with Europe that will mean more moaning and pain for him that he has to resolve. He can't say "Don't worry; we'll get a FTA with USA instead" because Biden says no. China is as well out of the picture and joining the TPP is at least years away. Hence while he'd love nothing more than to walk away he simply has nothing to replace the FTA with Europe with as "proof Brexit is great".

Professor Moriarty

Leroy42 wrote: »

Fight with who? He won't get any fight in the UK, in fact he will cheered and applauded.

Its actually more work for him to stick with the deal. Its easy to just to walk away and let others deal with the fallout.

He will simply say its up to the EU to build a border and the UK will continue on as if everything is the same.

If he walks away from his oven-ready deal, the EU will seriously damage his economy. Macron is champing at the bit.

I'm guessing the EU would give a window of six months or a year where they take punitive action before the Ireland question would actually have to be dealt with?

Sam Russell

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm guessing the EU would give a window of six months or a year where they take punitive action before the Ireland question would actually have to be dealt with?

They have brought legal action against the UK in the CJEU already, and if it looks like the UK are widening the WA default, the CJEU have shown in the past that they can act with some speed, particularly when it is important that they do. For example, they decided that the UK could rescind the Art 50 if they chose.

I cannot see the UK ditching the WA just for NI - more likely they will ditch NI in favour of the WA.

CelticRambler

Nody wrote: »

Except he'll lose his FTA with Europe and that means a lot of pissed businesses.

This!

Leroy42 wrote: »

Fight with who? He won't get any fight in the UK, in fact he will cheered and applauded.

Under WTO rules, sanctions are supposed to be "targetted and appropriate". Well let's see? The problem is Britain's refusal to enforce veterinary checks on its exported foodstuffs (to NI, but that's a small detail)
-> so (let say) sanctions are applied to all UK-to-SingleMarket products requiring veterinary certification
-> that Cornish shellfisherwoman, the Cheddar cheese man, the Scottish sheep farmers lose what limited access to the EU markets they've only just begun to recover (can't distribute from an EU re-packaging depot if you can't get the product to the depot => big cashflow problems with leases and employment contracts governed by anything-but-English law)
-> one heck of a lot of British businesses pushed to the edge of bankruptcy because Johnson wants to send sausages to a bunch of disgruntled Paddies. They won't be cheering or applauding.

That Johnson, Raab and Frost would even consider picking this kind of a fight with the EU shows how incredibly incompetent they are in the matter of diplomacy and international relations. It makes a mockery of their "global Britain" ambitions.

storker

Leroy42 wrote: »

Fight with who? He won't get any fight in the UK, in fact he will cheered and applauded.

Its actually more work for him to stick with the deal. Its easy to just to walk away and let others deal with the fallout.

And the the Brexit faithful will cheer him to the rafters for sticking it to Johnny Foreigner. Any resultant economic fallout will, of course, be spun (and swallowed) as being the fault of...take a wild guess.

Akrasia

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'm guessing the EU would give a window of six months or a year where they take punitive action before the Ireland question would actually have to be dealt with?

The EU would not wait a year if the UK unilaterally end the agreement. They would impose WTO tariffs immediately and there would probably be an Irish land border within weeks

CelticRambler

We're a long, long way from the EU imposing a hard border between NI and the RoI. The first step for the EU would be simply to declare all products of a certain category subject to stringent controls and/or tariffs, with heavy penalties for anyone caught importing them into the Single Market.

Nothing is going to get across the English Channel without being subject to trade-crushing scrutiny, which will force British companies out of their traditional markets with no time (or cash) available to develop alternatives.

On the island of Ireland, imports coming through the Republic's ports will be controlled (and blocked, if necessary) in the same way as those heading to Dover, Santander or Rotterdam. That only leaves the Scotland-NI route as a weak point, and no reputable trader in the Republic is going to take the risk of being fined and put out of business because of English idiocy.

There would, inevitably, be serious disruption to some of Ireland's domestic trade, e.g. milk crossing the border - but the effect on producers and traders in NI, and their ability to create alternative supply lines, will be considerably greater than for anyone in the Republic. Sure, there will be chancers who'll engage in a bit of smuggling, but you're not going to see any of the big players gamble with their whole product line being blacklisted in solidarity with NI criminals.

As has been pointed out several times over, the NIP would work perfectly well if Johnson & Co. agreed to non-regression on SPS rules. That's all. Everything else about the Protocol is (more or less) running smoothly, so there'll be no need for a hard border when there are other, more effective and practical ways of controlling the imports concerned.

ancapailldorcha

storker wrote: »

And the the Brexit faithful will cheer him to the rafters for sticking it to Johnny Foreigner. Any resultant economic fallout will, of course, be spun (and swallowed) as being the fault of...take a wild guess.

I'm not so sure.

It's a pretty bad look for the guy who won a huge majority based on getting Brexit done to have to revisit the thing. Covid is only going to distract the public for so long now that vaccination is well underway.

Johnson is not Trump. He does not command a cultlike following and the people of this country aren't Brexit fanatics. It was voted for half a decade ago and finally dealt with for the most part, I think the constant posturing from the government is wildly out of step with what people actually want which is governance. The pompous preening is only really amusing a fairly low number of people relative to the citizens and residents of the country who just want things to move forward.

People here have been insulated from Brexit by the response to covid. As this clears up, it's going to be harder and harder for Johnson to pin any tangible effects of Brexit on the EU since Brexit was supposed to be done.

Strazdas

I saw an interesting observation on Twitter that the Tories plus right wing press 'divide and rule' tactics / culture wars are working domestically but are having the unfortunate effect of unifying everyone outside Brexit UK against them.

They really haven't thought this out. They assume they can stay in power by having a bitterly divided English nation, but don't seem aware they don't have enough clout on the international stage to be a 'successful' pariah state under Johnson - Trump's US was far more powerful and people had no choice but to do business with him.

It seems by the way that Johnson is spoiling for a fight over the Protocol - has given an interview with Beth Rigby of Sky News and doesn't rule out the threat of invoking Article 16.

storker

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

People here have been insulated from Brexit by the response to covid. As this clears up, it's going to be harder and harder for Johnson to pin any tangible effects of Brexit on the EU since Brexit was supposed to be done.

I hope you're right, but I suspect that you're crediting Brexit supporters with far more intelligence than they've displayed to date.

ancapailldorcha

storker wrote: »

I hope you're right, but I suspect that you're crediting Brexit supporters with far more intelligence than they've displayed to date.

There's a whole spectrum of people there though and they're by no means solely on the right. When you take the 17.4 million number and subtract those on the left, people who were cautious about Brexit, moderate and small "c" conservatives, etc then you end up with probably millions but this is a country of almost 65 million people and the 17.4 million figure represents just over a quarter of that.

The fact that there was no revolt over Brexit works the other way as well. People aren't going to follow Johnson on his Palanquin into penury. If the Conservatives are unable to mitigate the effects of Brexit and people start feeling them as a result while the EU is approaching normality then I think they're in serious trouble. No amount of snarky comments from the tabloids are going to save them in that scenario.

fash

storker wrote: »

And the the Brexit faithful will cheer him to the rafters for sticking it to Johnny Foreigner. Any resultant economic fallout will, of course, be spun (and swallowed) as being the fault of...take a wild guess.

Personally, I'd "not-intentionally-but-actually-intentionally" target Scotland - whisky tariffs and whatever is. Add fuel to the fire of UK breaking up (i.e. why are we Scots the acceptable collateral damage for the Tories war on sanity - we need independence now"

Strazdas

Here's a transcript of the Beth Rigby interview. It's anyone's guess what Johnson is up to talking like this in the middle of a summit :

https://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/1403699999674966022

ClosedAccountFuzzy

You have to remember Boris tells audiences what they want to hear and then does something totally different.

He’s fundamentally untrustworthy, and that’s setting the tone of the UK government.

They agree to things with the full intention of wriggling out of the agreement.

I suspect they’ll really cause friction serious with Biden, mostly because the core of the Democratic Party see him as a British facsimile of Trump.

If he thinks he’s going to back the fringes of the GOP against the incumbent President for example, he’s in for a very rude awakening.

This next few weeks could turn very odd.

The U.K.- US relationships has to be about more than just cosplaying as Churchill and rhetoric. If there’s no meaningful trust, it’ll become very transactional and very quickly. The U.K. has notions about special relationships that seem very irrelevant on the other side of the Atlantic, and the usefulness of the U.K. in Europe has now been hugely diminished by Brexit, which is necessitating a very deliberate warming of US relations with other continental NATO members, notably seen in how the US is being much more diplomatically friendly towards France.

The U.K. could do a lot of damage to core relationships with the US and EU simply by behaving in a manipulative and deceptive way. It’s undermining trust and damaging its own reputation.

Strazdas

FuzzyThinking wrote: »

You have to remember Boris tells audiences what they want to hear and then does something totally different.

He’s fundamentally untrustworthy, and that’s setting the tone of the UK government.

They agree to things with the full intention of wriggling out of the agreement.

I suspect they’ll really cause friction serious with Biden, mostly because the core of the Democratic Party see him as a British facsimile of Trump.

If he thinks he’s going to back the fringes of the GOP against the incumbent President for example, he’s in for a very rude awakening.

This next few weeks could turn very odd.

The rhetoric about U.K.- US relationships has to be about more than just cosplaying as Churchill.

It's very strange. You could understand Johnson playing the international statesman during the summit but then pulling some Brexity stunt in a few days' time (to please the base). But to give a hardline interview to Sky News bang in the middle of the summit is eyebrow raising stuff.

ClosedAccountFuzzy

It is strange, but that’s how he operates - different audience, different day, different story.

The sad part is that large chunk of the U.K. media and commentary continues to lap it up and seem to be utterly beguiled by his roguish, caricature of an ageing public public school boy charm, the posh accent, the meaningless Latin quotations, the complex love love, the bumbling persona and his carefully disheveled suits and tussled hair. He’s like a cartoon character and they all buy into it.

They all happily talk about Boris Bikes, Boris Busses and are entertained by his waffling and making cups of tea for journalists who ask hard questions.

Christy42

Strazdas wrote: »

It's very strange. You could understand Johnson playing the international statesman during the summit but then pulling some Brexity stunt in a few days' time (to please the base). But to give a hardline interview to Sky News bang in the middle of the summit is eyebrow raising stuff.

He is at least playing the part better than Trump who wouldn't dare say a word until he was on the plane on the way home.

I think he is a far more dangerous version of Trump because he does have some intelligence (in terms of speaking, writing, acting not actual policy) and a lot of the bluster is an act to hide what he is actually trying to do.

I am curious about what his long game is. He may simply be trying to drag it out as long as possible. People want Brexit done but won't blame him. As long as Brexit keeps on going he can siphon off as much public cash to his friends as he wants and no one will try and touch him. Once it is no longer in the headlines people will start looking for results from their government again.

CelticRambler

Who are these "friends" in Europe that he keeps referring to? Is he talking about Orban and the like? Because he's not acting very friendly towards any of the moderate nations ... :rolleyes:

Rather amusing, too, that he says these "friends"

seem to misunderstand that the UK is a single country and a single territory

Ehhh, perhaps Mr. Johnson, you should have another look at your atlas and your government documents. There's a whole watery divide between the two countries that figure in the official name of the Kingdom, so it's neither a single country nor a single territory. The misunderstanding seems to be closer to home ... :rolleyes:

ClosedAccountFuzzy

He’s also surrounded by a whole group of ministers of similar mentality. It’s a government that got into office though spin and there’s little or no meaningful opposition and in the current configurations of Westminster he’s facing almost no checks and balances at all.

Trump at least regularly ended up being legally challenged, didn’t always have his way in the house and senate many state governors and governments were hugely opposed to him. He was even impeached, although not removed and there was a massive and irreconcilable public divide in society about him. He split the country, split the media and commentary and opened up all the cracks and fissures, to the point it boiled over into riots on the left and an armed siege of the legislature by the right.

That’s never, ever going to happen in the current U.K. and public opinion seems to be far less critical and have largely united behind Brexit and are buying the spin of plucky Little Britain against the big bad world. They are excellent at public relations and know exactly how to keep in power by nudging and playing loudly English nationalism and psychology around national pride.

I think the U.K. is going to probably be woken up by Scotland voting to leave, or perhaps by a slow grind of economic decline in rust belt regions that will eventually snap out of it. That’s been the history too. You get a number of terms of Tory rule. It starts out looking progressive, then it just becomes harder and harder on undermining social supports and it all ends in tears like the Poll Tax Riots etc.

If you look back at England though the 20th century it’s far from the bastion of calm stability that it tends to present. There were repeated periods of very serious social unrest and it’s usually driven by policies flipping far too far to the extremes of their political system due to the uncompromising, bipolar nature of how it works.

I’m almost more amazed that the wheels have remained on for this length of time. The pandemic no doubt has also hidden a lot of economic impacts of Brexit and of Tory domestic socioeconomic policy. There’s a lot yet to start becoming more visible as the dust settles.