Brexit Impact on Northern Ireland

pixelburp wrote: »

I can't see the lyrics changing that much either if _Donaldson_ is the man to take over; with the vote split between 2 hardline options at that acrimonious leadership contest, I'm not sure how "the other guy" is going to usher in a change of rhetoric.

"Never interrupt your enemy when they're making a mistake" has never rung truer for moderate Unionism; the UUP and Alliance must be planning ahead to scoop up the disenfranchised voters that are surely looking at this flailing, regressive unit of malcontents and saying "nope!". Dunno if I've missed any NI focused polls but you'd want to think the DUP are suffering in that respect, at least?

I don't have any to hand but lucid talk and the Belfast Telegraph among others have DUP taking a hit at the point of the next election. I think that's inevitable, the question is how big is the hit and where would those votes go? My guess would be split a few ways between UUP/Alliance and TUV with Alliance and UUP each receiving a small boost.

I just love the fact both Frost and Johnson are out lamenting the NIP and nobody ever seems to ask how they ever signed such a rubbish agreement?

Surely Johnson should be resigning over such a monumental mistake.

Is it up there, in terms of misreading of a situation, with Chamberlains peace in our time?

It is too late to go for no deal. There is a deal. The UK has committed to it, and is bound by it. Walking away now does not result in no deal; it results in a violated deal, with all the attendant grief.

Tl;dr: it's like the difference between (a) not accepting the bank's mortgage offer and (b) accepting the offer, drawing down the loan and then deciding not to repay. Option (b) has consequences that wouldn't have arisen if you had taken option (a).

The promise to Poots can be delivered — if it is to be delivered at all — in one of two ways. UK actually commits to operating the NIP, including the bits of it which provide a mechanism for adjusting its operation, uses these mechanisms to agree adjustments, and then hails those adjustments as "very significant changes". Or, UK negotiates a new treaty with EU amending the WA so as to make "very significant changes" to the NIP.

I mention the second option because it's legally, theoretically, possible. Realistically, it's not possible. For this to happen EU would have to trust UK, and UK would have to offer changes to the WA which the EU would find attractive. But UK has been unstinting in its efforts to make sure the EU will not trust it, and nothing in its attitude suggests that any changes to WA that it might suggest would be designed to appeal to the EU. So this is not going to happen.

So it's back to the UK getting agreement from the EU to changes in the practical operation of the NIP, and then hailing these as "very significant". Not even Edwin Poots is stupid enough not to understand that that is what he has been "promised".

Nothing. It's an internal UK problem.

Wiki has gathered opinon poll results on the matter. The result is still a No, but in given 5-10 years the trend could be a strong Yes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Ireland#Opinion_polling

The key thing to note in those polls is that both the YES and the NO vote are falling in current trends.

The optimistic United Irelander would say that the more people are undecided, the more they can be persuaded, the pessimistic one would say that people may be looking for a third way out in a plague on both sides.

Problem is, indecision doesn't meet the conditions of the GFA. A border poll has to be likely to pass, not that there is indecision. We are a long long way from even contemplating holding a border poll.

I think you are overstating the meaning of the court case.

The court found that the SoS didn't have to explain why he wasn't holding a border poll, that still leaves the possibility of a judicial review should he decide to hold one. The court case was about trying to force him to set the criteria in advance of a decision.

And I don't disagree with any of that. Essentially, the court said that the criteria could not be set in advance. However, the court didn't give the SoS carte blanche, and still leaves open the possibility of a judicial review should the SoS unreasonably decide to hold a poll. In that case, he would be required to explain himself in court.

From the poll above 48% are supporting parties that oppose the current brexit deal, 38% support parties that explicitly support the current deal, with Alliance in the middle, do Alliance support the current arrangement? If they do that's 51% supporting the current arrangement.

Reading Susan McKay's book, Northern Protestants, on shifting ground, a couple of things stood out, one how divided Unionists are, even their church alliances between Church of Ireland, Presbyterian and free Presbyterian and independent churches, all are different levels of extremes between real bible bashing and reality of what younger people want in society.

There also seemed to be a huge divide in generations, those who had lived through the troubles and those that had not. The younger generation more concerned about abortion, gay rights etc. The older generation more bitter and "against" anything seen as a concession to the green side.

Another feature was how many community initiatives that interviewees were involved in that were funded by the EU.

So DUP transfers to TUV.

Alliance vote splits based on background to UUP and SDLP.

This line is often trotted out by those that don't want reunification. Plenty of top economists dispute it.

The DUP is like an abused dog. They keep obeying their master only to get a slap in return. You'd feel sorry for the dog if it didn't keep eating orphans.

That is logical, except that if there was such a transition then you can bet that nothing at all would be done for 14.9999 years and then demands that the EU push back on their demands to punish NI and do something.

Why did the DUP want double jobbing, what was the strategy?

Wow, that's grim. Really that blatant?

He shouldn't stand then.