Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Brexit discussion thread XIV (Please read OP before posting)

Options
1549551553554555

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 26,511 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    I'm not saying that all the British MPs who voted against the protocol did so because it was insufficiently hard. On the contrary, many of them voted against it because as far as they were concerned it was already excessively hard. All I'm saying is that very few of them voted against it because, and only because, the DUP opposed it, and would otherwise have voted for it. Those British MPs who cited the DUP's views in support of their own "no" vote (and that is only a few of them) would, in my opinion, have voted "no" regardless of the DUP's position. And you've not really offered me any reason to think otherwise. Can you name even one British MP whose statements about Brexit suggests that, but for the DUP's opposition to it, he would have supported May's deal?



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,444 ✭✭✭Gerry T


    Is it more the case that the DUP took a position that the conservatives, like the ERG found it sympathetic and supported their position of "anything EU=Bad". They also found this support came free of charge, without any payback. They (ERG) must have been laughing at them, knowing that any day soon they might shaft the DUP, if their positions didn't align, which is exactly what happened. But it did take a visit from Bojo the clown promising there would be no border checks to the mainland...as the British govt were in the background preparing for such.

    The DUP like a broken clock see their orbit close to the mother ship and get all excited with the attention, amazing that the DUP can't see its only a fleeting moment in time, that they're been used. If they could focus on all their own peoples needs in NI, they could become a very powerful party.

    Post edited by Gerry T on


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,191 ✭✭✭MBSnr


    ^^^

    I'd agree with the above and I think Pete has some valid points. To say that the DUP didn't give some cover to allow the ERG another stick with which to bash any EU withdraw agreement would be incorrect. Don't forget that Nigel Dodds, if not a full ERG member, has been reported as being in the senior ERG circle.

    However, to counter, the other members of the ERG didn't give a flying F about NI to achieve their Brexit vision (as it has been shown). The DUP were merely convenient for the ERG. It gave them them a prefect 'Protect the Union against the Backstop/Irish sea border' drum to bang.

    So as said, the ERG would still have opposed the proposed solutions given at the time regardless, it's just that the DUP stance perhaps gave them more legitimacy (in their eyes anyhow) and when pressed by any reporters, it was an easy mantra to repeat. Protect the Union or whatever the slogan was at the time .



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭peter kern


    nobody suggested that the uk had any say in this ,so i guess it makes no sense to point that out that anybody suggests that the uk had a say in this.

    but it seems that france seemed to think that an extension could open the brexit deal . and was maybe more focused on the uk than china .

    https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/france-reluctant-delay-brexit-tariffs-uk-eu-electric-cars-sources-2023-10-02/

    it was not so much that there was a different solution germany and france had in mind , it was more that france said there should be no solution and contract means contract, while the rest of the eu looked more at the bigger picture.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,871 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    Exactly, rational thinking was removed from the conversation, the bitter EU was trying to trap NI and the Union had to be protected. It didn't matter that the form of Brexit the UK was choosing to pursue was what was creating the need for a separate solution for NI. Part of the UK government at the time was claiming that the EU was trying to cut them off from the rest of Britain, they simply had to resist and logic went out the window.

    It was like the Falklands, most didn't care about it or even know of it's existence but once it was threatened, protecting it became the most important thing. In both cases, what was previously irrelevant suddenly became very relevant as a way to drum up additional support for something which otherwise had limited support (Thatcher's government in the case of the Falklands, hard Brexit in the case of NI).

    And again, the Tories couldn't even form a government after May's disastrous snap election. The DUP literally put and kept them in power as the Brexit farce unfolded across two and a half years!



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 26,511 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    Let's think this through.

    1. There's no doubt that hard Brexiters did pretend that any concern expressed about a hard border in Ireland was simply a perfidious EU plot to stymie Brexit/a perfidious Irish plot to use Brexit to weaken the Precious Union.
    2. It's also true that the DUP joined in this pretence.
    3. And, therefore, hard Brexiters could point to the position of the DUP in support of their claims.
    4. But . . .
    5. The hard Brexiters could (and no doubt would) have advanced their claims regardless of the position of the DUP.
    6. I'm sceptical that DUP support did much to give the hard Brexiter position greater credibility with the public in Great Britain. Few people in Great Britain pay much attention to, or attach much credence to, the position of the DUP on any subject. DUP support is not a factor likely to influence public opinion in Great Britain on any matter to any significant degree.
    7. In any case, the hard Brexiters didn't really have a strategy of building public support for their vision of Brexit. Their strategy was to win the referendum with vague promises, and then to push hard Brexit through Parliament, relying on the division and confusion of their enemies and the British tradition that the dominant faction in the less unpopular of the two major parties can pretty much do what it wants, regardless of public opinion.
    8. Thus, they never made any attempt to build a wide consensus in favour of hard Brexit. We all remember how hard Brexiters reacted when there was a push for a second referendum on the nature or terms of Brexit; there was collective pant-shîtting on such a scale that the smell still lingers. They were perfectly aware that hard Brexit did not, and would never, enjoy majority public support, and their strategy for achieving it did not rely on appealing to or influencing majority opinion at all.
    9. What they sought to do was to influence other MPs, and in particular other Tory MPs. And by "influence" I mean either win them around to the hard Brexiter point of view, or overbear them so they were unable effectively to oppose the hard Brexiter point of view. Either would do.
    10. So, did DUP support to much to strengthen the position of hard Brexiters within the Tory party, or within Parliament?
    11. I'm very sceptical. Why would it?
    12. The only people in British politics who even pretend to take the DUP seriously are the looney right of the Tory party, for which the DUP is pathetically grateful. This abject dependence is part of the reason why the hard Brexiters had little difficulty in getting the DUP to betray the wishes, interests and welfare of NI and to jeopardise the security of the Union by supporting hard Brexit.
    13. But, as most people always knew and as everybody knows now, pathetic gratitude and abject dependence is very much a one-way thing. The looney right had no compunction about shafting the DUP when it suited them.
    14. Which brings me to my point; given how little regard the right of the Tory party has for the DUP, why would we imagine the positions adopted by the DUP on any question would carry much weight or influence with MPs on the Tory right?
    15. And nobody seriously imagines that moderate, centrist or progressive MPs of any party are susceptible to the influence of the DUP or the positions it adopts.
    16. Therefore, I am deeply sceptical that the positioning of the SUP was at all instrumental in delivering the form of Brexit that the UK got.

    None of this is to absolve the DUP. I don't think they can be blamed for delivering hard Brexit, or for delivering the Protocol. That would have happened anyway. But they have done considerable damage to the union, and to the cause of unionism. If the DUP, the dominant unionist party, won't — even now! — prioritise the wishes, interests and welfare of NI and stand by the union, they lose all credibility when they call on others to do so. They should have insisted all along that the hardness of Brexit was secondary to, and subordinate to, the place of NI in the Union. That's not a battle that, in my view, they could have won, but it was a battle they had to fight if they were to retain any self-respect, or to present unionism as an ideology with any confidence in its own worth. I think their failure to do that has done real, long-term damage to the unionist cause.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,624 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    I think you are not considering one of the key instances of the Brexit negotiations. TM had agreed on a withdrawal deal with the EU, It was only a phone call from the DUP that stopped her in her tracks and then suddenly everyone was against it. While the DUP didn't have the final say, they provided the cover of protecting the union to ensure that all other arguments could be dismissed as the person not caring about the union. Had the DUP accepted that deal, then the fall-out, Davis and Johnson both coming out against it (only after the DUP had) would possibly never happened. Whether they were always against it and using the DUP as a patsy or not is not really important. Without the DUP I don't think they had the support to go against the government (of which they were members).

    You then had the likes of JRM and Mark Francois coming out on every interview saying that this deal was unacceptable due to the damage to the union, and never having to actually speak about the alternatives or why Brexit had even brought them to such a place.

    So the DUP went from irrelevant to being the entire centre of the Brexit debate. The ERG didn't need the majority to side with hem, they only needed the media to portray this as a significant issue, such that MPs were effectively cowed into accepting the push for hard Brexit. Everyone knew the costs associated with a hard brexit, but the refrain was the it was worth it, sovereignty (and NI was the poster boy of that) was worth any price.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,191 ✭✭✭MBSnr


    ^^^ Exactly this.

    It's irrelevant that the general GB public had no idea who the DUP were. I'm also not arguing that it dramatically changed existing Tory MPs views or the general public opinions. But that intervention stopping May's deal then let any proposed NI sea border define the Brexiteers narrative going forward. It allowed those opposing, the Twitter online British flag anti EU brigade and the forum Leaver regulars, another strap line for their Twitter handle and more ammunition for their stance.

    If you were for May's existing agreement then you were against the 'Union' and of course a 'traitor' who was happy to accept the break up of the UK.

    Obviously the ERG didn't believe their pretend convictions as they voted for the NIP subsequently but prior to that it suited them to use NI as the reason not to accept any deal with the EU and push for a hard(er) Brexit.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,726 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    It doesn't matter what Theresa May agreed with the EU when there was no majority for it in the House. Remember the indicative votes? Nobody wanted a defined Brexit beyond avoiding a no deal. There's no way Francois, Rees-Mogg and co would have voted for her deal had the DUP stayed silent. They gave cover but it was cover they were always going to have in some insipid form or another.

    It's true to say that the DUP accepting the deal would have given May the hair's breath majority to push it through, they were too stupid and venal to do even that.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,191 ✭✭✭MBSnr


    Are you sure it would not have passed with DUP support? She was reportedly only 20 votes from passing her deal with the DUP onboard. I'd imagine she might have got it over the line by a vote or two, considering many probably thought as Mike Penning disclosed.

    The Conservative MP Sir Mike Penning said the decision to vote against May was a body blow to May.

    “That’s really disappointing, because a lot of colleagues were looking to follow the DUP through the lobbies if they were happy with the backstop,” he told Sky News.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,726 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    I don't remember each vote's results so probably not given the size of the ERG. The ERG were after a hard Brexit and used any and every excuse to facilitate that. You may well be right there. Her majority was threadbare even with DUP support so there was ample room for ERG shenanigans.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,871 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    The ERG numbers swelled at the time though, giving them a level of influence they never had before or since. There is a good chance this is due to the flag waving and "big bad EU" narrative which they were pushing at the time. It was a perfect storm of circumstances which gave them any influence and the DUP being part of government was certainly part of that storm.

    And remember, those Tory MPs were elected under May and overall were not as hardline as the group later elected under Johnson.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,726 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Of course they swelled. People voted for Brexit and they had outsized power and influence. That was always going to happen.

    The DUP are as relevant as NI is, which is to say not remotely. They were a useful cover but so was sovereignty, trade, cutting immigration and the other nonsense.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,742 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    I don't believe that this was added to this thread but this research confirms that the UK's exit from the EU is financially harming the UK (key points from the article below)

    Economists and analysts at Cambridge Econometrics - commissioned by London's mayor, Sadiq Khan - have modelled how the UK's economy would have acted were it still in the European Union.

    ...

    This equates to GVA [gross value added] being 6% lower in 2023 than it would have been without Brexit, and 10.1% lower in 2035.

    They found that, by 2035, the UK is anticipated to have three million fewer jobs, 32% lower investment, 5% lower exports and 16% lower imports, than it would have had if the UK had not left the EU.

    Cambridge Econometrics also found Brexit is expected to cause the productivity gap between London and the rest of the UK to widen further.




  • Registered Users Posts: 3,200 ✭✭✭yagan


    Added to the economic constriction is the increased dependency ratio as Asian immigrants are bringing entire families whereas EU immigrants were mostly young adults without dependents.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,624 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    Not sure what the value, or indeed purpose, or these types of reports are.

    To the vast majority, they are meaningless with so many caveats and assumptions built as to be easily ignored. Anyone pushing them is easily classed as a Remoaner or worse someone trying to belittle the UK and in the pay of the EU.

    The long and short of it is that reports like this achieve nothing. Those already against Brexit will be given more evidence, and those for Brexit are simply given more evidence that there are people in positions of power trying to reverse the will of the people.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,726 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    That's true, sadly. It's why I don't share those things here. We know Brexit has been a net loss for the country but everyone either knows that, has convinced themselves otherwise, or simply does not care.

    Some people on social media share stuff like this as a form of "I told you so" and it just doesn't really achieve anything.

    I think some breathing space for the UK is what's needed. Europe has serious problems right now so there are some advantages to a bit of distance if we can elect an adult government.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭peter kern


    and then there is always a 3rd group that is willing to learn and we have clearly seen a shift in people from the third group.


    you could argue there has been no real shift this year at the same time there has been a good shift since brexit so it would appear some people have changed their mind.

    agreed , the told you so is of course not working.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,708 ✭✭✭Economics101




  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 91,627 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Dublin City FM announced that there may be traffic delays near the port due to upcoming Brexit changes on Wednesday. Along the lines that if you don't have the new paperwork then the ferry operators may not let you board. Some goods categories require 24 hours notice so from Tuesday.


    This is because the UK is one step closer to getting Brexit done by finally applying the rules.

    https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/668a0-uk-import-controls-2023-the-border-target-operating-model-tom/#what-will-i-need-to-do-from-31-january-2024 "For live animals and animal products and high and medium risk category plant products, ensure your GB importer or GB based agent has pre-notified each consignment on the UK’s food and feed SPS import system (IPAFFS ) 24 hours in advance of transit." -


    Be interesting to see how this affects Dover and UK small importing businesses too.



  • Registered Users Posts: 34,884 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    But but they said Brexit would free the UK from red tape... 🙄

    The Dublin Airport cap is damaging the economy of Ireland as a whole, and must be scrapped forthwith.



  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 91,627 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Red tape's been replaced with Red, White and Blue tape.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,304 ✭✭✭tomhammer..


    Food price rises on the way now with extra red tape for EU imports



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,715 ✭✭✭✭Kermit.de.frog


    Jeffrey Donaldson is claiming all checks and all paperwork are being removed between the UK and NI for goods said to be staying in NI.

    If that is true is the EU in agreement with this?



  • Registered Users Posts: 26,511 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    At a wild guess, in essence what will happen is that the documentary requirements mitigation already agreed with the EU, and operated throught the "green lane", or some barely-changed version of these, will be set out in the new promised new UK legislation — i.e. some version of the practices and processes already operated on an administrative basis will be formalised in legislation.



  • Registered Users Posts: 26,045 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    All we know is the DUP had "concerns addressed" but Westminster. The Tories have promised to table a bill. But nobody has promised the bill will pass the courts or government.

    Nothing I have seen so far mentions any new deal with the EU.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,200 ✭✭✭yagan


    They'll have to come up with new repackaging for the DUP. Windsor framework didn't work so maybe the Saxe-coburg and Gotha alignment seeing as prince Billy was from mainland Europe.



  • Registered Users Posts: 26,045 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    It's a very suspicious move to announce this but make people wait for the actual facts of the agreement. I bet it will either be a pile of nothing or the Tories with another loony bill that will go completely against EU trade agreements and will be scuppered.

    There will certainly be more drama to come.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 723 ✭✭✭Slightly Kwackers


    The facts are 3.3 billion of UK taxpayers money.

    Not bad eh, what more do the DUP want?

    As was seen in that miserable excuse for substandard toilet paper called the Mail, The DUP will now tour Englands food banks with soup as a thank you to the taxpayers, a couple of verses of "Delaney's Donkey" will give the punters full bellies.



Advertisement