Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?

  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
unchanged_lineup said:
David Trimble is getting involved now with a legal challenge again at the backstop, saying it threatens the GFA
Click to expand...

Surely the first thing for all the politicians in NI to do is to re-populate Stormont and take direct rule away from London, otherwise Trimble's claims might be upheld?
 
It continually amazes me that people seem to think the EU should somehow give preferential treatment to a departing member state while damaging an existing member and if they do not do so they are painted as uncompromising or a bully.

the Withdrawal agreement that is negotiated is a bilateral agreement. No one was bullied into it. No one was forced to agree it.

Quite simply this is a divorce. One the UK asked for. The EU arent kicking them out. Its like a man divorcing his wife and then asking her to go easy on him through the divorce process, give him everything he wants even if it may be to her own detriment and on top of that come up with all the solutions as how to do that herself.

Ludicrous.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
That's three times, keep repeating it won't make it any more true.

All possible alternatives were suggested by the EU which were rejected by May and it was her that wanted the backstop because she wouldn't agree with the alternatives.

Not back to the Uk's obsession with WW2.
Click to expand...

Yes that's why I am saying when all this is over she will carry the can, or her party will for such a terrible error of judgement, akin to what happened in the thirties!
 
Maticmaker said:
Surely the first thing for all the politicians in NI to do is to re-populate Stormont and take direct rule away from London, otherwise Trimble's claims might be upheld?
Click to expand...
Why would the DUP have any interest in going back to Stormont when they currently have a direct line to the prime minister?
 
Maticmaker said:
Yes that's why I am saying when all this is over she will carry the can, or her party will for such a terrible error of judgement, akin to what happened in the thirties!
Click to expand...

The alternatives were the border in the Irish Sea, cancel Brexit or stay in the CU/SM - none of those are acceptable by any majority in parliament - so whether it was May , Corbyn , JRM or whoever , the outcome would have been the same.

There is no majority for any solution.
 
Abizzz said:
I mean aside from the hundreds of hours all other heads of states have wasted discussing how to tell the British PM that Britain cannot be turned into a fairyland in which economic, social, physical, legal and moral limits don't exist simply by leaving a bloc...

The EU has been a lot more helpful then people like me welcome. At this point BOBO JRM and the rest of them should be left to their own devices until the general population has finally decided to take its vengeance out on them.
Click to expand...

One thing you seem to have missed is that until the day we leave the EU we are going still a member and therefore all this effort you identify is actually part of EU business.

The EU are still complicit in this problem.
Much as I dislike David Cameron dealings in this, he did go to the EU and ask for meaningful change.

Did they listen - no.
Were they helping - no.

I am as appalled with how the UK has completely mismanaged our side of the leaving process.
But. To say that the EU has not hindered a smooth leaving is as I have mentioned naive in the extreme.
 
Buster15 said:
One thing you seem to have missed is that until the day we leave the EU we are going still a member and therefore all this effort you identify is actually part of EU business.

The EU are still complicit in this problem.
Much as I dislike David Cameron dealings in this, he did go to the EU and ask for meaningful change.

Did they listen - no.
Were they helping - no.

I am as appalled with how the UK has completely mismanaged our side of the leaving process.
But. To say that the EU has not hindered a smooth leaving is as I have mentioned naive in the extreme.
Click to expand...

Which meaningful changes did he ask? And the UK are 1/28 of the EU, if Cameron or anyone wants to propose meaningful changes the democratic way is to convince a majority of the 28 members.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
The alternatives were the border in the Irish Sea, cancel Brexit or stay in the CU/SM - none of those are acceptable by any majority in parliament - so whether it was May , Corbyn , JRM or whoever , the outcome would have been the same.

There is no majority for any solution.
Click to expand...

There might be a majority for a CU?

Labour and libs would back it - SNP im not sure but they might... DUP- quite possibly if it ensures NI treated same as rest of UK

So if CU was official conservative policy then Im sure the vast majority of the cabinet and party loyalists would back it - certanly enough to get a majority - problem is May said we had to leave the CU and she clearly does not want to back down
 
sun_tzu said:
There might be a majority for a CU?

Labour and libs would back it - SNP im not sure but they might... DUP- quite possibly if it ensures NI treated same as rest of UK

So if CU was official conservative policy then Im sure the vast majority of the cabinet and party loyalists would back it - certanly enough to get a majority - problem is May said we had to leave the CU and she clearly does not want to back down
Click to expand...

Labour are backing a CU but the unicorn version where they can still negotiate their own trade deals and not follow EU rules.
That's why May would not agree the CU because she knows all the promises of "we'll have all these fantastic trade deals" could never happen.
 
Buster15 said:
One thing you seem to have missed is that until the day we leave the EU we are going still a member and therefore all this effort you identify is actually part of EU business.
Click to expand...
As far as i'm concerned Britain is a member until the 29th of March. Until then they'll need to do with the ways things have been done for the last 40 years, why suddenly change everything for a member who's leaving in 8 weeks? You asked:
Buster15 said:
I would like to understand how the EU has been far more helpful than they needed to be.
Click to expand...
All other member states have plenty of problems of their own. Yet they keep meeting May whenever she asks for it (even when everyone knows it's just a charade) even though she hasn't once delivered on any of the deals she's agreed to in the entire process up to now. The EU is helping by keeping to it's commitment in the WA, a WA the UK Government negotiated and agreed to (as opposed to the UK side, who agreed to something it couldn't deliver on (how ironic) ).

Buster15 said:
The EU are still complicit in this problem.
Much as I dislike David Cameron dealings in this, he did go to the EU and ask for meaningful change.

Did they listen - no.
Were they helping - no.
Click to expand...
Cameron used the EU to tighten his grip on his party. No change the EU would have given would have been enough for the ERG. David Cameron WAS listened to... but he had no clue what to ask for, how to get it, or how to use it to achieve his actual goal once he got it. His "meaningful change" was the first chapter of a book of lies and deception.
Buster15 said:
I am as appalled with how the UK has completely mismanaged our side of the leaving process.
But. To say that the EU has not hindered a smooth leaving is as I have mentioned naive in the extreme.
Click to expand...
What do you expect? The EU's priorities are it's constituent countries interests. It's not a bipartisan arbiter, it's a political Union for the good of it's members.
 
@Bola

Genuine question. What do you want for the UK post Brexit? May has gone back to Brussels seeking "alternative arrangements" to the backstop - what do you think these should be?

If one person could actually propose a workable alternative, I'd be thrilled.
 
5 of Feb and it feels like we are sleepwalking into no deal...
 
JPRouve said:
Which meaningful changes did he ask? And the UK are 1/28 of the EU, if Cameron or anyone wants to propose meaningful changes the democratic way is to convince a majority of the 28 members.
Click to expand...

As someone who has a fair knowledge of this whole subject, you know as well as I do that it is a matter of record that Cameron discussed changes to the EU.

Yes. I quite agree that we are one of 28. But the EU would be deluded if they really believe that the EU is not beyond ways to improve. It is a far from optimum organisation.
 
Abizzz said:
As far as i'm concerned Britain is a member until the 29th of March. Until then they'll need to do with the ways things have been done for the last 40 years, why suddenly change everything for a member who's leaving in 8 weeks? You asked:
.
Click to expand...

And therein lies the problem.
We all know that the world is rapidly changing. In particular politics.

It is precisely because the EU is not receptive to change and steadfastly pushes towards a Federal Europe that makes it act like a self serving organisation.

I am not a Brexiteer. Far from it. But even I can see its flaws and who it's primary beneficiaries are.
 
Siorac said:
Allowing a UK-wide customs union without the four freedoms is an INCREDIBLE concession from the EU. You have to try and look at it from the EU perspective, as opposed to the British one all the time.
Click to expand...
Just to be a bit nitpicky here...

Allowing a customs union without the four freedoms (such as freedom of movement) is not unusual or exceptional. Turkey has a customs union with the EU without these freedoms. The four freedoms are seen as integral to the single market, which is very different from the customs union.

What is a partial concession from the EU, in the interests of avoiding a hard border, is to allow NI to benefit from some aspects of the single market without the four freedoms. Ironically, it is the DUP who hate this element as it makes a distinction between NI and the rest of the UK, even though being in the backstop would actually give NI a pretty good competitive advantage.

You are right that the EU’s first preference was for NI alone to remain in the customs union (and elements of the single market), rather than a UK-wide customs union, but it’s not related to the four freedoms. Long but thorough explanation of the negotiations: https://www.rte.ie/news/analysis-and-comment/2018/1207/1015924-brexit-backstop-uk/
 
Buster15 said:
As someone who has a fair knowledge of this whole subject, you know as well as I do that it is a matter of record that Cameron discussed changes to the EU.

Yes. I quite agree that we are one of 28. But the EU would be deluded if they really believe that the EU is not beyond ways to improve. It is a far from optimum organisation.
Click to expand...

The EU is continuously improving and changing so that's not even a point to make. The EU is the 28 member states and the institution, this sentence makes very little sense when every country makes propositions, some are accepted others aren't, the shared sovereignty on common subjects means that you need to convince the cosovereigns, as long as people don't burn that into their minds we will get into these silly arguments.

When I read some of the posts, what I actually see is people that wants a dictatorship from a single member.
 
Buster15 said:
As someone who has a fair knowledge of this whole subject, you know as well as I do that it is a matter of record that Cameron discussed changes to the EU.

Yes. I quite agree that we are one of 28. But the EU would be deluded if they really believe that the EU is not beyond ways to improve. It is a far from optimum organisation.
Click to expand...

What you consider improvement could quite easily be considered a step back for others in the EU. Every organization will have it´s flaws. You can not make 28 countries equally happy in a single union so you have to make compromises to make it work. This is one of key issues a lot of Brexiters have with the EU that UK have to comprise rather than dictate things ( somehow this translate to lose of sovereignty ). The very same people support the United Kingdom, which is a political union just like the EU. The difference is in the UK England gets to dictate the political direction by far the majority of time to other members of the UK. In EU England lacks this ability to dictate and thus somehow their sovereignty is threatened in their eyes when they do not get to dominate the political process. If Brexiters really cared for English sovereignty then they should be supporting a English exit from the UK and Great Britain yet they are not. It is really about power and influence when it comes down to it for a large number of Brexiters. England need to respect other countries more and stop acting like petulant children when other countries say nope to their proposal or visions for the EU. If you want to leave then stop bitching and moaning about the consequences that you have caused by your own free will as you leave.

Personally i never want to see an EU based upon the visions of the Tories as it will be shit for the average person like the USA have become when you hand over too much power and influence to big businesses and billionaires.
 
Maticmaker said:
The backstop as it now stands is a hostage to fortune that no UK government can accept and it is why ultimately the binary choice will return, i.e. Leave with no deal, or cancel Brexit altogether.
The fact that May apparently accepted it, doesn't bode well for her or her Government in the future, whatever the outcome from Brexit. It is equivalent to the 'peace in our time' piece of paper a former British Prime minister waved as he got off the plane from Munich in the 1930's
Click to expand...

There's been no alternative put forward by the British Government though.

And as you rightly say May and her government did agree to it last year, most likely because there is no workable alternative within her own red lines.
 
MikeUpNorth said:
Just to be a bit nitpicky here...

Allowing a customs union without the four freedoms (such as freedom of movement) is not unusual or exceptional. Turkey has a customs union with the EU without these freedoms. The four freedoms are seen as integral to the single market, which is very different from the customs union.

What is a partial concession from the EU, in the interests of avoiding a hard border, is to allow NI to benefit from some aspects of the single market without the four freedoms. Ironically, it is the DUP who hate this element as it makes a distinction between NI and the rest of the UK, even though being in the backstop would actually give NI a pretty good competitive advantage.

You are right that the EU’s first preference was for NI alone to remain in the customs union (and elements of the single market), rather than a UK-wide customs union, but it’s not related to the four freedoms. Long but thorough explanation of the negotiations: https://www.rte.ie/news/analysis-and-comment/2018/1207/1015924-brexit-backstop-uk/
Click to expand...

It's a partial custom agreement that only concerns industrial goods and the borders are controlled.
 
MikeUpNorth said:
Just to be a bit nitpicky here...

Allowing a customs union without the four freedoms (such as freedom of movement) is not unusual or exceptional. Turkey has a customs union with the EU without these freedoms. The four freedoms are seen as integral to the single market, which is very different from the customs union.

What is a partial concession from the EU, in the interests of avoiding a hard border, is to allow NI to benefit from some aspects of the single market without the four freedoms. Ironically, it is the DUP who hate this element as it makes a distinction between NI and the rest of the UK, even though being in the backstop would actually give NI a pretty good competitive advantage.

You are right that the EU’s first preference was for NI alone to remain in the customs union (and elements of the single market), rather than a UK-wide customs union, but it’s not related to the four freedoms. Long but thorough explanation of the negotiations: https://www.rte.ie/news/analysis-and-comment/2018/1207/1015924-brexit-backstop-uk/
Click to expand...

And the DUP don't like it because of the danger that people in NI start to think that they actually like this arrangement better than anything the UK can negotiate in terms of a Future Relationship. They clearly envisage circumstances where any referendum on a united Ireland could go against them.
 
JPRouve said:
The EU is continuously improving and changing so that's not even a point to make. The EU is the 28 member states and the institution, this sentence makes very little sense when every country makes propositions, some are accepted others aren't, the shared sovereignty on common subjects means that you need to convince the cosovereigns, as long as people don't burn that into their minds we will get into these silly arguments.

When I read some of the posts, what I actually see is people that wants a dictatorship from a single member.
Click to expand...

Regarding the dictatorship you mentioned. Why is the EU pushing ahead with a European Army when a number of countries are against the idea.
 
Buster15 said:
Regarding the dictatorship you mentioned. Why is the EU pushing ahead with a European Army when a number of countries are against the idea.
Click to expand...
When and where has "the EU" pushed for a European army?
 
Buster15 said:
Regarding the dictatorship you mentioned. Why is the EU pushing ahead with a European Army when a number of countries are against the idea.
Click to expand...

The EU doesn't push for an army and last time I checked 25 members out of 28 joined PESCO, which is the program equated to an army(it's not). The countries that didn't join it are the UK, Malta who aren't against it but want to see how it's going to work before eventually joining and Denmark who always opt-out.

The reality is that almost everyone wants to have a military cooperation.
 
Gee Male said:
@Bola

Genuine question. What do you want for the UK post Brexit? May has gone back to Brussels seeking "alternative arrangements" to the backstop - what do you think these should be?

If one person could actually propose a workable alternative, I'd be thrilled.
Click to expand...

If you are talking about the backstop element for the Irish border, then there is no easy solution as you've alluded to. What is clear is that the NI being under a separate customs/ border regieme is unacceptable and neither should we have a hard border

My broad approach would be as follows.

- have a transition period of 2 years (give or take) where there is no customs border. This buys time for all involved to develop a solution. This includes the UK broadly following the principles of the customs union, but being able to negotiate deals for the future

- post this period, the best solution appears to be a variant of 'max fac', with simplification of tarrifs and customs processes, pre customs activity and use of technology

- the above is not the perfect solution however as there is still the age old problem of customs fraud which would return with a border (hard or frictionless) returning, particularly on a border with multiple crossing points. I can't see much more of a mitigation other that greater enforcement to act as a deterrent (which partly reduces the risk)

- A ' max fac' type solution would also be aided by the pursuit of free trade to remove the need for tarrifs on the majority of goods. That would be a tough pill for the EU to swallow given the construct of their whole 'project', but protectionism generally isn't a healthy ideology in my view

As i've said not ideal, but it's the basis of a solution and more of a solution of ignoring the issue of sovereignty of NI remaining under an EU trade regime, something that I've generally seen remainers ignore/ dismiss
 
Abizzz said:
When and where has "the EU" pushed for a European army?
Click to expand...

Read the news and you will see that only a few weeks ago Macron and Merkel were pushing for such a European Army.

I am surprised that you were not aware of it.
 
JPRouve said:
The EU doesn't push for an army and last time I checked 25 members out of 28 joined PESCO, which is the program equated to an army(it's not). The countries that didn't join it are the UK, Malta who aren't against it but want to see how it's going to work before eventually joining and Denmark who always opt-out.

The reality is that almost everyone wants to have a military
Click to expand...
JPRouve said:
The EU doesn't push for an army and last time I checked 25 members out of 28 joined PESCO, which is the program equated to an army(it's not). The countries that didn't join it are the UK, Malta who aren't against it but want to see how it's going to work before eventually joining and Denmark who always opt-out.

The reality is that almost everyone wants to have a military cooperation.
Click to expand...

Read the news and tell me that Macron is not pushing for a European Army.
 
Buster15 said:
Read the news and you will see that only a few weeks ago Macron and Merkel were pushing for such a European Army.

I am surprised that you were not aware of it.
Click to expand...
Neither Macron or Merkel are the EU, are they?
 
JPRouve said:
Macron is the president of France.
Click to expand...
I think this exchange does demonstrate something interesting which I have noticed in other conversations with Brexiters. They instinctively equate individual leaders of European nations with the collective will of the EU. But they would never have taken what, say, David Cameron said when PM as being the voice of the EU.
 
MikeUpNorth said:
Just to be a bit nitpicky here...

Allowing a customs union without the four freedoms (such as freedom of movement) is not unusual or exceptional. Turkey has a customs union with the EU without these freedoms. The four freedoms are seen as integral to the single market, which is very different from the customs union.

What is a partial concession from the EU, in the interests of avoiding a hard border, is to allow NI to benefit from some aspects of the single market without the four freedoms. Ironically, it is the DUP who hate this element as it makes a distinction between NI and the rest of the UK, even though being in the backstop would actually give NI a pretty good competitive advantage.

You are right that the EU’s first preference was for NI alone to remain in the customs union (and elements of the single market), rather than a UK-wide customs union, but it’s not related to the four freedoms. Long but thorough explanation of the negotiations: https://www.rte.ie/news/analysis-and-comment/2018/1207/1015924-brexit-backstop-uk/
Click to expand...
My point was that the EU willingly gave up including any of the four freedoms in any deal - that is, they worked alongside the UK government's red lines from the start. And that UK wide customs union was a British idea that the EU accepted, after initial reluctance.

Yeah, Turkey has a similar deal - which was of a great benefit to them! It was negotiated way back when it looked like there was a chance of Turkey eventually becoming an EU member with everything that entails (which now looks absolutely impossible of course). It was part of a plan to bring their economy up to speed. It wasn't some selfless act by the EU, obviously, but it wasn't an evil scheme to keep Turkey in thrall to the EU either. Offering a similar deal to Britain without the intention of any further integration is a remarkable concession, in my opinion.
 
The idea of a European standing army in the EU had been discussed, but was seen as being a way off being realised; that is until Trump started to insist the European states in particular should pay their fair share of Nato's defence in Europe and commit the 2% of their GDP to defence as they had promised. The leading EU integrationist states then seized on this to resurrect the idea that only Europe can defend itself and it should no longer rely on anyone else and should have its own standing army. More grist to the mill for leavers!
 
MikeUpNorth said:
I think this exchange does demonstrate something interesting which I have noticed in other conversations with Brexiters. They instinctively equate leaders of European nations with the collective will of the EU. But they would never have taken what, say, David Cameron said when PM as being the voice of the EU.

It’s a misunderstanding which does
Click to expand...
It does show how easily people seem to fall for the traps the likes of Farage set. Either that, or it's just a fundamental lack of understanding.
 
MikeUpNorth said:
I think this exchange does demonstrate something interesting which I have noticed in other conversations with Brexiters. They instinctively equate leaders of European nations with the EU. But they would never have taken what, say, David Cameron said when PM as being the voice of the EU.
Click to expand...

I had the same thought when I wrote that post. It's almost crazy, Cameron makes a proposition and it's against the EU. Macron says something, he is the EU.
 
Wibble said:
feck off you patronising git.
Click to expand...

Wibble, you being patronised by this chump is like a wise old cat being patronised by a garden gnome.

He might have a smug smile painted on his face but he hasn't a fecking notion what he's doing here and most normal people don't know what the feck his point his.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.