All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
I suspect Unionists who were exasperated by DUP/UUP attitudes ended up voting for Alliance, so they are represented.
The Alliance aren't a unionist party, so no they're not.
And the DUP lost votes to the TUV on the basis that the DUP weren't hardline enough, not that they weren't compromising enough.
So. You can't be a Unionist if you don't vote for a Unionist party? How about if you do, but transfer to another? What percentage are you if you vote Alliance and transfer to a Unionist Party? Half a Unionist?
Meanwhile. It might be instructive to read this from the UUP. The Unionists aren't a monolith.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
You do know that the law related to NI elections was changed. Don't you?
The clock is ticking. 22 weeks left.
Indeed and if there's another election then the Protocol will lose it again, just like it lost the last one. And it will keep losing until the Unionists are happy.
So by the majority of voters voting for parties who voted for the protocol, thats the protocol losing the election is it?
The NIP is unworkable and will be revised. But your usual position of supporting democracy seems oddly to have been thrown out in favour supporting anyone who backs your hardest Brexit position.
Be careful now. I disagree with you a lot, but your positions are usually consistent. This is inconsistent.
The GFA requires the consent of both communities, what part of that are you struggling to understand?
I would prefer to have FPTP as a general principle but that is not the electoral system in Northern Ireland. I recognise the electoral system they have, not the one I'd rather we have, and under their electoral system the Protocol was comprehensively defeated since 100% of elected unionists opposed it.
In order for something to proceed under power-sharing it requires the consent of both communities. The Protocol comprehensively failed to get that at the election, so it lost the election.
Yes, I know it needs both communities. But again, the unionists are now the minority. That is what scares them. They thought they spoke for the majority. They still speak like they are the majority. But they are not. Their position - defeating the NIP and all - is now the minority position.
Whether power needs to be shared or not I know the majority of voters plumped for pro-NIP parties because I can add. Easy for the majority to dig their heels in and say NO. Much harder as the minority. Yes, they can't just be ignored, but the weight of their position is less.
The below the line discussion of Hilary Benn's Twitter thread was interesting, although I'm uncertain whether it is representative of a strand of wider Irish public opinion or just of whatever their equivalent of an FBPEr is. In any case, a penny dropped in my head.
The basic tenor was that dilution and non-implementation of the NIP was as much a threat to Irish food standards as something like TTIP, that the UK could be a back door in future for such totems as chlorinated chicken. And the fact that those goods are only potentially going to NI (if checks break down) does not make a difference - it doesn't have to be the supermarket or butcher themselves that exports the produce: for some RoI consumers the most convenient supermarket might be a UK chain in, for instance, Newry or Derry. Deals with Australia and America, therefore, could very much be a back door to stealthily reduce food hygiene standards for RoI citizens exercising normal consumer choice.
Even within the EU, Ireland and the UK were separate phytosanitary zones with checks at Larne, and the UK's record within the EU - mad cow, horsemeat, swine flu - can be regarded with a critical eye. A farm infection carried by inadequate checks on animals or feed, due to the breakdown of existing implementations, is a risk to all Ireland.
I think worth noting also that the historical event that looms as large as any other in Irish history was phytosanitary in nature, with the role of GB obviously highly contentious. Even in normal times, TTIP shows food standards can be very emotive - how much moreso for GB-Ire trade?
If there may be wiggle room for other goods, Ireland and the EU backing down on food looks a hard sell in Ireland.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Sadly this is not subtle enough. (BTW I support a united Ireland, and am not pro unionist.)
To say that there has to be acceptance of the realities on all sides, and then characterise unionists as morons, thick, lying etc, and the UK government in similar terms, clouds the debate. To suggest in an NI context there is such a thing as 'the will of the people', is, sadly, a little too unsubtle as well.
I was being deliberately unsubtle. The UK government lies about their deal. Claims to not know their deal would enact their deal. Then lies about saying they didn't know. "Liars" and "morons" is prima fascie.
And sadly the same can be said of the DUP. They knew fully well what they were doing in which case they are liars. Or they didn't know what the deal meant in which case they are morons. In reality I'm pretty confident its both.
That the entire business community has called them out does rather back me up, and so many of them are unionists. So I am not for a second characterising "unionists as morons". Just the unionist politicians. There is a difference.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The DUP oppose the Johnson Brexit because it creates an Irish Sea border and they opposed the May Brexit which would have prevented one. Seems the only Brexit on offer meeting their approval was a No Deal Brexit, the main drawback of which is a land border across Ireland. The inference is that a hard border across Ireland is in their eyes not a bug but a feature. Makes a perverse sense because a hard border in Ireland is a step away from Irish reunification just as a border in the Irish Sea is a step towards it. No chance of this rather sordid unionist fantasy coming true in practice, however, even under this government, and they really ought to realize this. The DUP, simultaneously thick and cynical. These 2 traits might seem to conflict but they do often go together.
Those aren't the only options.
There are 4 possible solutions, you've only listed 3 yet you've ignored the most suitable one altogether.
1: "May Brexit" - Keep UK aligned to the EU. Utterly unacceptable, would make Britain a rule-taker and entirely undemocratic since we'd have no elected representatives voting on the rules. 2: "Sea Border" - Utterly unacceptable, creates a border between GB and NI. 3: "Land Border" - Utterly unacceptable, creates a border between the Republic and NI.
Once you've eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the solution.
4: "Compromise" - No alignment, no border between GB and NI, no border between NI and Republic. Recognise the special nature of NI, recognise the UK and EU as equivalents even if not aligned and allow goods to flow freely handling it sensitively and sensibly.
The latter was roundly ridicules as a "unicorn" when I proposed it five years ago but even Hillary Benn is now calling for it. It was the right solution five years ago, it remains the right solution today. I am pleased even Hillary Benn is now on my side.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
I suspect Unionists who were exasperated by DUP/UUP attitudes ended up voting for Alliance, so they are represented.
The Alliance aren't a unionist party, so no they're not.
And the DUP lost votes to the TUV on the basis that the DUP weren't hardline enough, not that they weren't compromising enough.
So. You can't be a Unionist if you don't vote for a Unionist party? How about if you do, but transfer to another? What percentage are you if you vote Alliance and transfer to a Unionist Party? Half a Unionist?
Meanwhile. It might be instructive to read this from the UUP. The Unionists aren't a monolith.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
I suspect Unionists who were exasperated by DUP/UUP attitudes ended up voting for Alliance, so they are represented.
The Alliance aren't a unionist party, so no they're not.
And the DUP lost votes to the TUV on the basis that the DUP weren't hardline enough, not that they weren't compromising enough.
Two points:
1 Alliance voters count as much as other voters 2 Just because a Unionist votes for a non-unionist party that doesn't mean they aren't unionist any more. Perhaps they are looking for a more pragmatic and negotiated view of the future.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The DUP oppose the Johnson Brexit because it creates an Irish Sea border and they opposed the May Brexit which would have prevented one. Seems the only Brexit on offer meeting their approval was a No Deal Brexit, the main drawback of which is a land border across Ireland. The inference is that a hard border across Ireland is in their eyes not a bug but a feature. Makes a perverse sense because a hard border in Ireland is a step away from Irish reunification just as a border in the Irish Sea is a step towards it. No chance of this rather sordid unionist fantasy coming true in practice, however, even under this government, and they really ought to realize this. The DUP, simultaneously thick and cynical. These 2 traits might seem to conflict but they do often go together.
Those aren't the only options.
There are 4 possible solutions, you've only listed 3 yet you've ignored the most suitable one altogether.
1: "May Brexit" - Keep UK aligned to the EU. Utterly unacceptable, would make Britain a rule-taker and entirely undemocratic since we'd have no elected representatives voting on the rules. 2: "Sea Border" - Utterly unacceptable, creates a border between GB and NI. 3: "Land Border" - Utterly unacceptable, creates a border between the Republic and NI.
Once you've eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the solution.
4: "Compromise" - No alignment, no border between GB and NI, no border between NI and Republic. Recognise the special nature of NI, recognise the UK and EU as equivalents even if not aligned and allow goods to flow freely handling it sensitively and sensibly.
The latter was roundly ridicules as a "unicorn" when I proposed it five years ago but even Hillary Benn is now calling for it. It was the right solution five years ago, it remains the right solution today. I am pleased even Hillary Benn is now on my side.
The problem being that you want 100% of the compromise to come from the EU...
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
I suspect Unionists who were exasperated by DUP/UUP attitudes ended up voting for Alliance, so they are represented.
The Alliance aren't a unionist party, so no they're not.
And the DUP lost votes to the TUV on the basis that the DUP weren't hardline enough, not that they weren't compromising enough.
So. You can't be a Unionist if you don't vote for a Unionist party? How about if you do, but transfer to another? What percentage are you if you vote Alliance and transfer to a Unionist Party? Half a Unionist?
Meanwhile. It might be instructive to read this from the UUP. The Unionists aren't a monolith.
No, under the GFA parties have to register what community they are representing. The DUP, the UUP and the TUV and some elected Independents are all Unionists, combined they are the largest community. Sinn Fein and the SDLP are Nationalists, combined they are the second-largest but they have the largest party due to the SDLP being miniscule nowadays and they fell even further backwards this year.
The Alliance represent neither. That is their choice.
If Biden chooses to run, he ought to be odds on. The question is therefore, will he? I don't see anyone obvious who'd have a better chance in the General Election tbf.
It depends whether we reckon presidential incumbency effects are real but I think there are quite a few candidates who would be stronger than Biden in his current state, which may yet deteriorate: Gretchen Whitmer, Pete Buttiegeig, Amy KLOBUCHAR, Jared Polis...
The problem is that Joe Biden has to make the decision without knowing who the party would pick. I guess I'd rate it something like:
He retires before the primary and Harris becomes POTUS: Kamala Harris: 85% Left-wing challenger: 10% Electable person: 5%
He stays on but announces he won't run again Kamala Harris: 60% Left-wing challenger: 20% Electable person: 20%
Kamala Harris isn't a *terrible* candidate, and she might do better if she had Biden's team rather than her sister or whoever was running her primary campaign. But I think if you're Joe and you feel basically healthy, you feel duty-bound to stay on.
Worth thinking about this in relation to what else is happening.
There is a good chance the Ds get a shellacking in November - almost certainly they will lose the House, despite what has been an extraordinary successful gerrymandering campaign in D states (although the judicial ruling in NY State was a big blow). Good chance they will lose the Senate as well.
If that is the case, I cannot imagine Biden will want to go on for another term, especially given he is not in a great state of health. The D establishment knows Harris would get absolutely shafted in an election but the problem they have is that - ex-some sort of Agnew-style scandal - she is not the type to step aside. They also know that pushing out a Black / Asian woman - and one who is quite happy to tack hard left if that is what is needed to win the nomination - is not going to go down too well with the caucus.
So my guess is that they will write 2024 off, especially if they do poorly in November. It's worth noting that all the D other candidates mentioned above (with the possible exception of Polis) are tarred by the fact that they followed along with the left-wing antics and abandoned previously-held centrist positions, especially when it came to cultural issues. That is going to give the Rs plenty of material to work with, especially given the strong signs that swing voters aren't particularly enamoured re being told they're racist (if white) and / or the fact the Ds are losing Hispanic voters in drove. Buttegeig and Whitmer also both have negative factors against them (Pete B that he took 6 weeks parental leave in the midst of a supply chain crisis and Whitmer because of her handling of the CV crisis in Michigan plus the recent collapse of the trial of those accused of planning to kidnap her).
What does that mean for the candidate? I think Biden is too proud to lose, especially against Trump, so he won't win re-election. The D establishment will think it's better to let Harris be the candidate and lose 2024 so that she is out of the system. The real interesting question would be the VP pick for the Ds in 2024 because that will give an insight into who they think could win in 2028 post-Trump's 2nd term.
Yes, I think Trump will run again. I don't think he should but, given what is happening with inflation, the cost of living crisis etc, I think the temptation will be too great for him. Other R candidates will take the view they can wait until 2028 so best not to oppose him and instead try and get the VP pick (I think Trump would go with DeSantis, and I suspect DeSantis will already have a view on whom he would have as running mate in 2028).
Mid-terms don't predict presidential elections, see this from 538:
Nobody can accurately predict presidential elections years out, nobody is going to be writing one off in advance on the grounds that it's unwinnable.
Biden already watched Obama get destroyed in the mid-terms then go on to win convincingly, I can't see why he'd get disheartened by the loss that everyone expects.
The one thing I would say about the mid-terms is that if you've had a fairly catastrophic performance across the board, anyone who does win has their stature greatly enhanced. This is why I think it's worth watching Stacey Abrams: She could plausibly win Georgia with the help of Trumpists refusing to back Brian Kemp. That would give her a great story to go up against Harris if she was audacious enough to run for the next job when she'd only just got the current one.
Get your point on the mid-terms but Biden is not Obama and that is absolutely critical to this. Obama knew he could come back as indeed did all the other Presidents who have done so.
But Biden is late 70s, clearly has some mental cognisance issues and I challenge you to say he has bundles of energy. He clearly doesn't.
The penny is also starting to drop for the Democrats that jumping on the far left bandwagon, especially when it comes to cultural / immigration issues, is coming to bite them in the ass badly.
Which leads onto another point. You are right - most parties, if they get a crushing mid-term defeat, change course. But the Democrats are going to find it hard to do so because their voting base has been captured by the militants. Any candidate that comes out against the latter will find it a hard struggle in any primaries (although some do come through). Hence, it's unlikely they will be able to turn, or if they do, at the risk of splitting the party. The far-left want control of the Democrats. If they lose 2024, that's a small-ish price to pay for long-term control.
Re Abrams, happy to have a bet with you that she won't win.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
You do know that the law related to NI elections was changed. Don't you?
The clock is ticking. 22 weeks left.
Indeed and if there's another election then the Protocol will lose it again, just like it lost the last one. And it will keep losing until the Unionists are happy.
So by the majority of voters voting for parties who voted for the protocol, thats the protocol losing the election is it?
The NIP is unworkable and will be revised. But your usual position of supporting democracy seems oddly to have been thrown out in favour supporting anyone who backs your hardest Brexit position.
Be careful now. I disagree with you a lot, but your positions are usually consistent. This is inconsistent.
The GFA requires the consent of both communities, what part of that are you struggling to understand?
I would prefer to have FPTP as a general principle but that is not the electoral system in Northern Ireland. I recognise the electoral system they have, not the one I'd rather we have, and under their electoral system the Protocol was comprehensively defeated since 100% of elected unionists opposed it.
In order for something to proceed under power-sharing it requires the consent of both communities. The Protocol comprehensively failed to get that at the election, so it lost the election.
As did scrapping the Protocol. By your own logic that was soundly defeated too.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The DUP oppose the Johnson Brexit because it creates an Irish Sea border and they opposed the May Brexit which would have prevented one. Seems the only Brexit on offer meeting their approval was a No Deal Brexit, the main drawback of which is a land border across Ireland. The inference is that a hard border across Ireland is in their eyes not a bug but a feature. Makes a perverse sense because a hard border in Ireland is a step away from Irish reunification just as a border in the Irish Sea is a step towards it. No chance of this rather sordid unionist fantasy coming true in practice, however, even under this government, and they really ought to realize this. The DUP, simultaneously thick and cynical. These 2 traits might seem to conflict but they do often go together.
Those aren't the only options.
There are 4 possible solutions, you've only listed 3 yet you've ignored the most suitable one altogether.
1: "May Brexit" - Keep UK aligned to the EU. Utterly unacceptable, would make Britain a rule-taker and entirely undemocratic since we'd have no elected representatives voting on the rules. 2: "Sea Border" - Utterly unacceptable, creates a border between GB and NI. 3: "Land Border" - Utterly unacceptable, creates a border between the Republic and NI.
Once you've eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the solution.
4: "Compromise" - No alignment, no border between GB and NI, no border between NI and Republic. Recognise the special nature of NI, recognise the UK and EU as equivalents even if not aligned and allow goods to flow freely handling it sensitively and sensibly.
The latter was roundly ridicules as a "unicorn" when I proposed it five years ago but even Hillary Benn is now calling for it. It was the right solution five years ago, it remains the right solution today. I am pleased even Hillary Benn is now on my side.
The problem being that you want 100% of the compromise to come from the EU...
No, the problem is the UK has already compromised and offered to meet the EU halfway but the EU haven't done the same yet.
Unless or until the UK starts insisting a land border is built, just as the EU is insisting upon a sea border, there is only one side of the debate not showing flexibility and it isn't the UK.
There can not be a border anywhere, there can not be alignment. Therefore, the only solution is to accept that and find the next best option, but the EU still want "integrity" which the UK is not insisting upon.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
You do know that the law related to NI elections was changed. Don't you?
The clock is ticking. 22 weeks left.
Indeed and if there's another election then the Protocol will lose it again, just like it lost the last one. And it will keep losing until the Unionists are happy.
So by the majority of voters voting for parties who voted for the protocol, thats the protocol losing the election is it?
The NIP is unworkable and will be revised. But your usual position of supporting democracy seems oddly to have been thrown out in favour supporting anyone who backs your hardest Brexit position.
Be careful now. I disagree with you a lot, but your positions are usually consistent. This is inconsistent.
The GFA requires the consent of both communities, what part of that are you struggling to understand?
I would prefer to have FPTP as a general principle but that is not the electoral system in Northern Ireland. I recognise the electoral system they have, not the one I'd rather we have, and under their electoral system the Protocol was comprehensively defeated since 100% of elected unionists opposed it.
In order for something to proceed under power-sharing it requires the consent of both communities. The Protocol comprehensively failed to get that at the election, so it lost the election.
As did scrapping the Protocol. By your own logic that was soundly defeated too.
Indeed, which is why I don't advocate for scrapping the Protocol in one step, I advocate for implementing the Protocol's own Safeguarding procedures that were put there in case this very problem happened.
Implement the Safeguarding, suspend all operations of the Protocol while keeping it legally there but in Safeguarded abeyance pending the resolution whereby a compromise is reached that all relevant stakeholders agree to.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
I suspect Unionists who were exasperated by DUP/UUP attitudes ended up voting for Alliance, so they are represented.
The Alliance aren't a unionist party, so no they're not.
And the DUP lost votes to the TUV on the basis that the DUP weren't hardline enough, not that they weren't compromising enough.
So. You can't be a Unionist if you don't vote for a Unionist party? How about if you do, but transfer to another? What percentage are you if you vote Alliance and transfer to a Unionist Party? Half a Unionist?
Meanwhile. It might be instructive to read this from the UUP. The Unionists aren't a monolith.
No, under the GFA parties have to register what community they are representing. The DUP, the UUP and the TUV and some elected Independents are all Unionists, combined they are the largest community. Sinn Fein and the SDLP are Nationalists, combined they are the second-largest but they have the largest party due to the SDLP being miniscule nowadays and they fell even further backwards this year.
The Alliance represent neither. That is their choice.
I know all that. You are taking the HYUFD purity test too far. How about if you are a Unionist but aren't thoroughly obsessed by the minutiae of Brexit and feel the Health Service and jobs may be of considerably more import? Are you only a Unionist if you take one view on one niche issue?
R4 - 'You'll have to explain to us what a salient is'
Ffs.
For myself, I am pleased he was asked. BTW I wish scientists would explain what sort of string they are talking about in the term 'string theory'. More, simple, boring explanation please.
Easy: to quote Wiki for convenience:
Cosmic strings are hypothetical 1-dimensional topological defects which may have formed during a symmetry-breaking phase transition in the early universe when the topology of the vacuum manifold associated to this symmetry breaking was not simply connected.
It's claimed that the original popularity of string theory in the physics community was down to its having been considerably (or massively) cheaper to fund string research than anything else, since it's predictions couldn't be probed experimentally.
Cosmic strings are testable. They are strongly constrained, as they radiate and distort the cosmic microwave background...
There are arguments about that, but certainly for most of its existence, string theory has not led to any big money experiments, which was the point.
R4 - 'You'll have to explain to us what a salient is'
Ffs.
For myself, I am pleased he was asked. BTW I wish scientists would explain what sort of string they are talking about in the term 'string theory'. More, simple, boring explanation please.
Easy: to quote Wiki for convenience:
Cosmic strings are hypothetical 1-dimensional topological defects which may have formed during a symmetry-breaking phase transition in the early universe when the topology of the vacuum manifold associated to this symmetry breaking was not simply connected.
I see.
Somehow the PB confluence of the GFA/TCA/NIP and string theory seems rather apt...
Just such a shame that NI isn't as cheap as string.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The DUP oppose the Johnson Brexit because it creates an Irish Sea border and they opposed the May Brexit which would have prevented one. Seems the only Brexit on offer meeting their approval was a No Deal Brexit, the main drawback of which is a land border across Ireland. The inference is that a hard border across Ireland is in their eyes not a bug but a feature. Makes a perverse sense because a hard border in Ireland is a step away from Irish reunification just as a border in the Irish Sea is a step towards it. No chance of this rather sordid unionist fantasy coming true in practice, however, even under this government, and they really ought to realize this. The DUP, simultaneously thick and cynical. These 2 traits might seem to conflict but they do often go together.
Those aren't the only options.
There are 4 possible solutions, you've only listed 3 yet you've ignored the most suitable one altogether.
1: "May Brexit" - Keep UK aligned to the EU. Utterly unacceptable, would make Britain a rule-taker and entirely undemocratic since we'd have no elected representatives voting on the rules. 2: "Sea Border" - Utterly unacceptable, creates a border between GB and NI. 3: "Land Border" - Utterly unacceptable, creates a border between the Republic and NI.
Once you've eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the solution.
4: "Compromise" - No alignment, no border between GB and NI, no border between NI and Republic. Recognise the special nature of NI, recognise the UK and EU as equivalents even if not aligned and allow goods to flow freely handling it sensitively and sensibly.
The latter was roundly ridicules as a "unicorn" when I proposed it five years ago but even Hillary Benn is now calling for it. It was the right solution five years ago, it remains the right solution today. I am pleased even Hillary Benn is now on my side.
The problem being that you want 100% of the compromise to come from the EU...
No, the problem is the UK has already compromised and offered to meet the EU halfway but the EU haven't done the same yet.
Unless or until the UK starts insisting a land border is built, just as the EU is insisting upon a sea border, there is only one side of the debate not showing flexibility and it isn't the UK.
There can not be a border anywhere, there can not be alignment. Therefore, the only solution is to accept that and find the next best option, but the EU still want "integrity" which the UK is not insisting upon.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
I suspect Unionists who were exasperated by DUP/UUP attitudes ended up voting for Alliance, so they are represented.
The Alliance aren't a unionist party, so no they're not.
And the DUP lost votes to the TUV on the basis that the DUP weren't hardline enough, not that they weren't compromising enough.
So. You can't be a Unionist if you don't vote for a Unionist party? How about if you do, but transfer to another? What percentage are you if you vote Alliance and transfer to a Unionist Party? Half a Unionist?
Meanwhile. It might be instructive to read this from the UUP. The Unionists aren't a monolith.
No, under the GFA parties have to register what community they are representing. The DUP, the UUP and the TUV and some elected Independents are all Unionists, combined they are the largest community. Sinn Fein and the SDLP are Nationalists, combined they are the second-largest but they have the largest party due to the SDLP being miniscule nowadays and they fell even further backwards this year.
The Alliance represent neither. That is their choice.
Did all Unionists out poll all Nationalists in the Assembly elections?
By my reckoning on the BBC numbers the larger Nationalist parties out polled larger Unionists by 40.7 / 40.1, but the nature of the 3.7% Others may tip that balance.
Hmm, just seen Harry Lambert's post in the daily Staggers email, ending
'Now he [Mr J] needs to shore up a faltering premiership and pacify the MPs who put him in power. For the past week his ministers have threatened that Britain will undermine the protocol unilaterally, a stance that seasoned Brexit observers suspect is little more than a bluff. Johnson has buckled in negotiations with the EU in the past, and is indeed set to adopt a more conciliatory tone today than his outriders, such as Liz Truss, have done so far.
In doing so, Johnson will empathise the need for a solution that has “cross-community support”. But the irony of Britain’s Northern Irish trilemma is that the solution most likely to win such support is the one that does not involve any border: for Britain to have remained in the customs union (and single market) in a softer Brexit, or to have had no Brexit at all.'
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
I suspect Unionists who were exasperated by DUP/UUP attitudes ended up voting for Alliance, so they are represented.
The Alliance aren't a unionist party, so no they're not.
And the DUP lost votes to the TUV on the basis that the DUP weren't hardline enough, not that they weren't compromising enough.
So. You can't be a Unionist if you don't vote for a Unionist party? How about if you do, but transfer to another? What percentage are you if you vote Alliance and transfer to a Unionist Party? Half a Unionist?
Meanwhile. It might be instructive to read this from the UUP. The Unionists aren't a monolith.
No, under the GFA parties have to register what community they are representing. The DUP, the UUP and the TUV and some elected Independents are all Unionists, combined they are the largest community. Sinn Fein and the SDLP are Nationalists, combined they are the second-largest but they have the largest party due to the SDLP being miniscule nowadays and they fell even further backwards this year.
The Alliance represent neither. That is their choice.
I know all that. You are taking the HYUFD purity test too far. How about if you are a Unionist but aren't thoroughly obsessed by the minutiae of Brexit and feel the Health Service and jobs may be of considerably more import? Are you only a Unionist if you take one view on one niche issue?
Its not a HYUFD style purity test, its about the election results.
If a Unionist who thought that was elected then they would have been elected - they weren't. As far as I can see there were 37 Unionist MLAs elected and 35 Nationalist MLAs elected and of the 37 Unionist MLAs a total of 37 say the Protocol does not have their support and a total of 0 say it does. For the Nationalist community the figure is 35 say it does have their support and a total of 0 says it does not.
Therefore on a cross-community basis, the Protocol has been rejected. Scrapping it in one go has also been rejected (due to the Nationalists all supporting keeping it) so the solution is to Safeguard it until a compromise is reached. Once a compromise is reached, the Protocol can be replaced/scapped or implemented depending upon whatever the compromise is.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
I suspect Unionists who were exasperated by DUP/UUP attitudes ended up voting for Alliance, so they are represented.
The Alliance aren't a unionist party, so no they're not.
And the DUP lost votes to the TUV on the basis that the DUP weren't hardline enough, not that they weren't compromising enough.
So. You can't be a Unionist if you don't vote for a Unionist party? How about if you do, but transfer to another? What percentage are you if you vote Alliance and transfer to a Unionist Party? Half a Unionist?
Meanwhile. It might be instructive to read this from the UUP. The Unionists aren't a monolith.
No, under the GFA parties have to register what community they are representing. The DUP, the UUP and the TUV and some elected Independents are all Unionists, combined they are the largest community. Sinn Fein and the SDLP are Nationalists, combined they are the second-largest but they have the largest party due to the SDLP being miniscule nowadays and they fell even further backwards this year.
The Alliance represent neither. That is their choice.
I know all that. You are taking the HYUFD purity test too far. How about if you are a Unionist but aren't thoroughly obsessed by the minutiae of Brexit and feel the Health Service and jobs may be of considerably more import? Are you only a Unionist if you take one view on one niche issue?
What this conversation strongly suggests is that a significant part of NI opinion is quite happy to park the 'border question'.
Of course it was a lot easier, as far as the border was concerned, when NI, as part of the UK, was in the EU. Just maybe the solution will be for NI to rejoin the EU as an independent statelet, with EII (or GeoVII) as Head of State. And sensible, non-aggressive, Customs arrangements between UK and the EU.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
You do know that the law related to NI elections was changed. Don't you?
The clock is ticking. 22 weeks left.
Indeed and if there's another election then the Protocol will lose it again, just like it lost the last one. And it will keep losing until the Unionists are happy.
So by the majority of voters voting for parties who voted for the protocol, thats the protocol losing the election is it?
The NIP is unworkable and will be revised. But your usual position of supporting democracy seems oddly to have been thrown out in favour supporting anyone who backs your hardest Brexit position.
Be careful now. I disagree with you a lot, but your positions are usually consistent. This is inconsistent.
The GFA requires the consent of both communities, what part of that are you struggling to understand?
I would prefer to have FPTP as a general principle but that is not the electoral system in Northern Ireland. I recognise the electoral system they have, not the one I'd rather we have, and under their electoral system the Protocol was comprehensively defeated since 100% of elected unionists opposed it.
In order for something to proceed under power-sharing it requires the consent of both communities. The Protocol comprehensively failed to get that at the election, so it lost the election.
As did scrapping the Protocol. By your own logic that was soundly defeated too.
Indeed, which is why I don't advocate for scrapping the Protocol in one step, I advocate for implementing the Protocol's own Safeguarding procedures that were put there in case this very problem happened.
Implement the Safeguarding, suspend all operations of the Protocol while keeping it legally there but in Safeguarded abeyance pending the resolution whereby a compromise is reached that all relevant stakeholders agree to.
But there isn't the consent for your plan amongst both communities. Arguably neither. All your arguments ignore the fact that the Nationalist community is content with the status quo on the border. Any consent to changes were, in your own words "comprehensively defeated".
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
I suspect Unionists who were exasperated by DUP/UUP attitudes ended up voting for Alliance, so they are represented.
The Alliance aren't a unionist party, so no they're not.
And the DUP lost votes to the TUV on the basis that the DUP weren't hardline enough, not that they weren't compromising enough.
So. You can't be a Unionist if you don't vote for a Unionist party? How about if you do, but transfer to another? What percentage are you if you vote Alliance and transfer to a Unionist Party? Half a Unionist?
Meanwhile. It might be instructive to read this from the UUP. The Unionists aren't a monolith.
No, under the GFA parties have to register what community they are representing. The DUP, the UUP and the TUV and some elected Independents are all Unionists, combined they are the largest community. Sinn Fein and the SDLP are Nationalists, combined they are the second-largest but they have the largest party due to the SDLP being miniscule nowadays and they fell even further backwards this year.
The Alliance represent neither. That is their choice.
Did all Unionists out poll all Nationalists in the Assembly elections?
By my reckoning on the BBC numbers the larger Nationalist parties out polled larger Unionists by 40.7 / 40.1, but the nature of the 3.7% Others may tip that balance.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
You do know that the law related to NI elections was changed. Don't you?
The clock is ticking. 22 weeks left.
Indeed and if there's another election then the Protocol will lose it again, just like it lost the last one. And it will keep losing until the Unionists are happy.
So by the majority of voters voting for parties who voted for the protocol, thats the protocol losing the election is it?
The NIP is unworkable and will be revised. But your usual position of supporting democracy seems oddly to have been thrown out in favour supporting anyone who backs your hardest Brexit position.
Be careful now. I disagree with you a lot, but your positions are usually consistent. This is inconsistent.
The GFA requires the consent of both communities, what part of that are you struggling to understand?
I would prefer to have FPTP as a general principle but that is not the electoral system in Northern Ireland. I recognise the electoral system they have, not the one I'd rather we have, and under their electoral system the Protocol was comprehensively defeated since 100% of elected unionists opposed it.
In order for something to proceed under power-sharing it requires the consent of both communities. The Protocol comprehensively failed to get that at the election, so it lost the election.
As did scrapping the Protocol. By your own logic that was soundly defeated too.
Indeed, which is why I don't advocate for scrapping the Protocol in one step, I advocate for implementing the Protocol's own Safeguarding procedures that were put there in case this very problem happened.
Implement the Safeguarding, suspend all operations of the Protocol while keeping it legally there but in Safeguarded abeyance pending the resolution whereby a compromise is reached that all relevant stakeholders agree to.
But there isn't the consent for your plan amongst both communities. Arguably neither. All your arguments ignore the fact that the Nationalist community is content with the status quo on the border. Any consent to changes were, in your own words "comprehensively defeated".
And, as others have pointed out, a non-trivial part of the UNionists, given what the industry organizations are coming out with (unless anyone thinks they are solely Nationalist owned).
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
You do know that the law related to NI elections was changed. Don't you?
The clock is ticking. 22 weeks left.
Indeed and if there's another election then the Protocol will lose it again, just like it lost the last one. And it will keep losing until the Unionists are happy.
So by the majority of voters voting for parties who voted for the protocol, thats the protocol losing the election is it?
The NIP is unworkable and will be revised. But your usual position of supporting democracy seems oddly to have been thrown out in favour supporting anyone who backs your hardest Brexit position.
Be careful now. I disagree with you a lot, but your positions are usually consistent. This is inconsistent.
The GFA requires the consent of both communities, what part of that are you struggling to understand?
I would prefer to have FPTP as a general principle but that is not the electoral system in Northern Ireland. I recognise the electoral system they have, not the one I'd rather we have, and under their electoral system the Protocol was comprehensively defeated since 100% of elected unionists opposed it.
In order for something to proceed under power-sharing it requires the consent of both communities. The Protocol comprehensively failed to get that at the election, so it lost the election.
As did scrapping the Protocol. By your own logic that was soundly defeated too.
Indeed, which is why I don't advocate for scrapping the Protocol in one step, I advocate for implementing the Protocol's own Safeguarding procedures that were put there in case this very problem happened.
Implement the Safeguarding, suspend all operations of the Protocol while keeping it legally there but in Safeguarded abeyance pending the resolution whereby a compromise is reached that all relevant stakeholders agree to.
But there isn't the consent for your plan amongst both communities. Arguably neither. All your arguments ignore the fact that the Nationalist community is content with the status quo on the border. Any consent to changes were, in your own words "comprehensively defeated".
Safeguarding is a part of the existing Protocol so if the Nationalist community is content with the status quo, they must be content with that being implemented too. Otherwise they're against the Protocol too, Catch-22 position that.
If there's no consent for any solution, then Safeguarding is the responsible and rational thing to do until a compromise does exist and can be agreed. That is precisely what Safeguarding policies exist for.
Once a change is agreed, then it can be implemented. But until then, it should be put into Safeguarded abeyance to buy time until the agreement is found.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
I suspect Unionists who were exasperated by DUP/UUP attitudes ended up voting for Alliance, so they are represented.
The Alliance aren't a unionist party, so no they're not.
And the DUP lost votes to the TUV on the basis that the DUP weren't hardline enough, not that they weren't compromising enough.
So. You can't be a Unionist if you don't vote for a Unionist party? How about if you do, but transfer to another? What percentage are you if you vote Alliance and transfer to a Unionist Party? Half a Unionist?
Meanwhile. It might be instructive to read this from the UUP. The Unionists aren't a monolith.
No, under the GFA parties have to register what community they are representing. The DUP, the UUP and the TUV and some elected Independents are all Unionists, combined they are the largest community. Sinn Fein and the SDLP are Nationalists, combined they are the second-largest but they have the largest party due to the SDLP being miniscule nowadays and they fell even further backwards this year.
The Alliance represent neither. That is their choice.
Did all Unionists out poll all Nationalists in the Assembly elections?
By my reckoning on the BBC numbers the larger Nationalist parties out polled larger Unionists by 40.7 / 40.1, but the nature of the 3.7% Others may tip that balance.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
I suspect Unionists who were exasperated by DUP/UUP attitudes ended up voting for Alliance, so they are represented.
The Alliance aren't a unionist party, so no they're not.
And the DUP lost votes to the TUV on the basis that the DUP weren't hardline enough, not that they weren't compromising enough.
So. You can't be a Unionist if you don't vote for a Unionist party? How about if you do, but transfer to another? What percentage are you if you vote Alliance and transfer to a Unionist Party? Half a Unionist?
Meanwhile. It might be instructive to read this from the UUP. The Unionists aren't a monolith.
No, under the GFA parties have to register what community they are representing. The DUP, the UUP and the TUV and some elected Independents are all Unionists, combined they are the largest community. Sinn Fein and the SDLP are Nationalists, combined they are the second-largest but they have the largest party due to the SDLP being miniscule nowadays and they fell even further backwards this year.
The Alliance represent neither. That is their choice.
Did all Unionists out poll all Nationalists in the Assembly elections?
By my reckoning on the BBC numbers the larger Nationalist parties out polled larger Unionists by 40.7 / 40.1, but the nature of the 3.7% Others may tip that balance.
2 of the 37 Unionists are "U Independents" so guessing they fall in the "Others" category you mentioned and had enough votes to be elected.
But 37 to 35 is utterly irrelevant. Consent to change the status quo on the border does not have the support of both communities.
Which is why there should be nothing done apart from follow pre-existing Safeguarding policies of the Protocol until both communities reach a compromise.
The EU and the UK agreed to the Safeguarding provisions in case this happened 3 years ago. It is a part of the Protocol and a part of International Law.
Hmm, just seen Harry Lambert's post in the daily Staggers email, ending
'Now he [Mr J] needs to shore up a faltering premiership and pacify the MPs who put him in power. For the past week his ministers have threatened that Britain will undermine the protocol unilaterally, a stance that seasoned Brexit observers suspect is little more than a bluff. Johnson has buckled in negotiations with the EU in the past, and is indeed set to adopt a more conciliatory tone today than his outriders, such as Liz Truss, have done so far.
In doing so, Johnson will empathise the need for a solution that has “cross-community support”. But the irony of Britain’s Northern Irish trilemma is that the solution most likely to win such support is the one that does not involve any border: for Britain to have remained in the customs union (and single market) in a softer Brexit, or to have had no Brexit at all.'
That would have been simplest for NI, but we had a referendum and staying in the EU was defeated.
No border at all is the only viable solution I agree, but alignment is out of the question and being in the EU is also out of the question. Therefore the only viable solution is compromise - the EU recognises the UK as equivalents even if not aligned and the UK does the same with the EU.
I do have this suspicion that Biden might want to hang on if it looks like Trump's going for another go, not sure he trusts anyone else to beat Trump. Might depend on whether he is told to go. And on whether he listens... Would be more likely to step down if he had a VP who looked like a winner, I think.
I think that's right... Biden will reckon he can beat Trump and will be wary about handing over to a rookie.
I waver on thinking whether Warren is value... I thought she had a much better chance last time as I assumed she would get Sanders' endorsement... and I was basically wrong. That logic might apply this time though.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
I suspect Unionists who were exasperated by DUP/UUP attitudes ended up voting for Alliance, so they are represented.
The Alliance aren't a unionist party, so no they're not.
And the DUP lost votes to the TUV on the basis that the DUP weren't hardline enough, not that they weren't compromising enough.
So. You can't be a Unionist if you don't vote for a Unionist party? How about if you do, but transfer to another? What percentage are you if you vote Alliance and transfer to a Unionist Party? Half a Unionist?
Meanwhile. It might be instructive to read this from the UUP. The Unionists aren't a monolith.
No, under the GFA parties have to register what community they are representing. The DUP, the UUP and the TUV and some elected Independents are all Unionists, combined they are the largest community. Sinn Fein and the SDLP are Nationalists, combined they are the second-largest but they have the largest party due to the SDLP being miniscule nowadays and they fell even further backwards this year.
The Alliance represent neither. That is their choice.
Did all Unionists out poll all Nationalists in the Assembly elections?
By my reckoning on the BBC numbers the larger Nationalist parties out polled larger Unionists by 40.7 / 40.1, but the nature of the 3.7% Others may tip that balance.
2 of the 37 Unionists are "U Independents" so guessing they fall in the "Others" category you mentioned and had enough votes to be elected.
But 37 to 35 is utterly irrelevant. Consent to change the status quo on the border does not have the support of both communities.
Which is why there should be nothing done apart from follow pre-existing Safeguarding policies of the Protocol until both communities reach a compromise.
The EU and the UK agreed to the Safeguarding provisions in case this happened 3 years ago. It is a part of the Protocol and a part of International Law.
But that isn't what's being proposed. What's being proposed is legislation to override the Protocol. Which does not have the consent of both communities.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
You do know that the law related to NI elections was changed. Don't you?
The clock is ticking. 22 weeks left.
Indeed and if there's another election then the Protocol will lose it again, just like it lost the last one. And it will keep losing until the Unionists are happy.
I'm not sure if that's true. Say there is a another election and the same party rank is the result, but more flexible unionists have voted Alliance. NI will be in the same position. The DUP keep using their favourite two letter word, and there is another election. And another. Driven by the frustration and deadlock, more people vote Alliance and they eventually come second. Then, I believe, the Unionists won't get a look in. Power sharing would be between the two biggest communities, in which case that would be Catholic and None. At which point, what the Unionist parties think about the NIP is no longer anyone's concern.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
You do know that the law related to NI elections was changed. Don't you?
The clock is ticking. 22 weeks left.
Indeed and if there's another election then the Protocol will lose it again, just like it lost the last one. And it will keep losing until the Unionists are happy.
I'm not sure if that's true. Say there is a another election and the same party rank is the result, but more flexible unionists have voted Alliance. NI will be in the same position. The DUP keep using their favourite two letter word, and there is another election. And another. Driven by the frustration and deadlock, more people vote Alliance and they eventually come second. Then, I believe, the Unionists won't get a look in. Power sharing would be between the two biggest communities, in which case that would be Catholic and None. At which point, what the Unionist parties think about the NIP is no longer anyone's concern.
The Alliance would simply then designate as a Unionist party. Which they are entitled to do.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
I suspect Unionists who were exasperated by DUP/UUP attitudes ended up voting for Alliance, so they are represented.
The Alliance aren't a unionist party, so no they're not.
And the DUP lost votes to the TUV on the basis that the DUP weren't hardline enough, not that they weren't compromising enough.
So. You can't be a Unionist if you don't vote for a Unionist party? How about if you do, but transfer to another? What percentage are you if you vote Alliance and transfer to a Unionist Party? Half a Unionist?
Meanwhile. It might be instructive to read this from the UUP. The Unionists aren't a monolith.
No, under the GFA parties have to register what community they are representing. The DUP, the UUP and the TUV and some elected Independents are all Unionists, combined they are the largest community. Sinn Fein and the SDLP are Nationalists, combined they are the second-largest but they have the largest party due to the SDLP being miniscule nowadays and they fell even further backwards this year.
The Alliance represent neither. That is their choice.
Did all Unionists out poll all Nationalists in the Assembly elections?
By my reckoning on the BBC numbers the larger Nationalist parties out polled larger Unionists by 40.7 / 40.1, but the nature of the 3.7% Others may tip that balance.
2 of the 37 Unionists are "U Independents" so guessing they fall in the "Others" category you mentioned and had enough votes to be elected.
But 37 to 35 is utterly irrelevant. Consent to change the status quo on the border does not have the support of both communities.
Which is why there should be nothing done apart from follow pre-existing Safeguarding policies of the Protocol until both communities reach a compromise.
The EU and the UK agreed to the Safeguarding provisions in case this happened 3 years ago. It is a part of the Protocol and a part of International Law.
But that isn't what's being proposed. What's being proposed is legislation to override the Protocol. Which does not have the consent of both communities.
Indeed and I have already said I think that is a cynical Overton Window outrider proposal to get people to think that is outrageous and what should happen instead is to operate within the Protocol via Article 16.
That way when Article 16 is invoked, its a moderate and reasonable proposal within the workings of the Protocol as opposed to tearing up the Protocol or a breach of international law as some of the die-hards have pretended it is in order to further their agenda.
Without more information I would not support unilateral action to tear up the Protocol outside of the Article 16 provisions, that is what A16 is there for and it should be used.
Would you be content to see A16 used until a compromise is reached, considering that is quite literally what it is there for in this scenario and both parties already agreed to that when the deal was made?
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
I suspect Unionists who were exasperated by DUP/UUP attitudes ended up voting for Alliance, so they are represented.
The Alliance aren't a unionist party, so no they're not.
And the DUP lost votes to the TUV on the basis that the DUP weren't hardline enough, not that they weren't compromising enough.
So. You can't be a Unionist if you don't vote for a Unionist party? How about if you do, but transfer to another? What percentage are you if you vote Alliance and transfer to a Unionist Party? Half a Unionist?
Meanwhile. It might be instructive to read this from the UUP. The Unionists aren't a monolith.
No, under the GFA parties have to register what community they are representing. The DUP, the UUP and the TUV and some elected Independents are all Unionists, combined they are the largest community. Sinn Fein and the SDLP are Nationalists, combined they are the second-largest but they have the largest party due to the SDLP being miniscule nowadays and they fell even further backwards this year.
The Alliance represent neither. That is their choice.
I know all that. You are taking the HYUFD purity test too far. How about if you are a Unionist but aren't thoroughly obsessed by the minutiae of Brexit and feel the Health Service and jobs may be of considerably more import? Are you only a Unionist if you take one view on one niche issue?
Its not a HYUFD style purity test, its about the election results.
If a Unionist who thought that was elected then they would have been elected - they weren't. As far as I can see there were 37 Unionist MLAs elected and 35 Nationalist MLAs elected and of the 37 Unionist MLAs a total of 37 say the Protocol does not have their support and a total of 0 say it does. For the Nationalist community the figure is 35 say it does have their support and a total of 0 says it does not.
Therefore on a cross-community basis, the Protocol has been rejected. Scrapping it in one go has also been rejected (due to the Nationalists all supporting keeping it) so the solution is to Safeguard it until a compromise is reached. Once a compromise is reached, the Protocol can be replaced/scapped or implemented depending upon whatever the compromise is.
That logic only works if the Alliance and Green voters don't exist. The majority of votes cast were for pro-NIP parties. The majority of MLA's elected were pro-NIP.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The DUP oppose the Johnson Brexit because it creates an Irish Sea border and they opposed the May Brexit which would have prevented one. Seems the only Brexit on offer meeting their approval was a No Deal Brexit, the main drawback of which is a land border across Ireland. The inference is that a hard border across Ireland is in their eyes not a bug but a feature. Makes a perverse sense because a hard border in Ireland is a step away from Irish reunification just as a border in the Irish Sea is a step towards it. No chance of this rather sordid unionist fantasy coming true in practice, however, even under this government, and they really ought to realize this. The DUP, simultaneously thick and cynical. These 2 traits might seem to conflict but they do often go together.
Those aren't the only options.
There are 4 possible solutions, you've only listed 3 yet you've ignored the most suitable one altogether.
1: "May Brexit" - Keep UK aligned to the EU. Utterly unacceptable, would make Britain a rule-taker and entirely undemocratic since we'd have no elected representatives voting on the rules. 2: "Sea Border" - Utterly unacceptable, creates a border between GB and NI. 3: "Land Border" - Utterly unacceptable, creates a border between the Republic and NI.
Once you've eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the solution.
4: "Compromise" - No alignment, no border between GB and NI, no border between NI and Republic. Recognise the special nature of NI, recognise the UK and EU as equivalents even if not aligned and allow goods to flow freely handling it sensitively and sensibly.
The latter was roundly ridicules as a "unicorn" when I proposed it five years ago but even Hillary Benn is now calling for it. It was the right solution five years ago, it remains the right solution today. I am pleased even Hillary Benn is now on my side.
The problem being that you want 100% of the compromise to come from the EU...
No, the problem is the UK has already compromised and offered to meet the EU halfway but the EU haven't done the same yet.
Unless or until the UK starts insisting a land border is built, just as the EU is insisting upon a sea border, there is only one side of the debate not showing flexibility and it isn't the UK.
There can not be a border anywhere, there can not be alignment. Therefore, the only solution is to accept that and find the next best option, but the EU still want "integrity" which the UK is not insisting upon.
The EU won't meet us halfway because as the stronger player they will expect us to make most of the compromises, as indeed we will have to.
Hmm, just seen Harry Lambert's post in the daily Staggers email, ending
'Now he [Mr J] needs to shore up a faltering premiership and pacify the MPs who put him in power. For the past week his ministers have threatened that Britain will undermine the protocol unilaterally, a stance that seasoned Brexit observers suspect is little more than a bluff. Johnson has buckled in negotiations with the EU in the past, and is indeed set to adopt a more conciliatory tone today than his outriders, such as Liz Truss, have done so far.
In doing so, Johnson will empathise the need for a solution that has “cross-community support”. But the irony of Britain’s Northern Irish trilemma is that the solution most likely to win such support is the one that does not involve any border: for Britain to have remained in the customs union (and single market) in a softer Brexit, or to have had no Brexit at all.'
That would have been simplest for NI, but we had a referendum and staying in the EU was defeated.
No border at all is the only viable solution I agree, but alignment is out of the question and being in the EU is also out of the question. Therefore the only viable solution is compromise - the EU recognises the UK as equivalents even if not aligned and the UK does the same with the EU.
If you want to know what Johnson will be doing for the next six months, think 'everything he can to stop Lord Frost becoming the heir apparent' and I think you will not be far wrong.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
You do know that the law related to NI elections was changed. Don't you?
The clock is ticking. 22 weeks left.
Indeed and if there's another election then the Protocol will lose it again, just like it lost the last one. And it will keep losing until the Unionists are happy.
I'm not sure if that's true. Say there is a another election and the same party rank is the result, but more flexible unionists have voted Alliance. NI will be in the same position. The DUP keep using their favourite two letter word, and there is another election. And another. Driven by the frustration and deadlock, more people vote Alliance and they eventually come second. Then, I believe, the Unionists won't get a look in. Power sharing would be between the two biggest communities, in which case that would be Catholic and None. At which point, what the Unionist parties think about the NIP is no longer anyone's concern.
This is why pants are being shat by unionist politicians. They accepted power sharing on the basis that they would always be in the driving seat. They've just come second and if they keep saying no to the assembly they could come third.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
You do know that the law related to NI elections was changed. Don't you?
The clock is ticking. 22 weeks left.
Indeed and if there's another election then the Protocol will lose it again, just like it lost the last one. And it will keep losing until the Unionists are happy.
I'm not sure if that's true. Say there is a another election and the same party rank is the result, but more flexible unionists have voted Alliance. NI will be in the same position. The DUP keep using their favourite two letter word, and there is another election. And another. Driven by the frustration and deadlock, more people vote Alliance and they eventually come second. Then, I believe, the Unionists won't get a look in. Power sharing would be between the two biggest communities, in which case that would be Catholic and None. At which point, what the Unionist parties think about the NIP is no longer anyone's concern.
The idea the Alliance will overtake the Unionists is fantastical and mythical sadly. I'd be happy to see NI move on from sectarianism but that isn't what is happening.
The Alliance got a fraction of the votes of the Unionists, they weren't anywhere close to them.
The only reason the DUP fell behind Sinn Fein is that the SDLP fell backwards by more than Sinn Fein went forwards, and the DUP lost votes to the even more hardline TUV.
If there's another election, then the Unionists regaining the first placed party is far more likely than them falling behind to third.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
I suspect Unionists who were exasperated by DUP/UUP attitudes ended up voting for Alliance, so they are represented.
The Alliance aren't a unionist party, so no they're not.
And the DUP lost votes to the TUV on the basis that the DUP weren't hardline enough, not that they weren't compromising enough.
So. You can't be a Unionist if you don't vote for a Unionist party? How about if you do, but transfer to another? What percentage are you if you vote Alliance and transfer to a Unionist Party? Half a Unionist?
Meanwhile. It might be instructive to read this from the UUP. The Unionists aren't a monolith.
No, under the GFA parties have to register what community they are representing. The DUP, the UUP and the TUV and some elected Independents are all Unionists, combined they are the largest community. Sinn Fein and the SDLP are Nationalists, combined they are the second-largest but they have the largest party due to the SDLP being miniscule nowadays and they fell even further backwards this year.
The Alliance represent neither. That is their choice.
Did all Unionists out poll all Nationalists in the Assembly elections?
By my reckoning on the BBC numbers the larger Nationalist parties out polled larger Unionists by 40.7 / 40.1, but the nature of the 3.7% Others may tip that balance.
2 of the 37 Unionists are "U Independents" so guessing they fall in the "Others" category you mentioned and had enough votes to be elected.
But 37 to 35 is utterly irrelevant. Consent to change the status quo on the border does not have the support of both communities.
Which is why there should be nothing done apart from follow pre-existing Safeguarding policies of the Protocol until both communities reach a compromise.
The EU and the UK agreed to the Safeguarding provisions in case this happened 3 years ago. It is a part of the Protocol and a part of International Law.
But that isn't what's being proposed. What's being proposed is legislation to override the Protocol. Which does not have the consent of both communities.
Indeed and I have already said I think that is a cynical Overton Window outrider proposal to get people to think that is outrageous and what should happen instead is to operate within the Protocol via Article 16.
That way when Article 16 is invoked, its a moderate and reasonable proposal within the workings of the Protocol as opposed to tearing up the Protocol or a breach of international law as some of the die-hards have pretended it is in order to further their agenda.
Without more information I would not support unilateral action to tear up the Protocol outside of the Article 16 provisions, that is what A16 is there for and it should be used.
Would you be content to see A16 used until a compromise is reached, considering that is quite literally what it is there for in this scenario and both parties already agreed to that when the deal was made?
One community doesn't see any need for a compromise on the status quo. The other were the architects of it. Change requires consent of both. It doesn't exist.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
You do know that the law related to NI elections was changed. Don't you?
The clock is ticking. 22 weeks left.
Indeed and if there's another election then the Protocol will lose it again, just like it lost the last one. And it will keep losing until the Unionists are happy.
I'm not sure if that's true. Say there is a another election and the same party rank is the result, but more flexible unionists have voted Alliance. NI will be in the same position. The DUP keep using their favourite two letter word, and there is another election. And another. Driven by the frustration and deadlock, more people vote Alliance and they eventually come second. Then, I believe, the Unionists won't get a look in. Power sharing would be between the two biggest communities, in which case that would be Catholic and None. At which point, what the Unionist parties think about the NIP is no longer anyone's concern.
The Alliance would simply then designate as a Unionist party. Which they are entitled to do.
I really should go and re-read the agreement, but could they not take power as a community in their own right, if their community was second (unlikely though that may be)?
I suppose, if they were ahead of the DUP but the Protestant community was still the second largest bloc of parties, then they would just do as you say. Which, in order for my scenario to happen, would likely have to happen first...
Hmm, just seen Harry Lambert's post in the daily Staggers email, ending
'Now he [Mr J] needs to shore up a faltering premiership and pacify the MPs who put him in power. For the past week his ministers have threatened that Britain will undermine the protocol unilaterally, a stance that seasoned Brexit observers suspect is little more than a bluff. Johnson has buckled in negotiations with the EU in the past, and is indeed set to adopt a more conciliatory tone today than his outriders, such as Liz Truss, have done so far.
In doing so, Johnson will empathise the need for a solution that has “cross-community support”. But the irony of Britain’s Northern Irish trilemma is that the solution most likely to win such support is the one that does not involve any border: for Britain to have remained in the customs union (and single market) in a softer Brexit, or to have had no Brexit at all.'
That would have been simplest for NI, but we had a referendum and staying in the EU was defeated.
No border at all is the only viable solution I agree, but alignment is out of the question and being in the EU is also out of the question. Therefore the only viable solution is compromise - the EU recognises the UK as equivalents even if not aligned and the UK does the same with the EU.
Then we can all move on.
IIRC N. Ireland voted Remsin.
Also, the Brexiters lied relentlessly BEFORE THE REFERENDUM about the NI problem from the topmost activists to the ordinary voter even when the impossibility was forcibly pointed out to them. Or (certainly in my experience on PB and in real life) put their fingers in their ears and shut their eyes. (TBF some didn't have the intellectual and/or moral capacity to admit the problem.)
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
You do know that the law related to NI elections was changed. Don't you?
The clock is ticking. 22 weeks left.
Indeed and if there's another election then the Protocol will lose it again, just like it lost the last one. And it will keep losing until the Unionists are happy.
I'm not sure if that's true. Say there is a another election and the same party rank is the result, but more flexible unionists have voted Alliance. NI will be in the same position. The DUP keep using their favourite two letter word, and there is another election. And another. Driven by the frustration and deadlock, more people vote Alliance and they eventually come second. Then, I believe, the Unionists won't get a look in. Power sharing would be between the two biggest communities, in which case that would be Catholic and None. At which point, what the Unionist parties think about the NIP is no longer anyone's concern.
This is why pants are being shat by unionist politicians. They accepted power sharing on the basis that they would always be in the driving seat. They've just come second and if they keep saying no to the assembly they could come third.
So "the protocol" is code for power sharing.
They came first on a community basis, not second, and there's absolutely zero chance of them coming third.
The problem for the unionists is they're split between the DUP, the UUP and the even more hardline TUV - while the nationalists are solidifying behind Sinn Fein with the SDLP dying even further than before.
Its not possible for the Alliance to come second. If the DUP shipped enough votes to the TUV for the DUP to fall behind Alliance, then TUV would have already overtaken Alliance.
A strange thing about the local election in Glasgow was that the Tories were wiped out except for 2 seats in the East End of the city, which has traditionally been the worst part of the city for the party. The two seats are in Shettleston and Baillieston. It seems the paradigm shift of the Tories doing best with working-class voters is happening even in Glasgow.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
I suspect Unionists who were exasperated by DUP/UUP attitudes ended up voting for Alliance, so they are represented.
The Alliance aren't a unionist party, so no they're not.
And the DUP lost votes to the TUV on the basis that the DUP weren't hardline enough, not that they weren't compromising enough.
So. You can't be a Unionist if you don't vote for a Unionist party? How about if you do, but transfer to another? What percentage are you if you vote Alliance and transfer to a Unionist Party? Half a Unionist?
Meanwhile. It might be instructive to read this from the UUP. The Unionists aren't a monolith.
No, under the GFA parties have to register what community they are representing. The DUP, the UUP and the TUV and some elected Independents are all Unionists, combined they are the largest community. Sinn Fein and the SDLP are Nationalists, combined they are the second-largest but they have the largest party due to the SDLP being miniscule nowadays and they fell even further backwards this year.
The Alliance represent neither. That is their choice.
Did all Unionists out poll all Nationalists in the Assembly elections?
By my reckoning on the BBC numbers the larger Nationalist parties out polled larger Unionists by 40.7 / 40.1, but the nature of the 3.7% Others may tip that balance.
2 of the 37 Unionists are "U Independents" so guessing they fall in the "Others" category you mentioned and had enough votes to be elected.
But 37 to 35 is utterly irrelevant. Consent to change the status quo on the border does not have the support of both communities.
Which is why there should be nothing done apart from follow pre-existing Safeguarding policies of the Protocol until both communities reach a compromise.
The EU and the UK agreed to the Safeguarding provisions in case this happened 3 years ago. It is a part of the Protocol and a part of International Law.
But that isn't what's being proposed. What's being proposed is legislation to override the Protocol. Which does not have the consent of both communities.
Indeed and I have already said I think that is a cynical Overton Window outrider proposal to get people to think that is outrageous and what should happen instead is to operate within the Protocol via Article 16.
That way when Article 16 is invoked, its a moderate and reasonable proposal within the workings of the Protocol as opposed to tearing up the Protocol or a breach of international law as some of the die-hards have pretended it is in order to further their agenda.
Without more information I would not support unilateral action to tear up the Protocol outside of the Article 16 provisions, that is what A16 is there for and it should be used.
Would you be content to see A16 used until a compromise is reached, considering that is quite literally what it is there for in this scenario and both parties already agreed to that when the deal was made?
One community doesn't see any need for a compromise on the status quo. The other were the architects of it. Change requires consent of both. It doesn't exist.
The status quo includes the Safeguarding provisions within the 16th Article of the Northern Ireland Protocol.
Change requires consent of both, until then we have pre-agreed Safeguarding provisions to implement. Safeguarding isn't a change, it is what you do in the absence of agreement and was agreed by both parties as a part of the Protocol before it was implemented.
Inclined to agree that it's too early to judge on who the Presidential candidates will be. How near, for example, is Trump to arrest?.
At 'home,' is today that Northern Ireland looks over the edge towards a restart of the Troubles? Will the DUP refuse to accept the word of a Catholic PM?
The best way to avert a new Troubles is to follow the principles and agreement of the GFA and reach a compromise that both communities can live with. Since the election that means Sinn Fein and the DUP.
Sadly too many people want to ride roughshod over one community and seem to wish to ignore and tell the DUP to go away, but under the GFA they can explicitly stop Stormont from sitting or a government from forming indefinitely.
The British government seems like it's willing to find a compromise to make the DUP happy, without riding roughshod over Sinn Fein, sadly they're the only ones who are. If the EU can't or won't compromise then the pre-agreed safeguarding article of the Protocol has to be invoked until a compromise is reached that all relevent stakeholders can agree to.
Actually Benn is right on almost all of that but it isn't much different to what the Government and Brexiteers such as myself have been saying. Yes the key is compromise and equivalence, I have been saying that for years but when Benn says that you agree with it.
The question though is how do we get from here to a position where the EU is willing to compromise and recognise equivalence is the solution? Simply saying "diplomacy" or "trust" or "compromise" isn't a practical idea.
The EU don't want to compromise and there quite rightly is no trust because the EU is not an institution to be trusted, it is a rules-based operation which is why they're sticking to their rules. When we've made "good faith" gestures in the past, there's been no reciprocation, so we need to give them no alternative but to compromise and then make the compromise the new rules, that is the only solution.
Article 16 will do that.
But the government is not threatening to invoke A16, which is time-limited and subject to binding arbitration, it is proposing to legislate to give ministers the power to override the Protocol. Invoking A16 does not require legislation.
That's diplomacy and politics. As far as I'm concerned A16 is the solution.
Invoking A16 may require legislation due to Miller perhaps. IANAL so can't comment on that, I simply think the A16 is the solution.
But if you're objecting to the Government not invoking A16 then are you saying they should invoke A16? Can we at last be on the same page?
No, I’m saying legislating to override the Protocol is tearing it up. Invoking Article 16, whether spuriously or not, is working within it.
Isn’t legislation just saying “I REALLY REALLY mean it”. Invoking the article is an action. Legislation to give yourself the power to do something isn’t
If you want to know what Johnson will be doing for the next six months, think 'everything he can to stop Lord Frost becoming the heir apparent' and I think you will not be far wrong.
Don't you need to word it "actually inheriting"? Does Mr J really have any views on who actually follows him, so long as the timing suits him?
I'm not sure there is any solution to the NI constitutional issue. Mainstream unionism is shrinking thanks to a combination of demographics and political obstinacy. But even if we get to that place where the majority want closer cross-border ties they just won't accept that they are now the minority.
Hence the proxy war. Yes the NIP in its current form will need mods. But as NI business can demonstrate the foot in both camps is beneficial. Which is the big danger to the Tories - its being *in the EEA* thats beneficial. And despite the clear and growing evidence of the self-harm on the UK economy we can't possibly accept that.
So of course Bonzo the Clown has gone all in with the DUP. What other choice does he have?
Forget whether Die Hard is a Christmas movie or not - today is the day to watch it.
It is Middlesex Day today; the date was chosen to commemorate the 57th (West Middlesex) Regiment's victory at the Battle of of Albuera in 1811 during the Peninsular War. The 57th were holding a crucial line.
Their commander, Lieutenant Colonel William Inglis, was badly injured after taking grape shot in the neck but refused to retreat and stayed with the regiment's colours, exhorting the men to "Die hard 57th, die hard!"
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
You do know that the law related to NI elections was changed. Don't you?
The clock is ticking. 22 weeks left.
Indeed and if there's another election then the Protocol will lose it again, just like it lost the last one. And it will keep losing until the Unionists are happy.
I'm not sure if that's true. Say there is a another election and the same party rank is the result, but more flexible unionists have voted Alliance. NI will be in the same position. The DUP keep using their favourite two letter word, and there is another election. And another. Driven by the frustration and deadlock, more people vote Alliance and they eventually come second. Then, I believe, the Unionists won't get a look in. Power sharing would be between the two biggest communities, in which case that would be Catholic and None. At which point, what the Unionist parties think about the NIP is no longer anyone's concern.
The Alliance would simply then designate as a Unionist party. Which they are entitled to do.
I really should go and re-read the agreement, but could they not take power as a community in their own right, if their community was second (unlikely though that may be)?
I suppose, if they were ahead of the DUP but the Protestant community was still the second largest bloc of parties, then they would just do as you say. Which, in order for my scenario to happen, would likely have to happen first...
That's a very good question, to which I don't know the answer, but they're nowhere close to second.
On a community basis the unionists are first, the nationalists are second and both have over 40% of the vote and the Alliance are a long, long way behind on third with 13.5% of the vote.
It'd be great to see non-sectarian be NI's future, but it sadly isn't what NI voters are voting for. The only reason the unionists didn't get first placed party despite being first placed community is their vote is split more with the even more hardline TUV gaining votes, it isn't because the community is behind in the votes.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
I suspect Unionists who were exasperated by DUP/UUP attitudes ended up voting for Alliance, so they are represented.
The Alliance aren't a unionist party, so no they're not.
And the DUP lost votes to the TUV on the basis that the DUP weren't hardline enough, not that they weren't compromising enough.
So. You can't be a Unionist if you don't vote for a Unionist party? How about if you do, but transfer to another? What percentage are you if you vote Alliance and transfer to a Unionist Party? Half a Unionist?
Meanwhile. It might be instructive to read this from the UUP. The Unionists aren't a monolith.
No, under the GFA parties have to register what community they are representing. The DUP, the UUP and the TUV and some elected Independents are all Unionists, combined they are the largest community. Sinn Fein and the SDLP are Nationalists, combined they are the second-largest but they have the largest party due to the SDLP being miniscule nowadays and they fell even further backwards this year.
The Alliance represent neither. That is their choice.
Did all Unionists out poll all Nationalists in the Assembly elections?
By my reckoning on the BBC numbers the larger Nationalist parties out polled larger Unionists by 40.7 / 40.1, but the nature of the 3.7% Others may tip that balance.
2 of the 37 Unionists are "U Independents" so guessing they fall in the "Others" category you mentioned and had enough votes to be elected.
OK, here's a decent article on designation (although I'd question the Workers Party designation here). Does seem like Unionists hold a plurality of around 5000 votes.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
You do know that the law related to NI elections was changed. Don't you?
The clock is ticking. 22 weeks left.
Indeed and if there's another election then the Protocol will lose it again, just like it lost the last one. And it will keep losing until the Unionists are happy.
I'm not sure if that's true. Say there is a another election and the same party rank is the result, but more flexible unionists have voted Alliance. NI will be in the same position. The DUP keep using their favourite two letter word, and there is another election. And another. Driven by the frustration and deadlock, more people vote Alliance and they eventually come second. Then, I believe, the Unionists won't get a look in. Power sharing would be between the two biggest communities, in which case that would be Catholic and None. At which point, what the Unionist parties think about the NIP is no longer anyone's concern.
The idea the Alliance will overtake the Unionists is fantastical and mythical sadly. I'd be happy to see NI move on from sectarianism but that isn't what is happening.
The Alliance got a fraction of the votes of the Unionists, they weren't anywhere close to them.
The only reason the DUP fell behind Sinn Fein is that the SDLP fell backwards by more than Sinn Fein went forwards, and the DUP lost votes to the even more hardline TUV.
If there's another election, then the Unionists regaining the first placed party is far more likely than them falling behind to third.
Agreed, generally, but I'm ever an optimist and time marches on. The few people I know in NI report that the kids can't be fucked with it, not in the same way as the grown-ups anyway, particularly on the Unionist side. Still, though it happens rarely, events can overtake parties in an epochal way when they're ideologically anchored to the way things were and unable to move with the times. But that's a longer-term thing.
A strange thing about the local election in Glasgow was that the Tories were wiped out except for 2 seats in the East End of the city, which has traditionally been the worst part of the city for the party. The two seats are in Shettleston and Baillieston. It seems the paradigm shift of the Tories doing best with working-class voters is happening even in Glasgow.
I suspect it's more to do that every other party complete ignores their issues so they eventually turn to the only party standing that they haven't recently supported in the hope that their views / issues may get some representation...
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
You do know that the law related to NI elections was changed. Don't you?
The clock is ticking. 22 weeks left.
Indeed and if there's another election then the Protocol will lose it again, just like it lost the last one. And it will keep losing until the Unionists are happy.
I'm not sure if that's true. Say there is a another election and the same party rank is the result, but more flexible unionists have voted Alliance. NI will be in the same position. The DUP keep using their favourite two letter word, and there is another election. And another. Driven by the frustration and deadlock, more people vote Alliance and they eventually come second. Then, I believe, the Unionists won't get a look in. Power sharing would be between the two biggest communities, in which case that would be Catholic and None. At which point, what the Unionist parties think about the NIP is no longer anyone's concern.
This is why pants are being shat by unionist politicians. They accepted power sharing on the basis that they would always be in the driving seat. They've just come second and if they keep saying no to the assembly they could come third.
So "the protocol" is code for power sharing.
They came first on a community basis, not second, and there's absolutely zero chance of them coming third.
The problem for the unionists is they're split between the DUP, the UUP and the even more hardline TUV - while the nationalists are solidifying behind Sinn Fein with the SDLP dying even further than before.
Its not possible for the Alliance to come second. If the DUP shipped enough votes to the TUV for the DUP to fall behind Alliance, then TUV would have already overtaken Alliance.
In politics everything is possible. Remember that the rule of the UUP was set in stone. Until they stopped offering what people wanted. Then it was the DUP. Now they are under threat.
People in NI are people, not mindless religious zealots. The unionist parties have stopped taking the NI Assembly seriously. People don't want power imposed by London, thats the past. So if they continue to throw their toys out of the pram its certainly possible to see votes shift in large numbers to parties wanting to do the job.
We see plenty of seismic shifts in GB politics, why is NI any different?
A strange thing about the local election in Glasgow was that the Tories were wiped out except for 2 seats in the East End of the city, which has traditionally been the worst part of the city for the party. The two seats are in Shettleston and Baillieston. It seems the paradigm shift of the Tories doing best with working-class voters is happening even in Glasgow.
There are interesting dynamics under the surface for sure. I'm of the opinion that a part of it is that what I'll call anti wokism is much more prevalent in the working class and lower middle class and is now invested in small c conservatism as the bulwark against radical change. And, of course, brexit still has impact.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
I suspect Unionists who were exasperated by DUP/UUP attitudes ended up voting for Alliance, so they are represented.
The Alliance aren't a unionist party, so no they're not.
And the DUP lost votes to the TUV on the basis that the DUP weren't hardline enough, not that they weren't compromising enough.
So. You can't be a Unionist if you don't vote for a Unionist party? How about if you do, but transfer to another? What percentage are you if you vote Alliance and transfer to a Unionist Party? Half a Unionist?
Meanwhile. It might be instructive to read this from the UUP. The Unionists aren't a monolith.
No, under the GFA parties have to register what community they are representing. The DUP, the UUP and the TUV and some elected Independents are all Unionists, combined they are the largest community. Sinn Fein and the SDLP are Nationalists, combined they are the second-largest but they have the largest party due to the SDLP being miniscule nowadays and they fell even further backwards this year.
The Alliance represent neither. That is their choice.
Did all Unionists out poll all Nationalists in the Assembly elections?
By my reckoning on the BBC numbers the larger Nationalist parties out polled larger Unionists by 40.7 / 40.1, but the nature of the 3.7% Others may tip that balance.
2 of the 37 Unionists are "U Independents" so guessing they fall in the "Others" category you mentioned and had enough votes to be elected.
OK, here's a decent article on designation (although I'd question the Workers Party designation here). Does seem like Unionists hold a plurality of around 5000 votes.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
I suspect Unionists who were exasperated by DUP/UUP attitudes ended up voting for Alliance, so they are represented.
The Alliance aren't a unionist party, so no they're not.
And the DUP lost votes to the TUV on the basis that the DUP weren't hardline enough, not that they weren't compromising enough.
So. You can't be a Unionist if you don't vote for a Unionist party? How about if you do, but transfer to another? What percentage are you if you vote Alliance and transfer to a Unionist Party? Half a Unionist?
Meanwhile. It might be instructive to read this from the UUP. The Unionists aren't a monolith.
No, under the GFA parties have to register what community they are representing. The DUP, the UUP and the TUV and some elected Independents are all Unionists, combined they are the largest community. Sinn Fein and the SDLP are Nationalists, combined they are the second-largest but they have the largest party due to the SDLP being miniscule nowadays and they fell even further backwards this year.
The Alliance represent neither. That is their choice.
Did all Unionists out poll all Nationalists in the Assembly elections?
By my reckoning on the BBC numbers the larger Nationalist parties out polled larger Unionists by 40.7 / 40.1, but the nature of the 3.7% Others may tip that balance.
2 of the 37 Unionists are "U Independents" so guessing they fall in the "Others" category you mentioned and had enough votes to be elected.
But 37 to 35 is utterly irrelevant. Consent to change the status quo on the border does not have the support of both communities.
Which is why there should be nothing done apart from follow pre-existing Safeguarding policies of the Protocol until both communities reach a compromise.
The EU and the UK agreed to the Safeguarding provisions in case this happened 3 years ago. It is a part of the Protocol and a part of International Law.
But that isn't what's being proposed. What's being proposed is legislation to override the Protocol. Which does not have the consent of both communities.
Indeed and I have already said I think that is a cynical Overton Window outrider proposal to get people to think that is outrageous and what should happen instead is to operate within the Protocol via Article 16.
That way when Article 16 is invoked, its a moderate and reasonable proposal within the workings of the Protocol as opposed to tearing up the Protocol or a breach of international law as some of the die-hards have pretended it is in order to further their agenda.
Without more information I would not support unilateral action to tear up the Protocol outside of the Article 16 provisions, that is what A16 is there for and it should be used.
Would you be content to see A16 used until a compromise is reached, considering that is quite literally what it is there for in this scenario and both parties already agreed to that when the deal was made?
One community doesn't see any need for a compromise on the status quo. The other were the architects of it. Change requires consent of both. It doesn't exist.
The status quo includes the Safeguarding provisions within the 16th Article of the Northern Ireland Protocol.
Change requires consent of both, until then we have pre-agreed Safeguarding provisions to implement. Safeguarding isn't a change, it is what you do in the absence of agreement and was agreed by both parties as a part of the Protocol before it was implemented.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Indeed, and with the business community beginning to come out of cover and say that HMG are outright lying - the NIP is great for the economy, as per that Graun story I referenced earlier.
The Tories think they can say any old shit and people will eat it. Might work in England with newspapers happy to keep people ignorant for profit, but not in NI. Thats an extensive list of business interests who have come out with clear data showing how the economy is performing. The government and the DUP morons can't just deny this because the truth can't just be replaced like in England.
A new election be called 24 weeks after the last one if the Assembly cannot meet. The Tories changed the law to prevent "shan't" shut downs and imposition of direct rule. So either the DUP play ball or they face getting absolutely mullered in the autumn.
I doubt it, all the DUP voters earlier this month wanted a hardline on the NIP and Donaldson's harder line now will win back even harder line Unionists lost to TUV
That doesn't help though. TUV voters already transfer to DUP. Meanwhile. The harder line risks losing yet more UUP transfers to Alliance. We can't predict what will happen with certainty. But that is the trend. In both communities.
UUP voters want to remove the Irish Sea border too though even if they want to restart the Stormont executive as well
I do have this suspicion that Biden might want to hang on if it looks like Trump's going for another go, not sure he trusts anyone else to beat Trump. Might depend on whether he is told to go. And on whether he listens... Would be more likely to step down if he had a VP who looked like winner, I think.
Yup, and whether Trump is running or not also affects the potency of the age issue: Some voters could definitely be persuaded that you shouldn't elect someone who's 81, but that's not a great argument coming from somebody who's 78.
An old 81 though. You'd guess there were 10 years between them not 3.
I don't think he'll run unless it's judged the only way to stop Trump returning.
A strange thing about the local election in Glasgow was that the Tories were wiped out except for 2 seats in the East End of the city, which has traditionally been the worst part of the city for the party. The two seats are in Shettleston and Baillieston. It seems the paradigm shift of the Tories doing best with working-class voters is happening even in Glasgow.
INteresting, but very thin margins - might just be accidental pattern. Very different transfer pattersn though.
If you want to know what Johnson will be doing for the next six months, think 'everything he can to stop Lord Frost becoming the heir apparent' and I think you will not be far wrong.
Don't you need to word it "actually inheriting"? Does Mr J really have any views on who actually follows him, so long as the timing suits him?
Yes maybe you are right, 'actually inheriting' might be closer to it, depending on events.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
You do know that the law related to NI elections was changed. Don't you?
The clock is ticking. 22 weeks left.
Indeed and if there's another election then the Protocol will lose it again, just like it lost the last one. And it will keep losing until the Unionists are happy.
I'm not sure if that's true. Say there is a another election and the same party rank is the result, but more flexible unionists have voted Alliance. NI will be in the same position. The DUP keep using their favourite two letter word, and there is another election. And another. Driven by the frustration and deadlock, more people vote Alliance and they eventually come second. Then, I believe, the Unionists won't get a look in. Power sharing would be between the two biggest communities, in which case that would be Catholic and None. At which point, what the Unionist parties think about the NIP is no longer anyone's concern.
This is why pants are being shat by unionist politicians. They accepted power sharing on the basis that they would always be in the driving seat. They've just come second and if they keep saying no to the assembly they could come third.
So "the protocol" is code for power sharing.
They came first on a community basis, not second, and there's absolutely zero chance of them coming third.
The problem for the unionists is they're split between the DUP, the UUP and the even more hardline TUV - while the nationalists are solidifying behind Sinn Fein with the SDLP dying even further than before.
Its not possible for the Alliance to come second. If the DUP shipped enough votes to the TUV for the DUP to fall behind Alliance, then TUV would have already overtaken Alliance.
In politics everything is possible. Remember that the rule of the UUP was set in stone. Until they stopped offering what people wanted. Then it was the DUP. Now they are under threat.
People in NI are people, not mindless religious zealots. The unionist parties have stopped taking the NI Assembly seriously. People don't want power imposed by London, thats the past. So if they continue to throw their toys out of the pram its certainly possible to see votes shift in large numbers to parties wanting to do the job.
We see plenty of seismic shifts in GB politics, why is NI any different?
NI politics is having seismic shifts, but the shifts are happening within communities more than between them.
Despite all the talk of the supposed rise of Alliance (which gained some votes from both communities, not from just one) the biggest gainers of the election were the even more hardline TUV. Between the DUP, UUP and TUV no matter how you split the votes of the 42% at least of those will ultimately come ahead of the party with the lions share of the 16%.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
I suspect Unionists who were exasperated by DUP/UUP attitudes ended up voting for Alliance, so they are represented.
The Alliance aren't a unionist party, so no they're not.
And the DUP lost votes to the TUV on the basis that the DUP weren't hardline enough, not that they weren't compromising enough.
So. You can't be a Unionist if you don't vote for a Unionist party? How about if you do, but transfer to another? What percentage are you if you vote Alliance and transfer to a Unionist Party? Half a Unionist?
Meanwhile. It might be instructive to read this from the UUP. The Unionists aren't a monolith.
No, under the GFA parties have to register what community they are representing. The DUP, the UUP and the TUV and some elected Independents are all Unionists, combined they are the largest community. Sinn Fein and the SDLP are Nationalists, combined they are the second-largest but they have the largest party due to the SDLP being miniscule nowadays and they fell even further backwards this year.
The Alliance represent neither. That is their choice.
Did all Unionists out poll all Nationalists in the Assembly elections?
By my reckoning on the BBC numbers the larger Nationalist parties out polled larger Unionists by 40.7 / 40.1, but the nature of the 3.7% Others may tip that balance.
2 of the 37 Unionists are "U Independents" so guessing they fall in the "Others" category you mentioned and had enough votes to be elected.
But 37 to 35 is utterly irrelevant. Consent to change the status quo on the border does not have the support of both communities.
Which is why there should be nothing done apart from follow pre-existing Safeguarding policies of the Protocol until both communities reach a compromise.
The EU and the UK agreed to the Safeguarding provisions in case this happened 3 years ago. It is a part of the Protocol and a part of International Law.
But that isn't what's being proposed. What's being proposed is legislation to override the Protocol. Which does not have the consent of both communities.
Indeed and I have already said I think that is a cynical Overton Window outrider proposal to get people to think that is outrageous and what should happen instead is to operate within the Protocol via Article 16.
That way when Article 16 is invoked, its a moderate and reasonable proposal within the workings of the Protocol as opposed to tearing up the Protocol or a breach of international law as some of the die-hards have pretended it is in order to further their agenda.
Without more information I would not support unilateral action to tear up the Protocol outside of the Article 16 provisions, that is what A16 is there for and it should be used.
Would you be content to see A16 used until a compromise is reached, considering that is quite literally what it is there for in this scenario and both parties already agreed to that when the deal was made?
One community doesn't see any need for a compromise on the status quo. The other were the architects of it. Change requires consent of both. It doesn't exist.
The status quo includes the Safeguarding provisions within the 16th Article of the Northern Ireland Protocol.
Change requires consent of both, until then we have pre-agreed Safeguarding provisions to implement. Safeguarding isn't a change, it is what you do in the absence of agreement and was agreed by both parties as a part of the Protocol before it was implemented.
That's your wish. It isn't what's proposed.
Nothing has been formally proposed yet has it?
Take media reports with a grain of salt.
Do you agree that until a compromise is reached, it is reasonable to operate the pre-agreed Safeguarding procedures within the Protocol itself?
I do have this suspicion that Biden might want to hang on if it looks like Trump's going for another go, not sure he trusts anyone else to beat Trump. Might depend on whether he is told to go. And on whether he listens... Would be more likely to step down if he had a VP who looked like winner, I think.
Yup, and whether Trump is running or not also affects the potency of the age issue: Some voters could definitely be persuaded that you shouldn't elect someone who's 81, but that's not a great argument coming from somebody who's 78.
An old 81 though. You'd guess there were 10 years between them not 3.
I don't think he'll run unless it's judged the only way to stop Trump returning.
A feature of being late 70's and certainly early 80's*, in my experience anyway, is that things that you don't expect to break down do so, sometimes quite suddenly, and, if something does arrive which you didn't expect, it takes longer to recover. I think I'm still mentally capable**, but I'm certainly less physically so that a couple of years ago. And I find it much difficult to get enthused about things.
Going back to the Penn primary discussed over the weekend:
"Pennsylvania Lt. Governor and Democratic Senate candidate John Fetterman on Sunday said he had suffered a stroke late last week but was on the way to “a full recovery.” "
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The DUP oppose the Johnson Brexit because it creates an Irish Sea border and they opposed the May Brexit which would have prevented one. Seems the only Brexit on offer meeting their approval was a No Deal Brexit, the main drawback of which is a land border across Ireland. The inference is that a hard border across Ireland is in their eyes not a bug but a feature. Makes a perverse sense because a hard border in Ireland is a step away from Irish reunification just as a border in the Irish Sea is a step towards it. No chance of this rather sordid unionist fantasy coming true in practice, however, even under this government, and they really ought to realize this. The DUP, simultaneously thick and cynical. These 2 traits might seem to conflict but they do often go together.
Those aren't the only options.
There are 4 possible solutions, you've only listed 3 yet you've ignored the most suitable one altogether.
1: "May Brexit" - Keep UK aligned to the EU. Utterly unacceptable, would make Britain a rule-taker and entirely undemocratic since we'd have no elected representatives voting on the rules. 2: "Sea Border" - Utterly unacceptable, creates a border between GB and NI. 3: "Land Border" - Utterly unacceptable, creates a border between the Republic and NI.
Once you've eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the solution.
4: "Compromise" - No alignment, no border between GB and NI, no border between NI and Republic. Recognise the special nature of NI, recognise the UK and EU as equivalents even if not aligned and allow goods to flow freely handling it sensitively and sensibly.
The latter was roundly ridicules as a "unicorn" when I proposed it five years ago but even Hillary Benn is now calling for it. It was the right solution five years ago, it remains the right solution today. I am pleased even Hillary Benn is now on my side.
The no cost Brexit remains a unicorn - but I won't ridicule since unicorns have their dignity as all God's creatures do.
Going back to the Penn primary discussed over the weekend:
"Pennsylvania Lt. Governor and Democratic Senate candidate John Fetterman on Sunday said he had suffered a stroke late last week but was on the way to “a full recovery.” "
The Hill
As did another sitting Senator this last week. The Democrats hold on the senate is fragile even before the mid terms.
Trump's second term is going to be a laugh a minute. He is older, madder, cowed the Republicans completely and doesn't have to worry about 2028.
I thought it was only that a President couldn't be re-elected immediately. I know Obama isn't in the frame, but couldn't the madman, if he wins in 2024, run again in 2028?
On NI, it strikes me that even if a resolution to the current impasse is found that is acceptable to the DUP, the DUP will then find something else to be intransigent about. That's what they do, and will continue to do with knobs on now that Sinn Fein is the largest party. Nothing achievable will ever be enough for them. So I'm not sure that we should kowtow to a party that seeks to turn back the tide of history.
So you want to kill the Good Friday Agreement?
Because that's precisely what the Good Friday Agreement is all about, that both communities must both be satisfied to work together and the largest party of both communities holds a veto over Stormont operating - and the DUP won the election to be the largest party of their community just as Sinn Fein won the election to be the largest of theirs (ironically which is larger of the two doesn't matter as much as which is larger within their own community).
Yes they may find something else to be intransient over, the history of Northern Ireland suggests that is almost certainly nailed on, but until we replace the Good Friday Agreement with something else what else do you propose other than keep reaching compromises one intransient dispute at a time?
No, I don't want to kill the GFA, though I suspect the DUP are indifferent.
I'm just trying to remember what event of the last six years, by its very nature, made the GFA much more difficult to sustain. Brexit, I think?
Nope.
The fact that the GFA is a balancing act between two very diverse communities is the issue.
if it wasn't Brexit then to quote someone sensible earlier they would "find something else to be intransigent about. That's what they do, and will continue to do with knobs on" with or without Brexit.
Rubbish, the Good Friday Agreement worked in the first case because the UK and Ireland were both in the EU.
Not quite right.
The GFA was designed in the way it did because both the UK and RoI were part of the EU. If that had not been the case then it would have been designed differently to achieve the same objective.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The DUP oppose the Johnson Brexit because it creates an Irish Sea border and they opposed the May Brexit which would have prevented one. Seems the only Brexit on offer meeting their approval was a No Deal Brexit, the main drawback of which is a land border across Ireland. The inference is that a hard border across Ireland is in their eyes not a bug but a feature. Makes a perverse sense because a hard border in Ireland is a step away from Irish reunification just as a border in the Irish Sea is a step towards it. No chance of this rather sordid unionist fantasy coming true in practice, however, even under this government, and they really ought to realize this. The DUP, simultaneously thick and cynical. These 2 traits might seem to conflict but they do often go together.
Those aren't the only options.
There are 4 possible solutions, you've only listed 3 yet you've ignored the most suitable one altogether.
1: "May Brexit" - Keep UK aligned to the EU. Utterly unacceptable, would make Britain a rule-taker and entirely undemocratic since we'd have no elected representatives voting on the rules. 2: "Sea Border" - Utterly unacceptable, creates a border between GB and NI. 3: "Land Border" - Utterly unacceptable, creates a border between the Republic and NI.
Once you've eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the solution.
4: "Compromise" - No alignment, no border between GB and NI, no border between NI and Republic. Recognise the special nature of NI, recognise the UK and EU as equivalents even if not aligned and allow goods to flow freely handling it sensitively and sensibly.
The latter was roundly ridicules as a "unicorn" when I proposed it five years ago but even Hillary Benn is now calling for it. It was the right solution five years ago, it remains the right solution today. I am pleased even Hillary Benn is now on my side.
The no cost Brexit remains a unicorn - but I won't ridicule since unicorns have their dignity as all God's creatures do.
A compromise is only a unicorn in the same way as peace in Northern Ireland was a unicorn.
If people are willing to compromise we can have peace and an agreement. The outline for compromise has always been there, in the past it was just Brexiteers like myself making it. Now even former hardline Remainers like Hillary Benn are rethinking things and coming up to the same conclusion, from a different starting point.
When even Hillary Benn is calling for the same compromises I have always advocated, maybe you should start taking it seriously rather than being so conceited as to call it a unicorn.
Peace in NI is about compromise, not winner takes all majoritarianism.
Trump's second term is going to be a laugh a minute. He is older, madder, cowed the Republicans completely and doesn't have to worry about 2028.
I thought it was only that a President couldn't be re-elected immediately. I know Obama isn't in the frame, but couldn't the madman, if he wins in 2024, run again in 2028?
Trump's second term is going to be a laugh a minute. He is older, madder, cowed the Republicans completely and doesn't have to worry about 2028.
I thought it was only that a President couldn't be re-elected immediately. I know Obama isn't in the frame, but couldn't the madman, if he wins in 2024, run again in 2028?
He will have suspended the constitution by 2028. He is no more of a (small D) democrat than I am.
Random post on Greens as I've just seen a tweet about where they advanced this year. With thoughts on their chances going forwards. In my constituency, Norwich South, the Greens got very strong results in 2010 and 2015 with 15% and 14% and it was touted as a possible breakthrough a la Brighton in the future. They have been the main opposition to Labour on the council since about 2010. However they faded at the GEs of 2017 and 19 as Clive Lewis hoovered up the left wing vote. That's the nut they need to crack here. In the council vote this year in the wards of NS (with the exception of New Costessey which is not in Norwich council area but is not strong for greens anyway) they got roughly 7500 votes on mid to high 30s turnout. In 2015 GE they got 7000 votes/15% on 65% turnout. The numbers are there for a 20%+ result and 'one more heave', the councillors are well set and dug in and they just need to convince Green local/Lewis GE voters to switch now. Conclusion - I can see a green victory here, not next time but if we had a poorly thought of Labour minority administration or a decline for some reason for Labour, 2 elections out. One to watch imo.
Edit - the proposed boundary changes are not particularly helpful though, removing a strong ward for the Greens and adding less fertile areas but not perhaps to the extent I'd previously thought.......
Secondary edit - if they can get above their 2015 15% then I think Norwich will be ready to go green. They could really do with Lewis buggering off
Tertiary edit - the Tories get 20 to 30% here, so the Greens would be looking to take it on ca low 30s from Labour on similar
He had no friends on the left - being an authentic hard-line religious fundy to the core. He had no friends in the middle - being an authentic hard-line religious fundy to the core He had no friends on the moderate right - who see him as a joke/fundy/Trump Lite He had no friends on the Trump Right - for betraying Him. He has a small number of friends in the non Trump Fundy Right - but that is a small, small group.
Mr. Jessop, I trust you paused to rebuke them for their objectifying behaviour?
I thought about that as I ran on. There is no way I would wolf whistle a woman (never have, not only because I cannot whistle), and quite like schemes such as the Considerate Contractor one that prohibit it. Yet I quite enjoyed being wolf-whistled today. It made me smile and feel good.
I was last wolf-whistled 25 years ago, so it's not as if it is boringly common. I can imagine if it happened weekly I'd feel rather different.
I also wondered why they wolf-whistled a sweaty man who was 9K into a run; so much so, I actually checked my fly was zipped...
I wrote him off a long time ago! He has no plausible path for me.
It's a very narrow path, but it's not entirely implausible. (The nomination, not the Presidency.) If Trump were to blow up then he's a contender, especially if abortion is a headline issue, which is quite likely.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
You do know that the law related to NI elections was changed. Don't you?
The clock is ticking. 22 weeks left.
Indeed and if there's another election then the Protocol will lose it again, just like it lost the last one. And it will keep losing until the Unionists are happy.
I'm not sure if that's true. Say there is a another election and the same party rank is the result, but more flexible unionists have voted Alliance. NI will be in the same position. The DUP keep using their favourite two letter word, and there is another election. And another. Driven by the frustration and deadlock, more people vote Alliance and they eventually come second. Then, I believe, the Unionists won't get a look in. Power sharing would be between the two biggest communities, in which case that would be Catholic and None. At which point, what the Unionist parties think about the NIP is no longer anyone's concern.
This is why pants are being shat by unionist politicians. They accepted power sharing on the basis that they would always be in the driving seat. They've just come second and if they keep saying no to the assembly they could come third.
So "the protocol" is code for power sharing.
They came first on a community basis, not second, and there's absolutely zero chance of them coming third.
The problem for the unionists is they're split between the DUP, the UUP and the even more hardline TUV - while the nationalists are solidifying behind Sinn Fein with the SDLP dying even further than before.
Its not possible for the Alliance to come second. If the DUP shipped enough votes to the TUV for the DUP to fall behind Alliance, then TUV would have already overtaken Alliance.
In politics everything is possible. Remember that the rule of the UUP was set in stone. Until they stopped offering what people wanted. Then it was the DUP. Now they are under threat.
People in NI are people, not mindless religious zealots. The unionist parties have stopped taking the NI Assembly seriously. People don't want power imposed by London, thats the past. So if they continue to throw their toys out of the pram its certainly possible to see votes shift in large numbers to parties wanting to do the job.
We see plenty of seismic shifts in GB politics, why is NI any different?
The UUP were too moderate. Hence the rise of the DUP The SDLP were too moderate. Hence the rise of SF.
Hardline is what the sectarian voters want. Other people vote for the Alliance.
The actual money and jobs can be doled out by London (and have when the assembly is not in action) - the policies on the ground don't really change.
I do have this suspicion that Biden might want to hang on if it looks like Trump's going for another go, not sure he trusts anyone else to beat Trump. Might depend on whether he is told to go. And on whether he listens... Would be more likely to step down if he had a VP who looked like winner, I think.
Yup, and whether Trump is running or not also affects the potency of the age issue: Some voters could definitely be persuaded that you shouldn't elect someone who's 81, but that's not a great argument coming from somebody who's 78.
An old 81 though. You'd guess there were 10 years between them not 3.
I don't think he'll run unless it's judged the only way to stop Trump returning.
A feature of being late 70's and certainly early 80's*, in my experience anyway, is that things that you don't expect to break down do so, sometimes quite suddenly, and, if something does arrive which you didn't expect, it takes longer to recover. I think I'm still mentally capable**, but I'm certainly less physically so that a couple of years ago. And I find it much difficult to get enthused about things.
*Or maybe mid 80's now.
**YMMV.
Mentally you're definitely good. Posts on here show that all the time.
"President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia is meeting at the Kremlin with the leaders of the Collective Treaty Security Organization, an alliance that also includes five other former Soviet states. President Aleksandr G. Lukashenko of Belarus, speaking first, criticized some of the allies for insufficient solidarity with Russia and Belarus amid Western sanctions."
He had no friends on the left - being an authentic hard-line religious fundy to the core. He had no friends in the middle - being an authentic hard-line religious fundy to the core He had no friends on the moderate right - who see him as a joke/fundy/Trump Lite He had no friends on the Trump Right - for betraying Him. He has a small number of friends in the non Trump Fundy Right - but that is a small, small group.
Pence is going nowhere.
I'm not suggesting betting on him - just saying that an absolute assumption that he has zero chance is a dangerous one for betting purposes.
And I think you underestimate his potential support among those likely to vote in primaries.
Trump's second term is going to be a laugh a minute. He is older, madder, cowed the Republicans completely and doesn't have to worry about 2028.
Quite. Fewer checks and balances from the neocons as it looks like there will be fewer of them.
I get why he's the betting fav for WH24 but I don't see it myself. There are multiple things that could prevent it and I think at least one of them will happen.
Mr. Jessop, I trust you paused to rebuke them for their objectifying behaviour?
I thought about that as I ran on. There is no way I would wolf whistle a woman (never have, not only because I cannot whistle), and quite like schemes such as the Considerate Contractor one that prohibit it. Yet I quite enjoyed being wolf-whistled today. It made me smile and feel good.
I was last wolf-whistled 25 years ago, so it's not as if it is boringly common. I can imagine if it happened weekly I'd feel rather different.
I also wondered why they wolf-whistled a sweaty man who was 9K into a run; so much so, I actually checked my fly was zipped...
He had no friends on the left - being an authentic hard-line religious fundy to the core. He had no friends in the middle - being an authentic hard-line religious fundy to the core He had no friends on the moderate right - who see him as a joke/fundy/Trump Lite He had no friends on the Trump Right - for betraying Him. He has a small number of friends in the non Trump Fundy Right - but that is a small, small group.
Pence is going nowhere.
Quite funny that the man who backed Trump to the hilt and even wanted to help him further than he legally could (until told he didn't have the power to - by Mr Potatoe Head himself, Dan Quayle) - ended up being thought to have betrayed Trump.
All political issues can be resolved, but to do so there has to be an acceptance of the realities on hand. And in NI that is not the case.
The Tories don't recognise that what they signed is directly contrary to their promises made to business and unionists. The DUP don't recognise that they just lost the election. And that a majority of voters backed the protocol. Neither recognise the business reality that the protocol puts NI in a golden position of a foot in both camps hence business performance being so strong.
This cannot be fixed because the Tories and DUP are lying to each other from a position of pig ignorance. Scrapping the protocol overturns the will of the people. Refusing to participate in the assembly removes democracy and threatens the GFA itself.
Yes it is preposterous that we need a license and customs forms to send stuff from one part of the UK to another - and even more preposterous that the government who proposed and implemented such a thing claims to be dumfounded that this has happened. But we are where we are. And that place is planet delusion.
The sad thing for Unionism is that its elected morons will keep saying "Don't Look Up", the mess will rumble on for another 5 months and then we get another election where this time the DUP get overtaken by Alliance. And then we need a revised framework for the Assembly as the DUP will have led Unionism into third place.
Point of order, the DUP didn't "lose the election" since under the Good Friday Agreement the election isn't a First Past the Post winner-takes-all majoritarian system.
Under the GFA which party comes first or second overall matters far, far, far less than which party finishes first within each community - and the DUP won the election within the Unionist community, which didn't always seem guaranteed.
Scrapping the Protocol doesn't overturn the will of the people, that is something you can only say because you are being deliberately pig ignorant. Under the GFA to proceed needs the consent of both communities. The Protocol well and truly lost the election just gone on that basis since it won the consent as far as I know of no elected MLAs from the Unionist community. Therefore under the terms of the GFA, the cross-partisan support it requires has failed and the Unionist community is entirely within their rights under the GFA to shut down Stormont until the Protocol is fixed to their liking.
That is how power sharing works, that is the GFA in action and the partisanly pro-EU side which sought to weaponise the GFA to seek further alignment have failed to understand that power sharing means both communities have power, not just the community that wants free trade across the land border.
The *DUP* think they lost the election. Power sharing was ok as long as the majority unionist population elected unionists to power. The bit that scares them is that the long-forecasted demographic shift is here.
As for the protocol this has been turned into the unionist line in the sand. And was beaten by all the people who voted for parties who said "its fine".
Of course we will need a way through this impasse. But lets not dodge the bullet - majority unionism in NI is over. If they refuse to accept the result then another election is forced. And they will lose even harder next time.
The power-sharing agreement assumed two main blocks - unionism and republicanism. We now have a third block, and if that keeps advancing we will need to revise the agreement as it no longer works. No wonder the DUP are so scared. This is the End Of Things.
Total bullshit.
The election wasn't even due yet, it was only held because of the resignation of the First Minister over the Protocol. So to claim "power sharing was OK" before is total unmitigated bollocks, the plug had already been pulled when they were first and it remains pulled still because the issue still isn't resolved.
The unionist community against the Protocol won 100% of the seats won by the unionist community. So the Protocol was defeated in the ballot box under the terms of the GFA, unionists saying "its fine" didn't win even a single MLA. So your repeated pretensions of "its fine" is you saying "don't look up" to what actually happened.
PS unionists remain the biggest community so the idea they're going to be the third community is your own wishcasting. Unionists won 37 MLAs, nationalists only won 35.
I suspect Unionists who were exasperated by DUP/UUP attitudes ended up voting for Alliance, so they are represented.
The Alliance aren't a unionist party, so no they're not.
And the DUP lost votes to the TUV on the basis that the DUP weren't hardline enough, not that they weren't compromising enough.
So. You can't be a Unionist if you don't vote for a Unionist party? How about if you do, but transfer to another? What percentage are you if you vote Alliance and transfer to a Unionist Party? Half a Unionist?
Meanwhile. It might be instructive to read this from the UUP. The Unionists aren't a monolith.
No, under the GFA parties have to register what community they are representing. The DUP, the UUP and the TUV and some elected Independents are all Unionists, combined they are the largest community. Sinn Fein and the SDLP are Nationalists, combined they are the second-largest but they have the largest party due to the SDLP being miniscule nowadays and they fell even further backwards this year.
The Alliance represent neither. That is their choice.
I know all that. You are taking the HYUFD purity test too far. How about if you are a Unionist but aren't thoroughly obsessed by the minutiae of Brexit and feel the Health Service and jobs may be of considerably more import? Are you only a Unionist if you take one view on one niche issue?
Its not a HYUFD style purity test, its about the election results.
If a Unionist who thought that was elected then they would have been elected - they weren't. As far as I can see there were 37 Unionist MLAs elected and 35 Nationalist MLAs elected and of the 37 Unionist MLAs a total of 37 say the Protocol does not have their support and a total of 0 say it does. For the Nationalist community the figure is 35 say it does have their support and a total of 0 says it does not.
Therefore on a cross-community basis, the Protocol has been rejected. Scrapping it in one go has also been rejected (due to the Nationalists all supporting keeping it) so the solution is to Safeguard it until a compromise is reached. Once a compromise is reached, the Protocol can be replaced/scapped or implemented depending upon whatever the compromise is.
That logic only works if the Alliance and Green voters don't exist. The majority of votes cast were for pro-NIP parties. The majority of MLA's elected were pro-NIP.
What you are missing is there are 3 classes of voters who vote separately, with the results only aggregated for certain purposes
Trump's second term is going to be a laugh a minute. He is older, madder, cowed the Republicans completely and doesn't have to worry about 2028.
I thought it was only that a President couldn't be re-elected immediately. I know Obama isn't in the frame, but couldn't the madman, if he wins in 2024, run again in 2028?
No, he couldn't run in 28 for President. He could run as VP though I believe Edit- nope, I'm wrong but..........
Mr. Jessop, I trust you paused to rebuke them for their objectifying behaviour?
I thought about that as I ran on. There is no way I would wolf whistle a woman (never have, not only because I cannot whistle), and quite like schemes such as the Considerate Contractor one that prohibit it. Yet I quite enjoyed being wolf-whistled today. It made me smile and feel good.
I was last wolf-whistled 25 years ago, so it's not as if it is boringly common. I can imagine if it happened weekly I'd feel rather different.
I also wondered why they wolf-whistled a sweaty man who was 9K into a run; so much so, I actually checked my fly was zipped...
I look absolutely dreadful mid-run.
A friend of mine used to do Ironman triathlons, and he told me a saying. "Some days you are a pigeon, soaring gracefully through the air. Other days you're a statue that the pigeon lands and sh*ts on."
That's running for me: some days are incredibly easy, and the miles just glide by; other days I struggle for ever mile. I haven't really found any reason for it; I don't know my body well enough.
Statue days and pigeon days. Today was a pigeon day.
Trump's second term is going to be a laugh a minute. He is older, madder, cowed the Republicans completely and doesn't have to worry about 2028.
I thought it was only that a President couldn't be re-elected immediately. I know Obama isn't in the frame, but couldn't the madman, if he wins in 2024, run again in 2028?
No, he couldn't run in 28 for President. He could run as VP though I believe Edit- nope, I'm wrong but..........
If the Republicans take the house and senate he could be put in place as speaker, becoming second in line and if something were to happen to Biden and Harris (impeachment by republican congress?), Trump becomes president and as long as he serves less than 2 years (so, after midday Jan 20 2023) he could run for 4 years more. That's your maximum Trump under current rules
Trump's second term is going to be a laugh a minute. He is older, madder, cowed the Republicans completely and doesn't have to worry about 2028.
I thought it was only that a President couldn't be re-elected immediately. I know Obama isn't in the frame, but couldn't the madman, if he wins in 2024, run again in 2028?
Two terms maximum whether consecutive or not. Ignore the nutters who think that Trump has a way round term limits - they're utterly deluded.
Comments
How about if you do, but transfer to another?
What percentage are you if you vote Alliance and transfer to a Unionist Party?
Half a Unionist?
Meanwhile. It might be instructive to read this from the UUP. The Unionists aren't a monolith.
https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/politics/uup-peer-sir-reg-empey-slams-anti-protocol-rally-speakers-3656865
Whether power needs to be shared or not I know the majority of voters plumped for pro-NIP parties because I can add. Easy for the majority to dig their heels in and say NO. Much harder as the minority. Yes, they can't just be ignored, but the weight of their position is less.
The basic tenor was that dilution and non-implementation of the NIP was as much a threat to Irish food standards as something like TTIP, that the UK could be a back door in future for such totems as chlorinated chicken. And the fact that those goods are only potentially going to NI (if checks break down) does not make a difference - it doesn't have to be the supermarket or butcher themselves that exports the produce: for some RoI consumers the most convenient supermarket might be a UK chain in, for instance, Newry or Derry. Deals with Australia and America, therefore, could very much be a back door to stealthily reduce food hygiene standards for RoI citizens exercising normal consumer choice.
Even within the EU, Ireland and the UK were separate phytosanitary zones with checks at Larne, and the UK's record within the EU - mad cow, horsemeat, swine flu - can be regarded with a critical eye. A farm infection carried by inadequate checks on animals or feed, due to the breakdown of existing implementations, is a risk to all Ireland.
I think worth noting also that the historical event that looms as large as any other in Irish history was phytosanitary in nature, with the role of GB obviously highly contentious. Even in normal times, TTIP shows food standards can be very emotive - how much moreso for GB-Ire trade?
If there may be wiggle room for other goods, Ireland and the EU backing down on food looks a hard sell in Ireland.
And sadly the same can be said of the DUP. They knew fully well what they were doing in which case they are liars. Or they didn't know what the deal meant in which case they are morons. In reality I'm pretty confident its both.
That the entire business community has called them out does rather back me up, and so many of them are unionists. So I am not for a second characterising "unionists as morons". Just the unionist politicians. There is a difference.
There are 4 possible solutions, you've only listed 3 yet you've ignored the most suitable one altogether.
1: "May Brexit" - Keep UK aligned to the EU. Utterly unacceptable, would make Britain a rule-taker and entirely undemocratic since we'd have no elected representatives voting on the rules.
2: "Sea Border" - Utterly unacceptable, creates a border between GB and NI.
3: "Land Border" - Utterly unacceptable, creates a border between the Republic and NI.
Once you've eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the solution.
4: "Compromise" - No alignment, no border between GB and NI, no border between NI and Republic. Recognise the special nature of NI, recognise the UK and EU as equivalents even if not aligned and allow goods to flow freely handling it sensitively and sensibly.
The latter was roundly ridicules as a "unicorn" when I proposed it five years ago but even Hillary Benn is now calling for it. It was the right solution five years ago, it remains the right solution today. I am pleased even Hillary Benn is now on my side.
1 Alliance voters count as much as other voters
2 Just because a Unionist votes for a non-unionist party that doesn't mean they aren't unionist any more. Perhaps they are looking for a more pragmatic and negotiated view of the future.
She's getting quicker, if less original
The Alliance represent neither. That is their choice.
But Biden is late 70s, clearly has some mental cognisance issues and I challenge you to say he has bundles of energy. He clearly doesn't.
The penny is also starting to drop for the Democrats that jumping on the far left bandwagon, especially when it comes to cultural / immigration issues, is coming to bite them in the ass badly.
Which leads onto another point. You are right - most parties, if they get a crushing mid-term defeat, change course. But the Democrats are going to find it hard to do so because their voting base has been captured by the militants. Any candidate that comes out against the latter will find it a hard struggle in any primaries (although some do come through). Hence, it's unlikely they will be able to turn, or if they do, at the risk of splitting the party. The far-left want control of the Democrats. If they lose 2024, that's a small-ish price to pay for long-term control.
Re Abrams, happy to have a bet with you that she won't win.
By your own logic that was soundly defeated too.
Unless or until the UK starts insisting a land border is built, just as the EU is insisting upon a sea border, there is only one side of the debate not showing flexibility and it isn't the UK.
There can not be a border anywhere, there can not be alignment. Therefore, the only solution is to accept that and find the next best option, but the EU still want "integrity" which the UK is not insisting upon.
Implement the Safeguarding, suspend all operations of the Protocol while keeping it legally there but in Safeguarded abeyance pending the resolution whereby a compromise is reached that all relevant stakeholders agree to.
You are taking the HYUFD purity test too far.
How about if you are a Unionist but aren't thoroughly obsessed by the minutiae of Brexit and feel the Health Service and jobs may be of considerably more import?
Are you only a Unionist if you take one view on one niche issue?
By my reckoning on the BBC numbers the larger Nationalist parties out polled larger Unionists by 40.7 / 40.1, but the nature of the 3.7% Others may tip that balance.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2022/northern-ireland/results
'Now he [Mr J] needs to shore up a faltering premiership and pacify the MPs who put him in power. For the past week his ministers have threatened that Britain will undermine the protocol unilaterally, a stance that seasoned Brexit observers suspect is little more than a bluff. Johnson has buckled in negotiations with the EU in the past, and is indeed set to adopt a more conciliatory tone today than his outriders, such as Liz Truss, have done so far.
In doing so, Johnson will empathise the need for a solution that has “cross-community support”. But the irony of Britain’s Northern Irish trilemma is that the solution most likely to win such support is the one that does not involve any border: for Britain to have remained in the customs union (and single market) in a softer Brexit, or to have had no Brexit at all.'
If a Unionist who thought that was elected then they would have been elected - they weren't. As far as I can see there were 37 Unionist MLAs elected and 35 Nationalist MLAs elected and of the 37 Unionist MLAs a total of 37 say the Protocol does not have their support and a total of 0 say it does. For the Nationalist community the figure is 35 say it does have their support and a total of 0 says it does not.
Therefore on a cross-community basis, the Protocol has been rejected. Scrapping it in one go has also been rejected (due to the Nationalists all supporting keeping it) so the solution is to Safeguard it until a compromise is reached. Once a compromise is reached, the Protocol can be replaced/scapped or implemented depending upon whatever the compromise is.
Of course it was a lot easier, as far as the border was concerned, when NI, as part of the UK, was in the EU. Just maybe the solution will be for NI to rejoin the EU as an independent statelet, with EII (or GeoVII) as Head of State.
And sensible, non-aggressive, Customs arrangements between UK and the EU.
All your arguments ignore the fact that the Nationalist community is content with the status quo on the border.
Any consent to changes were, in your own words "comprehensively defeated".
2 of the 37 Unionists are "U Independents" so guessing they fall in the "Others" category you mentioned and had enough votes to be elected.
If there's no consent for any solution, then Safeguarding is the responsible and rational thing to do until a compromise does exist and can be agreed. That is precisely what Safeguarding policies exist for.
Once a change is agreed, then it can be implemented. But until then, it should be put into Safeguarded abeyance to buy time until the agreement is found.
Consent to change the status quo on the border does not have the support of both communities.
The EU and the UK agreed to the Safeguarding provisions in case this happened 3 years ago. It is a part of the Protocol and a part of International Law.
No border at all is the only viable solution I agree, but alignment is out of the question and being in the EU is also out of the question. Therefore the only viable solution is compromise - the EU recognises the UK as equivalents even if not aligned and the UK does the same with the EU.
Then we can all move on.
I waver on thinking whether Warren is value... I thought she had a much better chance last time as I assumed she would get Sanders' endorsement... and I was basically wrong. That logic might apply this time though.
What's being proposed is legislation to override the Protocol.
Which does not have the consent of both communities.
That way when Article 16 is invoked, its a moderate and reasonable proposal within the workings of the Protocol as opposed to tearing up the Protocol or a breach of international law as some of the die-hards have pretended it is in order to further their agenda.
Without more information I would not support unilateral action to tear up the Protocol outside of the Article 16 provisions, that is what A16 is there for and it should be used.
Would you be content to see A16 used until a compromise is reached, considering that is quite literally what it is there for in this scenario and both parties already agreed to that when the deal was made?
So "the protocol" is code for power sharing.
The Alliance got a fraction of the votes of the Unionists, they weren't anywhere close to them.
The only reason the DUP fell behind Sinn Fein is that the SDLP fell backwards by more than Sinn Fein went forwards, and the DUP lost votes to the even more hardline TUV.
If there's another election, then the Unionists regaining the first placed party is far more likely than them falling behind to third.
The other were the architects of it.
Change requires consent of both.
It doesn't exist.
I suppose, if they were ahead of the DUP but the Protestant community was still the second largest bloc of parties, then they would just do as you say. Which, in order for my scenario to happen, would likely have to happen first...
The problem for the unionists is they're split between the DUP, the UUP and the even more hardline TUV - while the nationalists are solidifying behind Sinn Fein with the SDLP dying even further than before.
Its not possible for the Alliance to come second. If the DUP shipped enough votes to the TUV for the DUP to fall behind Alliance, then TUV would have already overtaken Alliance.
Change requires consent of both, until then we have pre-agreed Safeguarding provisions to implement. Safeguarding isn't a change, it is what you do in the absence of agreement and was agreed by both parties as a part of the Protocol before it was implemented.
Hence the proxy war. Yes the NIP in its current form will need mods. But as NI business can demonstrate the foot in both camps is beneficial. Which is the big danger to the Tories - its being *in the EEA* thats beneficial. And despite the clear and growing evidence of the self-harm on the UK economy we can't possibly accept that.
So of course Bonzo the Clown has gone all in with the DUP. What other choice does he have?
It is Middlesex Day today; the date was chosen to commemorate the 57th (West Middlesex) Regiment's victory at the Battle of of Albuera in 1811 during the Peninsular War. The 57th were holding a crucial line.
Their commander, Lieutenant Colonel William Inglis, was badly injured after taking grape shot in the neck but refused to retreat and stayed with the regiment's colours, exhorting the men to "Die hard 57th, die hard!"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_hard_(phrase)
On a community basis the unionists are first, the nationalists are second and both have over 40% of the vote and the Alliance are a long, long way behind on third with 13.5% of the vote.
It'd be great to see non-sectarian be NI's future, but it sadly isn't what NI voters are voting for. The only reason the unionists didn't get first placed party despite being first placed community is their vote is split more with the even more hardline TUV gaining votes, it isn't because the community is behind in the votes.
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/2022-northern-ireland-assembly-elections/
People in NI are people, not mindless religious zealots. The unionist parties have stopped taking the NI Assembly seriously. People don't want power imposed by London, thats the past. So if they continue to throw their toys out of the pram its certainly possible to see votes shift in large numbers to parties wanting to do the job.
We see plenty of seismic shifts in GB politics, why is NI any different?
42% Unionist
16% Non-Aligned
Yeah that sounds about right. So non-aligned displacing unionist isn't happening any time soon.
It isn't what's proposed.
I don't think he'll run unless it's judged the only way to stop Trump returning.
https://ballotbox.scot/le22/glasgow
Despite all the talk of the supposed rise of Alliance (which gained some votes from both communities, not from just one) the biggest gainers of the election were the even more hardline TUV. Between the DUP, UUP and TUV no matter how you split the votes of the 42% at least of those will ultimately come ahead of the party with the lions share of the 16%.
Take media reports with a grain of salt.
Do you agree that until a compromise is reached, it is reasonable to operate the pre-agreed Safeguarding procedures within the Protocol itself?
And I find it much difficult to get enthused about things.
*Or maybe mid 80's now.
**YMMV.
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/16/mike-pence-2024-presidential-race-00032573
"Pennsylvania Lt. Governor and Democratic Senate candidate John Fetterman on Sunday said he had suffered a stroke late last week but was on the way to “a full recovery.” "
The Hill
The Democrats hold on the senate is fragile even before the mid terms.
The GFA was designed in the way it did because both the UK and RoI were part of the EU. If that had not been the case then it would have been designed differently to achieve the same objective.
If people are willing to compromise we can have peace and an agreement. The outline for compromise has always been there, in the past it was just Brexiteers like myself making it. Now even former hardline Remainers like Hillary Benn are rethinking things and coming up to the same conclusion, from a different starting point.
When even Hillary Benn is calling for the same compromises I have always advocated, maybe you should start taking it seriously rather than being so conceited as to call it a unicorn.
Peace in NI is about compromise, not winner takes all majoritarianism.
This has made me deliriously happy. Not bad for a 49 year old ...
If Trump has a health issue, then Pence could be facing DeSantis for the nomination.
In my constituency, Norwich South, the Greens got very strong results in 2010 and 2015 with 15% and 14% and it was touted as a possible breakthrough a la Brighton in the future. They have been the main opposition to Labour on the council since about 2010.
However they faded at the GEs of 2017 and 19 as Clive Lewis hoovered up the left wing vote. That's the nut they need to crack here.
In the council vote this year in the wards of NS (with the exception of New Costessey which is not in Norwich council area but is not strong for greens anyway) they got roughly 7500 votes on mid to high 30s turnout. In 2015 GE they got 7000 votes/15% on 65% turnout.
The numbers are there for a 20%+ result and 'one more heave', the councillors are well set and dug in and they just need to convince Green local/Lewis GE voters to switch now.
Conclusion - I can see a green victory here, not next time but if we had a poorly thought of Labour minority administration or a decline for some reason for Labour, 2 elections out.
One to watch imo.
Edit - the proposed boundary changes are not particularly helpful though, removing a strong ward for the Greens and adding less fertile areas but not perhaps to the extent I'd previously thought.......
Secondary edit - if they can get above their 2015 15% then I think Norwich will be ready to go green. They could really do with Lewis buggering off
Tertiary edit - the Tories get 20 to 30% here, so the Greens would be looking to take it on ca low 30s from Labour on similar
He had no friends in the middle - being an authentic hard-line religious fundy to the core
He had no friends on the moderate right - who see him as a joke/fundy/Trump Lite
He had no friends on the Trump Right - for betraying Him.
He has a small number of friends in the non Trump Fundy Right - but that is a small, small group.
Pence is going nowhere.
I was last wolf-whistled 25 years ago, so it's not as if it is boringly common. I can imagine if it happened weekly I'd feel rather different.
I also wondered why they wolf-whistled a sweaty man who was 9K into a run; so much so, I actually checked my fly was zipped...
If Trump were to blow up then he's a contender, especially if abortion is a headline issue, which is quite likely.
The SDLP were too moderate. Hence the rise of SF.
Hardline is what the sectarian voters want. Other people vote for the Alliance.
The actual money and jobs can be doled out by London (and have when the assembly is not in action) - the policies on the ground don't really change.
What's not to like for your average bonfire guy?
"President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia is meeting at the Kremlin with the leaders of the Collective Treaty Security Organization, an alliance that also includes five other former Soviet states. President Aleksandr G. Lukashenko of Belarus, speaking first, criticized some of the allies for insufficient solidarity with Russia and Belarus amid Western sanctions."
NY Times live blog
And I think you underestimate his potential support among those likely to vote in primaries.
Edit- nope, I'm wrong but..........
That's running for me: some days are incredibly easy, and the miles just glide by; other days I struggle for ever mile. I haven't really found any reason for it; I don't know my body well enough.
Statue days and pigeon days. Today was a pigeon day.
That's your maximum Trump under current rules