If there is a Deal agreed and passed by Parliament then May will still be there, if not then Corbyn could well be PM this time next year and the 2019 Tory Party Conference will be addressed not by the PM but by the Leader of the Opposition
Could you, as a Conservative and a Unionist, support a deal which keeps the CU for the UK and the SM for Northern Ireland?
The CU for the UK is preferred by most voters to No Deal and the CU and SM in NI is preferred by most NI voters to a hard border, if a hard border in NI that will be a boost to Nationalists and if No Deal for the UK that will be a huge boost to the SNP and the Yes to Scottish independence campaign posing a far greater threat to the UK
Aren't NI currently in a single market with the rest of the UK? Surely they'd have to leave that in order to stay in one with the EU.
Given the whole UK would be in the Customs Union there would still be no tariffs between NI and GB
RobD is correct; HYUFD is wrong. If NI is in the EU SM they would not be part of the UK SM. There would be a regulatory barrier between the two and goods could not move without friction between GB and NI The fact that there would be no tariffs does not change this.
So it would be like mainland Spain and the Canary Islands? Or Ceuta and Melilla?
Or between UK and Channel Islands, Isle of Man?
Technically those are not part of the United Kingdom, so your comparison is not accurate.
Just a matter of interpretation. Are Manxmen or Islanders less British than Northern Irish?
IofM and Channel Isles are part of the British Isles but not part of the UK.
I think that it is reasonable to assume that someone who lives and works in Australia is not likely to have his job or living standards negatively impacted by a No Deal Brexit. If that is not the case, Mr Archer is at perfect liberty to inform us.
Mr Archer's personal circumstances are his own business - none of ours. Much better (and frankly more in character) to attack his ideas than his personal circumstances, of which you admit you are completely ignorant.
Not that its any of our business, but below he replied 'all of the above' when I suggested it entirely possible for an Australian resident to have family, property, investments or pensions in the UK.
I am not attacking his personal circumstances. I am pointing out that someone accusing the British Prime Minister of potentially being a traitor for possibly proposing a Brexit deal he does not like lives and works in Australia.
You keep writing 'he won't be affected by a bad deal or no deal' - you don't know that.
Perhaps engage with his argument than his current geographical location?
Reminds me of last weekend when you blamed Remainers for the mess that Brexit was in.
That would appear to mean that Olly Robbins has sold out the UK and he is waiting to inform TM of what he has done. It would be absolutely extraordinary if Robbins has reached a deal without having political approval. But then May does not have Cabinet approval for anything other than Chequers. The conventions of Government that have been in place for centuries being overturned in a desperate attempt to sell out the country.
We need not only a divorce deal (the Withdrawal agreement), but also a Trade Deal or at least a binding agreement about the future trade relationship plus a refund on the Withdrawal agreement terms if the trade deal is not finally signed.
If there is a Deal agreed and passed by Parliament then May will still be there, if not then Corbyn could well be PM this time next year and the 2019 Tory Party Conference will be addressed not by the PM but by the Leader of the Opposition
Could you, as a Conservative and a Unionist, support a deal which keeps the CU for the UK and the SM for Northern Ireland?
The CU for the UK is preferred by most voters to No Deal and the CU and SM in NI is preferred by most NI voters to a hard border, if a hard border in NI that will be a boost to Nationalists and if No Deal for the UK that will be a huge boost to the SNP and the Yes to Scottish independence campaign posing a far greater threat to the UK
Aren't NI currently in a single market with the rest of the UK? Surely they'd have to leave that in order to stay in one with the EU.
Given the whole UK would be in the Customs Union there would still be no tariffs between NI and GB
RobD is correct; HYUFD is wrong. If NI is in the EU SM they would not be part of the UK SM. There would be a regulatory barrier between the two and goods could not move without friction between GB and NI The fact that there would be no tariffs does not change this.
So it would be like mainland Spain and the Canary Islands? Or Ceuta and Melilla?
Or between UK and Channel Islands, Isle of Man?
Technically those are not part of the United Kingdom, so your comparison is not accurate.
Just a matter of interpretation. Are Manxmen or Islanders less British than Northern Irish?
IofM and Channel Isles are part of the British Isles but not part of the UK.
Surely a perfectly reasonable precedent for NI customs though.
If there is a Deal agreed and passed by Parliament then May will still be there, if not then Corbyn could well be PM this time next year and the 2019 Tory Party Conference will be addressed not by the PM but by the Leader of the Opposition
Could you, as a Conservative and a Unionist, support a deal which keeps the CU for the UK and the SM for Northern Ireland?
The CU for the UK is preferred by most voters to No Deal and the CU and SM in NI is preferred by most NI voters to a hard border, if a hard border in NI that will be a boost to Nationalists and if No Deal for the UK that will be a huge boost to the SNP and the Yes to Scottish independence campaign posing a far greater threat to the UK
Aren't NI currently in a single market with the rest of the UK? Surely they'd have to leave that in order to stay in one with the EU.
Given the whole UK would be in the Customs Union there would still be no tariffs between NI and GB
RobD is correct; HYUFD is wrong. If NI is in the EU SM they would not be part of the UK SM. There would be a regulatory barrier between the two and goods could not move without friction between GB and NI The fact that there would be no tariffs does not change this.
So it would be like mainland Spain and the Canary Islands? Or Ceuta and Melilla?
Or between UK and Channel Islands, Isle of Man?
Technically those are not part of the United Kingdom, so your comparison is not accurate.
Just a matter of interpretation. Are Manxmen or Islanders less British than Northern Irish?
IofM and Channel Isles are part of the British Isles but not part of the UK.
But are ruled by the British Crown, via an individual that has the support of the local assembly.
I’m not going to attack Archie simply because of location, he’s entitled to his views and his passion for the country wherever he is. As we all are.
But
“Remaining in a CU for any period of time would be a disastrous outcome for the UK; far worse than either Remaining or No Deal”
I genuinely want to know the evidence supporting that statement
Always delighted to answer a direct question. And this is probably the most important point I have made.
Under the CU, the EU can negotiate FTAs on behalf of the CU. BUT although the UK would be bound by the terms of these treaties and the tariff agreements, the third parties with which the EU is signing the FTAs are NOT bound to provide these benefits to the UK - the UK will not be part of the EU, and the FTA is between the third country and the EU. The UK is not a party to the FTA.
So it is a totally one sided arrangement. We are bound by whatever the EU agrees, but we don't get access to the FTAs terms, only the tariff arrangement. The EU can therefore sign an FTA which gives a third country preferential access to parts of the UK market, and the UK has no say, but the UK does not get the reciprocal rights in the third country.
Therefore this outcome is far more damaging to the UK than any of the alternatives and would result in massive damage to UK trade internationally if it became permanent. It would be simply mad to agree to this.
If there is a Deal agreed and passed by Parliament then May will still be there, if not then Corbyn could well be PM this time next year and the 2019 Tory Party Conference will be addressed not by the PM but by the Leader of the Opposition
Could you, as a Conservative and a Unionist, support a deal which keeps the CU for the UK and the SM for Northern Ireland?
The CU for the UK is preferred by most voters to No Deal and the CU and SM in NI is preferred by most NI voters to a hard border, if a hard border in NI that will be a boost to Nationalists and if No Deal for the UK that will be a huge boost to the SNP and the Yes to Scottish independence campaign posing a far greater threat to the UK
Aren't NI currently in a single market with the rest of the UK? Surely they'd have to leave that in order to stay in one with the EU.
Given the whole UK would be in the Customs Union there would still be no tariffs between NI and GB
RobD is correct; HYUFD is wrong. If NI is in the EU SM they would not be part of the UK SM. There would be a regulatory barrier between the two and goods could not move without friction between GB and NI The fact that there would be no tariffs does not change this.
So it would be like mainland Spain and the Canary Islands? Or Ceuta and Melilla?
Or between UK and Channel Islands, Isle of Man?
Technically those are not part of the United Kingdom, so your comparison is not accurate.
Just a matter of interpretation. Are Manxmen or Islanders less British than Northern Irish?
IofM and Channel Isles are part of the British Isles but not part of the UK.
Surely a perfectly reasonable precedent for NI customs though.
Given the Channel Islands status traces to 1066, I'm not sure that provides a helpful precedent for Northern Ireland.
That would appear to mean that Olly Robbins has sold out the UK and he is waiting to inform TM of what he has done. It would be absolutely extraordinary if Robbins has reached a deal without having political approval. But then May does not have Cabinet approval for anything other than Chequers. The conventions of Government that have been in place for centuries being overturned in a desperate attempt to sell out the country.
We need not only a divorce deal (the Withdrawal agreement), but also a Trade Deal or at least a binding agreement about the future trade relationship plus a refund on the Withdrawal agreement terms if the trade deal is not finally signed.
BBC staff have been told to use non- binary pronouns when addressing gender-fluid or transgender employees to ensure that the corporation does not develop a “heteronormative culture”.
The policy means that BBC workers will be encouraged to refer to non-binary colleagues as “they” or “them”, rather than “he” or “she”.
In addition heterosexual BBC staff will be asked to wear badges identifying themselves as “straight allies” to help their LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) colleagues."
If there is a Deal agreed and passed by Parliament then May will still be there, if not then Corbyn could well be PM this time next year and the 2019 Tory Party Conference will be addressed not by the PM but by the Leader of the Opposition
Could you, as a Conservative and a Unionist, support a deal which keeps the CU for the UK and the SM for Northern Ireland?
The CU for the UK is preferred by most voters to No Deal and the CU and SM in NI is preferred by most NI voters to a hard border, if a hard border in NI that will be a boost to Nationalists and if No Deal for the UK that will be a huge boost to the SNP and the Yes to Scottish independence campaign posing a far greater threat to the UK
Aren't NI currently in a single market with the rest of the UK? Surely they'd have to leave that in order to stay in one with the EU.
Given the whole UK would be in the Customs Union there would still be no tariffs between NI and GB
RobD is correct; HYUFD is wrong. If NI is in the EU SM they would not be part of the UK SM. There would be a regulatory barrier between the two and goods could not move without friction between GB and NI The fact that there would be no tariffs does not change this.
So it would be like mainland Spain and the Canary Islands? Or Ceuta and Melilla?
Or between UK and Channel Islands, Isle of Man?
Technically those are not part of the United Kingdom, so your comparison is not accurate.
Just a matter of interpretation. Are Manxmen or Islanders less British than Northern Irish?
The Channel Islands are not part of the UK ( they "report" to the queen, not the UK government, the queen delegates oversight to the UK government, but by treaty and custom they are self governing, although many UK laws are adopted more or less automatically).
Channel Islanders never benefited from Freedom of Movement in the EU.
If there is a Deal agreed and passed by Parliament then May will still be there, if not then Corbyn could well be PM this time next year and the 2019 Tory Party Conference will be addressed not by the PM but by the Leader of the Opposition
Could you, as a Conservative and a Unionist, support a deal which keeps the CU for the UK and the SM for Northern Ireland?
The CU for the UK is preferred by most voters to No Deal and the CU and SM in NI is preferred by most NI voters to a hard border, if a hard border in NI that will be a boost to Nationalists and if No Deal for the UK that will be a huge boost to the SNP and the Yes to Scottish independence campaign posing a far greater threat to the UK
Aren't NI currently in a single market with the rest of the UK? Surely they'd have to leave that in order to stay in one with the EU.
Given the whole UK would be in the Customs Union there would still be no tariffs between NI and GB
RobD is correct; HYUFD is wrong. If NI is in the EU SM they would not be part of the UK SM. There would be a regulatory barrier between the two and goods could not move without friction between GB and NI The fact that there would be no tariffs does not change this.
So it would be like mainland Spain and the Canary Islands? Or Ceuta and Melilla?
Or between UK and Channel Islands, Isle of Man?
Technically those are not part of the United Kingdom, so your comparison is not accurate.
Just a matter of interpretation. Are Manxmen or Islanders less British than Northern Irish?
IofM and Channel Isles are part of the British Isles but not part of the UK.
Strictly speaking the Channel Isles are not part of the British Isles. They are part of Normandy.
Evidently the Cabinet revolt and the DUP’s never x4 kyboshed the quislingery*.
*per the snowflake Leavers.
It is concerning that Olly Robbins thinks a plan can be agreed that won't pass the first hurdle of his political masters - Raab - let alone the Cabinet - suggests poor communication (or a bit of theatre.....though 'cock-up' is almost always the best explanation.)
BBC staff have been told to use non- binary pronouns when addressing gender-fluid or transgender employees to ensure that the corporation does not develop a “heteronormative culture”.
The policy means that BBC workers will be encouraged to refer to non-binary colleagues as “they” or “them”, rather than “he” or “she”."
I think that it is reasonable to assume that someone who lives and works in Australia is not likely to have his job or living standards negatively impacted by a No Deal Brexit. If that is not the case, Mr Archer is at perfect liberty to inform us.
Mr Archer's personal circumstances are his own business - none of ours. Much better (and frankly more in character) to attack his ideas than his personal circumstances, of which you admit you are completely ignorant.
Not that its any of our business, but below he replied 'all of the above' when I suggested it entirely possible for an Australian resident to have family, property, investments or pensions in the UK.
I am not attacking his personal circumstances. I am pointing out that someone accusing the British Prime Minister of potentially being a traitor for possibly proposing a Brexit deal he does not like lives and works in Australia.
You keep writing 'he won't be affected by a bad deal or no deal' - you don't know that.
Perhaps engage with his argument than his current geographical location?
Reminds me of last weekend when you blamed Remainers for the mess that Brexit was in.
Evidently the Cabinet revolt and the DUP’s never x4 kyboshed the quislingery*.
*per the snowflake Leavers.
It is concerning that Olly Robbins thinks a plan can be agreed that won't pass the first hurdle of his political masters - Raab - let alone the Cabinet - suggests poor communication (or a bit of theatre.....though 'cock-up' is almost always the best explanation.)
How does anyone know? we are standing on the sidelines guessing.
I’m not going to attack Archie simply because of location, he’s entitled to his views and his passion for the country wherever he is. As we all are.
But
“Remaining in a CU for any period of time would be a disastrous outcome for the UK; far worse than either Remaining or No Deal”
I genuinely want to know the evidence supporting that statement
Always delighted to answer a direct question. And this is probably the most important point I have made.
Under the CU, the EU can negotiate FTAs on behalf of the CU. BUT although the UK would be bound by the terms of these treaties and the tariff agreements, the third parties with which the EU is signing the FTAs are NOT bound to provide these benefits to the UK - the UK will not be part of the EU, and the FTA is between the third country and the EU. The UK is not a party to the FTA.
So it is a totally one sided arrangement. We are bound by whatever the EU agrees, but we don't get access to the FTAs terms, only the tariff arrangement. The EU can therefore sign an FTA which gives a third country preferential access to parts of the UK market, and the UK has no say, but the UK does not get the reciprocal rights in the third country.
Therefore this outcome is far more damaging to the UK than any of the alternatives and would result in massive damage to UK trade internationally if it became permanent. It would be simply mad to agree to this.
Unusually, I disagree with you from a technical perspective rather than a moral one.
If you look at - for example - CETA, you will see that the UK itself is a signatory to it. It is not solely a treaty between the EU and Canada. Turkey, by contrast, is not a signatory to CETA. It is therefore at the discretion of the EU and the UK what happens to the arrangement post Brexit if the UK remained in the Customs Union.
I am not sure that you are right here. Once the UK leave the EU, their signature on the agreements is invalid because it is a term of the agreement that the agreement applies to EU members. The UK are a signatory, not party to the agreement.
Usually a party cannot unilaterally give a third party the benefit of a contract to which it is not a party. In am FTA between (say) the EU and Canada, the UK will cease to be a party to that agreement. It would seem to require the consent of both parties to extend the benefits to the UK. The EU cannot just 'include' the UK.
And the whole point here is that the EU may consider it in their interests to offer up access to UK markets in an FTA and it is quite obvious from what we have seen that they may also consider it appropriate to screw the UK by not including the UK in the agreement.
I think that it is reasonable to assume that someone who lives and works in Australia is not likely to have his job or living standards negatively impacted by a No Deal Brexit. If that is not the case, Mr Archer is at perfect liberty to inform us.
Mr Archer's personal circumstances are his own business - none of ours. Much better (and frankly more in character) to attack his ideas than his personal circumstances, of which you admit you are completely ignorant.
Not that its any of our business, but below he replied 'all of the above' when I suggested it entirely possible for an Australian resident to have family, property, investments or pensions in the UK.
I am not attacking his personal circumstances. I am pointing out that someone accusing the British Prime Minister of potentially being a traitor for possibly proposing a Brexit deal he does not like lives and works in Australia.
You keep writing 'he won't be affected by a bad deal or no deal' - you don't know that.
Perhaps engage with his argument than his current geographical location?
Reminds me of last weekend when you blamed Remainers for the mess that Brexit was in.
Citation required.
Are you needing new glasses? that surely is a cetatean.
Unusually, I disagree with you from a technical perspective rather than a moral one.
If you look at - for example - CETA, you will see that the UK itself is a signatory to it. It is not solely a treaty between the EU and Canada. Turkey, by contrast, is not a signatory to CETA. It is therefore at the discretion of the EU and the UK what happens to the arrangement post Brexit if the UK remained in the Customs Union.
I am not sure that you are right here. Once the UK leave the EU, their signature on the agreements is invalid because it is a term of the agreement that the agreement applies to EU members. The UK are a signatory, not party to the agreement.
Usually a party cannot unilaterally give a third party the benefit of a contract to which it is not a party. In am FTA between (say) the EU and Canada, the UK will cease to be a party to that agreement. It would seem to require the consent of both parties to extend the benefits to the UK. The EU cannot just 'include' the UK.
And the whole point here is that the EU may consider it in their interests to offer up access to UK markets in an FTA and it is quite obvious from what we have seen that they may also consider it appropriate to screw the UK by not including the UK in the agreement.
See this legal analysis, which I think confirms the position I have set out:
Unusually, I disagree with you from a technical perspective rather than a moral one.
If you look at - for example - CETA, you will see that the UK itself is a signatory to it. It is not solely a treaty between the EU and Canada. Turkey, by contrast, is not a signatory to CETA. It is therefore at the discretion of the EU and the UK what happens to the arrangement post Brexit if the UK remained in the Customs Union.
I am not sure that you are right here. Once the UK leave the EU, their signature on the agreements is invalid because it is a term of the agreement that the agreement applies to EU members. The UK are a signatory, not party to the agreement.
Usually a party cannot unilaterally give a third party the benefit of a contract to which it is not a party. In am FTA between (say) the EU and Canada, the UK will cease to be a party to that agreement. It would seem to require the consent of both parties to extend the benefits to the UK. The EU cannot just 'include' the UK.
And the whole point here is that the EU may consider it in their interests to offer up access to UK markets in an FTA and it is quite obvious from what we have seen that they may also consider it appropriate to screw the UK by not including the UK in the agreement.
See this legal analysis, which I think confirms the position I have set out:
Earlier you said if Raab walked out of the negotiations, said that regrettably no deal was possible, and resigned from the Government, he could be PM within a month. I’m beginning to think you’re right.
We are out of time. May cannot be the leader for No Deal.
Evidently the Cabinet revolt and the DUP’s never x4 kyboshed the quislingery*.
*per the snowflake Leavers.
It is concerning that Olly Robbins thinks a plan can be agreed that won't pass the first hurdle of his political masters - Raab - let alone the Cabinet - suggests poor communication (or a bit of theatre.....though 'cock-up' is almost always the best explanation.)
The concern is that Olly Robins is trying to bounce the PM into an agreement to suit the EU rather than the UK.
Evidently the Cabinet revolt and the DUP’s never x4 kyboshed the quislingery*.
*per the snowflake Leavers.
It is concerning that Olly Robbins thinks a plan can be agreed that won't pass the first hurdle of his political masters - Raab - let alone the Cabinet - suggests poor communication (or a bit of theatre.....though 'cock-up' is almost always the best explanation.)
The concern is that Olly Robins is trying to bounce the PM into an agreement to suit the EU rather than the UK.
I'm sure he doesn't see it like that - but there does appear to be a breakdown in communication somewhere along the Robins - May - Raab axis...
BBC staff have been told to use non- binary pronouns when addressing gender-fluid or transgender employees to ensure that the corporation does not develop a “heteronormative culture”.
The policy means that BBC workers will be encouraged to refer to non-binary colleagues as “they” or “them”, rather than “he” or “she”.
In addition heterosexual BBC staff will be asked to wear badges identifying themselves as “straight allies” to help their LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) colleagues."
BBC staff have been told to use non- binary pronouns when addressing gender-fluid or transgender employees to ensure that the corporation does not develop a “heteronormative culture”.
The policy means that BBC workers will be encouraged to refer to non-binary colleagues as “they” or “them”, rather than “he” or “she”.
In addition heterosexual BBC staff will be asked to wear badges identifying themselves as “straight allies” to help their LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) colleagues."
If there is a Deal agreed and passed by Parliament then May will still be there, if not then Corbyn could well be PM this time next year and the 2019 Tory Party Conference will be addressed not by the PM but by the Leader of the Opposition
Could you, as a Conservative and a Unionist, support a deal which keeps the CU for the UK and the SM for Northern Ireland?
The CU for the UK is preferred by most voters to No Deal and the CU and SM in NI is preferred by most NI voters to a hard border, if a hard border in NI that will be a boost to Nationalists and if No Deal for the UK that will be a huge boost to the SNP and the Yes to Scottish independence campaign posing a far greater threat to the UK
Aren't NI currently in a single market with the rest of the UK? Surely they'd have to leave that in order to stay in one with the EU.
Given the whole UK would be in the Customs Union there would still be no tariffs between NI and GB
RobD is correct; HYUFD is wrong. If NI is in the EU SM they would not be part of the UK SM. There would be a regulatory barrier between the two and goods could not move without friction between GB and NI The fact that there would be no tariffs does not change this.
So it would be like mainland Spain and the Canary Islands? Or Ceuta and Melilla?
Or between UK and Channel Islands, Isle of Man?
Technically those are not part of the United Kingdom, so your comparison is not accurate.
Just a matter of interpretation. Are Manxmen or Islanders less British than Northern Irish?
IofM and Channel Isles are part of the British Isles but not part of the UK.
Surely a perfectly reasonable precedent for NI customs though.
The island dependencies don't send MPs to Westminster however.
I think that it is reasonable to assume that someone who lives and works in Australia is not likely to have his job or living standards negatively impacted by a No Deal Brexit. If that is not the case, Mr Archer is at perfect liberty to inform us.
Mr Archer's personal circumstances are his own business - none of ours. Much better (and frankly more in character) to attack his ideas than his personal circumstances, of which you admit you are completely ignorant.
Not that its any of our business, but below he replied 'all of the above' when I suggested it entirely possible for an Australian resident to have family, property, investments or pensions in the UK.
I am not attacking his personal circumstances. I am pointing out that someone accusing the British Prime Minister of potentially being a traitor for possibly proposing a Brexit deal he does not like lives and works in Australia.
You keep writing 'he won't be affected by a bad deal or no deal' - you don't know that.
Perhaps engage with his argument than his current geographical location?
Reminds me of last weekend when you blamed Remainers for the mess that Brexit was in.
Citation required.
Are you needing new glasses? that surely is a cetatean.
Leonard is among the thickest of the thick regional managers for labour since time immemorial. I would have said it was impossible for them to get any further down the evolutionary chain than previous dolts, but they have managed it.
Leonard is among the thickest of the thick regional managers for labour since time immemorial. I would have said it was impossible for them to get any further down the evolutionary chain than previous dolts, but they have managed it.
“Remaining in a CU for any period of time would be a disastrous outcome for the UK; far worse than either Remaining or No Deal”
I genuinely want to know the evidence supporting that statement
Always delighted to answer a direct question. And this is probably the most important point I have made.
Under the CU, the EU can negotiate FTAs on behalf of the CU. BUT although the UK would be bound by the terms of these treaties and the tariff agreements, the third parties with which the EU is signing the FTAs are NOT bound to provide these benefits to the UK - the UK will not be part of the EU, and the FTA is between the third country and the EU. The UK is not a party to the FTA.
So it is a totally one sided arrangement. We are bound by whatever the EU agrees, but we don't get access to the FTAs terms, only the tariff arrangement. The EU can therefore sign an FTA which gives a third country preferential access to parts of the UK market, and the UK has no say, but the UK does not get the reciprocal rights in the third country.
Therefore this outcome is far more damaging to the UK than any of the alternatives and would result in massive damage to UK trade internationally if it became permanent. It would be simply mad to agree to this.
Thanks for putting your technical response out there. Proper conversation like this gets to nub of.
I can give you another argument to use. Since we gave up negotiating on our own, with some cost benefit to that, we gave up freedom of choice, some of what came to us from EU we would have no problem accepting, some would and should create debate within British politics, where Britain stand not together as a group on choices. The example I would use is Basel 3, leave campaign referenced within the campaign, fairly enough it came to us part of EU directive, and ideologically given freedom some would not have signed.
Given that freedom of choice, would UK government have signed up to Basel 3? This is weakness of remainer argument, locking us into an ideological direction we may not choose to take if we had freedom.
BBC staff have been told to use non- binary pronouns when addressing gender-fluid or transgender employees to ensure that the corporation does not develop a “heteronormative culture”.
The policy means that BBC workers will be encouraged to refer to non-binary colleagues as “they” or “them”, rather than “he” or “she”.
In addition heterosexual BBC staff will be asked to wear badges identifying themselves as “straight allies” to help their LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) colleagues."
Holy crap, we have to pay a fortune for that kind of bull merde. Time these clowns were cast adrift and forced into the real world.
These seems daft to me, but not because it’s OK to be rude to people who want to be called by a different gender to their physical sex. My objection is that most trans people know whether they want to be called he or she. Why not just do that, rather than jump through grammatical hoops for the 0.0001% of millennials who are so special they need a new category.
Unusually, I disagree with you from a technical perspective rather than a moral one.
If you look at - for example - CETA, you will see that the UK itself is a signatory to it. It is not solely a treaty between the EU and Canada. Turkey, by contrast, is not a signatory to CETA. It is therefore at the discretion of the EU and the UK what happens to the arrangement post Brexit if the UK remained in the Customs Union.
I am not sure that you are right here. Once the UK leave the EU, their signature on the agreements is invalid because it is a term of the agreement that the agreement applies to EU members. The UK are a signatory, not party to the agreement.
Usually a party cannot unilaterally give a third party the benefit of a contract to which it is not a party. In am FTA between (say) the EU and Canada, the UK will cease to be a party to that agreement. It would seem to require the consent of both parties to extend the benefits to the UK. The EU cannot just 'include' the UK.
And the whole point here is that the EU may consider it in their interests to offer up access to UK markets in an FTA and it is quite obvious from what we have seen that they may also consider it appropriate to screw the UK by not including the UK in the agreement.
See this legal analysis, which I think confirms the position I have set out:
I disagree, and that document talks about Turkey, which is not a signatory to the EU's customs deals so is not directly relevant.
There are two reasons why I believe you are wrong.
Firstly, the government's own legal advice is that we remain party to the EU's trade deals through the transition or implementation period.
Secondly, looking longer term and taking the treaty with Canada as our template. It will need to be amended post Brexit in all circumstances. (And treaties are revised with minutae all the time.) The power of inertia, which you rightly worry about, works in our favour here. Amending the treaty so that the UK remains party as part of the EU customs union is no more effort than removing the UK from the deal altogether.
So, could Canada choose to say "no", the UK cannot be a part of the amended treaty? Yes, they could. But given they - we would hope - would want a Free Trade Agreement with us, and it's less hassle to say yes, why would they?
Evidently the Cabinet revolt and the DUP’s never x4 kyboshed the quislingery*.
*per the snowflake Leavers.
It is concerning that Olly Robbins thinks a plan can be agreed that won't pass the first hurdle of his political masters - Raab - let alone the Cabinet - suggests poor communication (or a bit of theatre.....though 'cock-up' is almost always the best explanation.)
The concern is that Olly Robins is trying to bounce the PM into an agreement to suit the EU rather than the UK.
I'm sure he doesn't see it like that - but there does appear to be a breakdown in communication somewhere along the Robins - May - Raab axis...
Raab confirmed at the Select Committee that Robins reports direct to May, not to him Raab.
If there is a Deal agreed and passed by Parliament then May will still be there, if not then Corbyn could well be PM this time next year and the 2019 Tory Party Conference will be addressed not by the PM but by the Leader of the Opposition
Could you, as a Conservative and a Unionist, support a deal which keeps the CU for the UK and the SM for Northern Ireland?
The CU for the UK is preferred by most voters to No Deal and the CU and SM in NI is preferred by most NI voters to a hard border, if a hard border in NI that will be a boost to Nationalists and if No Deal for the UK that will be a huge boost to the SNP and the Yes to Scottish independence campaign posing a far greater threat to the UK
Aren't NI currently in a single market with the rest of the UK? Surely they'd have to leave that in order to stay in one with the EU.
Given the whole UK would be in the Customs Union there would still be no tariffs between NI and GB
RobD is correct; HYUFD is wrong. If NI is in the EU SM they would not be part of the UK SM. There would be a regulatory barrier between the two and goods could not move without friction between GB and NI The fact that there would be no tariffs does not change this.
So there would still be no tariffs then and no hard border in Ireland which is what most voters in NI want
No, but it erects a border between two parts of the UK.
It does not erect a border with tariffs between GB and NI as the whole UK reat to the Union than keeping NI in the SM and CU
If I were in the DUP I would be looking a lot more carefully at what all the polling tells us about attitudes to Northern Ireland on the British mainland. Put simply, standing in the way of a Brexit deal may not strengthen ties! If we do get to No Deal thanks to the DUP, it could get rather interesting.
If I were May I think I would announce a referendum in NI this week to be held in early/mid November as to whether they want to ensure they remain in the SM and CU after Brexit or if they only want to Leave the EU on exactly the same terms as GB even if that means leaving the SM.
The DUP would be free to campaign for the latter option of course. She would only agree a Deal with the EU if the Referendum resulted in a Yes vote for staying in the SM and CU
If there is a Deal agreed and passed by Parliament then May will still be there, if not then Corbyn could well be PM this time next year and the 2019 Tory Party Conference will be addressed not by the PM but by the Leader of the Opposition
Could you, as a Conservative and a Unionist, support a deal which keeps the CU for the UK and the SM for Northern Ireland?
The CU for the UK is preferred by most voters to No Deal and the CU and SM in NI is preferred by most NI voters to a hard border, if a hard border in NI that will be a boost to Nationalists and if No Deal for the UK that will be a huge boost to the SNP and the Yes to Scottish independence campaign posing a far greater threat to the UK
Aren't NI currently in a single market with the rest of the UK? Surely they'd have to leave that in order to stay in one with the EU.
Given the whole UK would be in the Customs Union there would still be no tariffs between NI and GB
RobD is correct; HYUFD is wrong. If NI is in the EU SM they would not be part of the UK SM. There would be a regulatory barrier between the two and goods could not move without friction between GB and NI The fact that there would be no tariffs does not change this.
So there would still be no tariffs between GB and NI then and no hard border in Ireland which is what most voters in NI want
No tariffs + same standards = no border checks No tariffs + different standards* = border checks.
* or even 'same' standards not subject to same rules (ie ECJ)
57.8% of NI voters want special status within the EU and to stay in the Single Market and Customs Union.
47.9% would vote to join the Republic of Ireland in the event of a hard border in NI and a hard Brexit, 45.4% to stay in the UK
If there is a Deal agreed and passed by Parliament then May will still be there, if not then Corbyn could well be PM this time next year and the 2019 Tory Party Conference will be addressed not by the PM but by the Leader of the Opposition
Could you, as a Conservative and a Unionist, support a deal which keeps the CU for the UK and the SM for Northern Ireland?
The CU for the UK is preferred by most voters to No Deal and the CU and SM in NI is preferred by most NI voters to a hard border, if a hard border in NI that will be a boost to Nationalists and if No Deal for the UK that will be a huge boost to the SNP and the Yes to Scottish independence campaign posing a far greater threat to the UK
Aren't NI currently in a single market with the rest of the UK? Surely they'd have to leave that in order to stay in one with the EU.
Given the whole UK would be in the Customs Union there would still be no tariffs between NI and GB
RobD is correct; HYUFD is wrong. If NI is in the EU SM they would not be part of the UK SM. There would be a regulatory barrier between the two and goods could not move without friction between GB and NI The fact that there would be no tariffs does not change this.
So there would still be no tariffs then and no hard border in Ireland which is what most voters in NI want
No, but it erects a border between two parts of the UK.
It does not erect a border with tariffs between GB and NI as the whole UK reat to the Union than keeping NI in the SM and CU
If I were in the DUP I would be looking a lot more carefully at what all the polling tells us about attitudes to Northern Ireland on the British mainland. Put simply, standing in the way of a Brexit deal may not strengthen ties! If we do get to No Deal thanks to the DUP, it could get rather interesting.
If I were May I think I would announce a referendum on NI this week to be held in early November as to whether they want to ensure they remain in the SM and CU after Brexit or if they only want to Leave the EU on exactly the same terms as GB even if that means leaving the SM.
The DUP would be free to campaign for the latter option of course. She would only agree a Deal with the EU if the Referendum resulted in a Yes vote for staying in the SM and CU
That's a terrible, terrible result for the SPD, and a perhaps better than feared one for the CSU.
The FDP get to be on tenterhooks to see whether they make the 5% cut. And a very good result for the Greens. AfD performs reasonably well, but the CSU's (and FW's) innate conservatism makes it hard for them to make much more ground.
The focus on the AfD in Germany seems to be obscuring an even bigger story: the rise of the Greens.
Yes, I think that's probably true.
I wonder whether that's also possible in the UK now, which would largely be at the expense of Labour.
I wonder if this is linked to air pollution in Cities. German Government has been attacked for being too soft on car producers and rectifying the cars to be less polluting.
I disagree, and that document talks about Turkey, which is not a signatory to the EU's customs deals so is not directly relevant.
There are two reasons why I believe you are wrong.
Firstly, the government's own legal advice is that we remain party to the EU's trade deals through the transition or implementation period.
Secondly, looking longer term and taking the treaty with Canada as our template. It will need to be amended post Brexit in all circumstances. (And treaties are revised with minutae all the time.) The power of inertia, which you rightly worry about, works in our favour here. Amending the treaty so that the UK remains party as part of the EU customs union is no more effort than removing the UK from the deal altogether.
So, could Canada choose to say "no", the UK cannot be a part of the amended treaty? Yes, they could. But given they - we would hope - would want a Free Trade Agreement with us, and it's less hassle to say yes, why would they?
It is certainly true that with all party agreement the UK could be included in FTAs. But being in a customs union does not give you access to FTAs - a free trade area is a separate concept as the paper explains. It is also quite true that the EU can unilaterally take actions against the UKs interests. The whole purpose of the EU forcing the UK into a CU is to maintain the huge surplus in traded goods in favour of the EU and stop the UK out competing against the EU - something they are in a perfect position to maintain if we are in a CU over which we have no control whatsoever.
Overall it seems to me that it is a ridiculous position for a country such as the UK to voluntarily enter.
I wonder if this is linked to air pollution in Cities. German Government has been attacked for being too soft on car producers and rectifying the cars to be less polluting.
That's definitely a possibility, the German government had been extremely soft on their car companies caught cheating the emissions testing. Might be something that drives people from the SPD and CDU to the Greens. That and Merkel's renewed use of coal power.
If I were May I think I would announce a referendum in NI this week to be held in early/mid November as to whether they want to ensure they remain in the SM and CU after Brexit or if they only want to Leave the EU on exactly the same terms as GB even if that means leaving the SM.
The DUP would be free to campaign for the latter option of course. She would only agree a Deal with the EU if the Referendum resulted in a Yes vote for staying in the SM and CU
Yeah, because a referendum on whether NI should be economically separated from the Union is not likely to lead to sectarian division. Not smart.
I wonder if this is linked to air pollution in Cities. German Government has been attacked for being too soft on car producers and rectifying the cars to be less polluting.
That's definitely a possibility, the German government had been extremely soft on their car companies caught cheating the emissions testing. Might be something that drives people from the SPD and CDU to the Greens. That and Merkel's renewed use of coal power.
BBC staff have been told to use non- binary pronouns when addressing gender-fluid or transgender employees to ensure that the corporation does not develop a “heteronormative culture”.
The policy means that BBC workers will be encouraged to refer to non-binary colleagues as “they” or “them”, rather than “he” or “she”.
In addition heterosexual BBC staff will be asked to wear badges identifying themselves as “straight allies” to help their LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) colleagues."
If there is a Deal agreed and passed by Parliament then May will still be there, if not then Corbyn could well be PM this time next year and the 2019 Tory Party Conference will be addressed not by the PM but by the Leader of the Opposition
Could you, as a Conservative and a Unionist, support a deal which keeps the CU for the UK and the SM for Northern Ireland?
The CU for the UK is preferred by most voters to No Deal and the CU and SM in NI is preferred by most NI voters to a hard border, if a hard border in NI that will be a boost to Nationalists and if No Deal for the UK that will be a huge boost to the SNP and the Yes to Scottish independence campaign posing a far greater threat to the UK
Aren't NI currently in a single market with the rest of the UK? Surely they'd have to leave that in order to stay in one with the EU.
Given the whole UK would be in the Customs Union there would still be no tariffs between NI and GB
RobD is correct; HYUFD is wrong. If NI is in the EU SM they would not be part of the UK SM. There would be a regulatory barrier between the two and goods could not move without friction between GB and NI The fact that there would be no tariffs does not change this.
So there would still be no tariffs then and no hard border in Ireland which is what most voters in NI want
No, but it erects a border between two parts of the UK.
It does not erect a border with tariffs between GB and NI as the whole UK reat to the Union than keeping NI in the SM and CU
If I were in the Dg.
If I were May I think I would announce a referendum on NI this week to be held in early November as to whether they want to ensure they remain in the SM and CU after Brexit or if they only want to Leave the EU on exactly the same terms as GB even if that means leaving the SM.
The DUP would be free to campaign for the latter option of course. She would only agree a Deal with the EU if the Referendum resulted in a Yes vote for staying in the SM and CU
Surely we get a vote too.
No, the UK as a whole voted to Leave the EU it is only NI which also voted for the GFA and hence that also needs to be respected in delivering Brexit
I wonder if this is linked to air pollution in Cities. German Government has been attacked for being too soft on car producers and rectifying the cars to be less polluting.
That's definitely a possibility, the German government had been extremely soft on their car companies caught cheating the emissions testing. Might be something that drives people from the SPD and CDU to the Greens. That and Merkel's renewed use of coal power.
Didn't she shut all the Nuke plants?
Yes, and that meant reopening all of the coal plants which are ultimately more polluting.
RMT tossers at Northern Rail still striking every Saturday, precluding any attempt to either Retford - Brigg - Barnetby OR Stockport - Guide Bridge
You mean you require those easy routes?!?
Saturdays only, man!
(they changed the Stockport one from Fridays a few months ago - though there is a southbound service as well as the northbound one)
Hi Sunil
I was wondering if you could help. At the moment, the Chase line from Birmingham to Rugeley is closed at weekends to complete the electrification project. I have been trying to find information on (a) when this will finish and (b) whether they are likely to meet he new timetabling deadline (they are already a year behind schedule and £10 million over budget, as ever). I've checked Network Rail's website and amazingly it is as unhelpful as a costing by Diane Abbott. Would you have any idea where I could find out more?
If I were May I think I would announce a referendum in NI this week to be held in early/mid November as to whether they want to ensure they remain in the SM and CU after Brexit or if they only want to Leave the EU on exactly the same terms as GB even if that means leaving the SM.
The DUP would be free to campaign for the latter option of course. She would only agree a Deal with the EU if the Referendum resulted in a Yes vote for staying in the SM and CU
Yeah, because a referendum on whether NI should be economically separated from the Union is not likely to lead to sectarian division. Not smart.
It is creating a hard border in NI by taking the province out of the SM and CU that will create a sectarian division and potentially create a majority for a United Ireland as all the polling shows.
However I know you don't care about that, just as you don't care about Scotland leaving the UK, just as you don't care about crashing the economy with a No Deal Brexit
I wonder if this is linked to air pollution in Cities. German Government has been attacked for being too soft on car producers and rectifying the cars to be less polluting.
More to do with being pro-EU and anti Blood and Soil Nationalism.
If I were May I think I would announce a referendum in NI this week to be held in early/mid November as to whether they want to ensure they remain in the SM and CU after Brexit or if they only want to Leave the EU on exactly the same terms as GB even if that means leaving the SM.
The DUP would be free to campaign for the latter option of course. She would only agree a Deal with the EU if the Referendum resulted in a Yes vote for staying in the SM and CU
Yeah, because a referendum on whether NI should be economically separated from the Union is not likely to lead to sectarian division. Not smart.
It is creating a hard border in NI by taking the province out of the SM and CU that will create a sectarian division and potentially create a majority for a United Ireland as all the polling shows.
However I know you don't care about that, just as you don't care about Scotland leaving the UK, just as you don't care about crashing the economy with a No Deal Brexit
To be fair, Archer is with most Tory Leavers on not caring that Brexit might lead to the end of the Union. All the polling shows this. In the end, English nationalists care about England. Throw in a Labour party leadership (and membership, I’d hazard) that would clearly prefer a united Ireland and it could be the DUP ends up being its own worst enemy.
BBC staff have been told to use non- binary pronouns when addressing gender-fluid or transgender employees to ensure that the corporation does not develop a “heteronormative culture”.
The policy means that BBC workers will be encouraged to refer to non-binary colleagues as “they” or “them”, rather than “he” or “she”.
In addition heterosexual BBC staff will be asked to wear badges identifying themselves as “straight allies” to help their LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) colleagues."
If I were May I think I would announce a referendum in NI this week to be held in early/mid November as to whether they want to ensure they remain in the SM and CU after Brexit or if they only want to Leave the EU on exactly the same terms as GB even if that means leaving the SM.
The DUP would be free to campaign for the latter option of course. She would only agree a Deal with the EU if the Referendum resulted in a Yes vote for staying in the SM and CU
Yeah, because a referendum on whether NI should be economically separated from the Union is not likely to lead to sectarian division. Not smart.
It is creating a hard border in NI by taking the province out of the SM and CU that will create a sectarian division and potentially create a majority for a United Ireland as all the polling shows.
However I know you don't care about that, just as you don't care about Scotland leaving the UK, just as you don't care about crashing the economy with a No Deal Brexit
There will be no hard border in NI as everyone from both sides has already confirmed. The common travel area will continue.
The people being reckless in respect of NI are Barnier and now May.
Allowing NI to remain in the SM will cause the same demand in Scotland, which is why Davidson (a Unionist) has threatened to resign if it happens.
If I were May I think I would announce a referendum in NI this week to be held in early/mid November as to whether they want to ensure they remain in the SM and CU after Brexit or if they only want to Leave the EU on exactly the same terms as GB even if that means leaving the SM.
The DUP would be free to campaign for the latter option of course. She would only agree a Deal with the EU if the Referendum resulted in a Yes vote for staying in the SM and CU
Yeah, because a referendum on whether NI should be economically separated from the Union is not likely to lead to sectarian division. Not smart.
It is creating a hard border in NI by taking the province out of the SM and CU that will create a sectarian division and potentially create a majority for a United Ireland as all the polling shows.
However I know you don't care about that, just as you don't care about Scotland leaving the UK, just as you don't care about crashing the economy with a No Deal Brexit
To be fair, Archer is with most Tory Leavers on not caring that Brexit might lead to the end of the Union. All the polling shows this. In the end, English nationalists care about England. Throw in a Labour party leadership (and membership, I’d hazard) that would clearly prefer a united Ireland and it could be the DUP ends up being its own worst enemy.
I was recently described as a member of the 'upper middle classes'.
I still haven't recovered.
Did you buy your own furniture? If I recall Alan Clarke correctly, that's the big thing...
I tend to be mystified by the English obsession with class, but I'm pretty sure Clark liked to think of himself as upper rather than upper middle. Of course (as with so many other things) he may have been wrong about that, but I guess whatever social stratification Hesseltine resided in, AC was convinced he was above it.
If I were May I think I would announce a referendum in NI this week to be held in early/mid November as to whether they want to ensure they remain in the SM and CU after Brexit or if they only want to Leave the EU on exactly the same terms as GB even if that means leaving the SM.
The DUP would be free to campaign for the latter option of course. She would only agree a Deal with the EU if the Referendum resulted in a Yes vote for staying in the SM and CU
Yeah, because a referendum on whether NI should be economically separated from the Union is not likely to lead to sectarian division. Not smart.
It is creating a hard border in NI by taking the province out of the SM and CU that will create a sectarian division and potentially create a majority for a United Ireland as all the polling shows.
However I know you don't care about that, just as you don't care about Scotland leaving the UK, just as you don't care about crashing the economy with a No Deal Brexit
To be fair, Archer is with most Tory Leavers on not caring that Brexit might lead to the end of the Union. All the polling shows this. In the end, English nationalists care about England. Throw in a Labour party leadership (and membership, I’d hazard) that would clearly prefer a united Ireland and it could be the DUP ends up being its own worst enemy.
Comments
Why would the EU agree to that?
https://twitter.com/JenniferMerode/status/1051518992697954304
*per the snowflake Leavers.
BBC staff have been told to use non- binary pronouns when addressing gender-fluid or transgender employees to ensure that the corporation does not develop a “heteronormative culture”.
The policy means that BBC workers will be encouraged to refer to non-binary colleagues as “they” or “them”, rather than “he” or “she”.
In addition heterosexual BBC staff will be asked to wear badges identifying themselves as “straight allies” to help their LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) colleagues."
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/25ffc92e-ce66-11e8-bde6-fae32479843d
https://twitter.com/scottishlabour/status/1051389143287132160
How does anyone know? we are standing on the sidelines guessing.
Usually a party cannot unilaterally give a third party the benefit of a contract to which it is not a party. In am FTA between (say) the EU and Canada, the UK will cease to be a party to that agreement. It would seem to require the consent of both parties to extend the benefits to the UK. The EU cannot just 'include' the UK.
And the whole point here is that the EU may consider it in their interests to offer up access to UK markets in an FTA and it is quite obvious from what we have seen that they may also consider it appropriate to screw the UK by not including the UK in the agreement.
(OK, it isn't. But if you want to be correct, perhaps 'coldest' is better.)
I still haven't recovered.
https://lawyersforbritain.org/staying-in-the-eu-customs-union-after-exit
Earlier you said if Raab walked out of the negotiations, said that regrettably no deal was possible, and resigned from the Government, he could be PM within a month. I’m beginning to think you’re right.
We are out of time. May cannot be the leader for No Deal.
https://twitter.com/JeremyCliffe/status/1051500111455547393
Why not use it instead of he or she? It is a perfectly sound pronoun.
In a restaurant I ordered circa £40 for a main, when it arrived it was a very small portion and I said 'Is that it?' in a very Northern accent.
The only downside to having a Northern accent is that I'm dropping the c-bomb every time I say 'couldn't'.
Yes, we know it's a calamity and all Brexiteers are thick moronic fantasists, but what's new?
And, good evening all.
I can give you another argument to use. Since we gave up negotiating on our own, with some cost benefit to that, we gave up freedom of choice, some of what came to us from EU we would have no problem accepting, some would and should create debate within British politics, where Britain stand not together as a group on choices. The example I would use is Basel 3, leave campaign referenced within the campaign, fairly enough it came to us part of EU directive, and ideologically given freedom some would not have signed.
Given that freedom of choice, would UK government have signed up to Basel 3? This is weakness of remainer argument, locking us into an ideological direction we may not choose to take if we had freedom.
Rant over.
There are two reasons why I believe you are wrong.
Firstly, the government's own legal advice is that we remain party to the EU's trade deals through the transition or implementation period.
Secondly, looking longer term and taking the treaty with Canada as our template. It will need to be amended post Brexit in all circumstances. (And treaties are revised with minutae all the time.) The power of inertia, which you rightly worry about, works in our favour here. Amending the treaty so that the UK remains party as part of the EU customs union is no more effort than removing the UK from the deal altogether.
So, could Canada choose to say "no", the UK cannot be a part of the amended treaty? Yes, they could. But given they - we would hope - would want a Free Trade Agreement with us, and it's less hassle to say yes, why would they?
The DUP would be free to campaign for the latter option of course. She would only agree a Deal with the EU if the Referendum resulted in a Yes vote for staying in the SM and CU
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Leyland_Sherpa
Although we know all Eurocrats love to go through the wine lakes.
Overall it seems to me that it is a ridiculous position for a country such as the UK to voluntarily enter.
(they changed the Stockport one from Fridays a few months ago - though there is a southbound service as well as the northbound one)
The EU know perfectly well that May couldn't sell an indefinite full customs union for the UK back home and survive, so they won't.
I was wondering if you could help. At the moment, the Chase line from Birmingham to Rugeley is closed at weekends to complete the electrification project. I have been trying to find information on (a) when this will finish and (b) whether they are likely to meet he new timetabling deadline (they are already a year behind schedule and £10 million over budget, as ever). I've checked Network Rail's website and amazingly it is as unhelpful as a costing by Diane Abbott. Would you have any idea where I could find out more?
However I know you don't care about that, just as you don't care about Scotland leaving the UK, just as you don't care about crashing the economy with a No Deal Brexit
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leyland_cypress
This moment must certainly be causing them allama though...
The people being reckless in respect of NI are Barnier and now May.
Allowing NI to remain in the SM will cause the same demand in Scotland, which is why Davidson (a Unionist) has threatened to resign if it happens.
It risks making our politics more ferocious and tribal like in many developing countries.