As for countering his points Ive done that many times over the years rerunning the endless Brexit arguments just drives us all bonkers. Nobody is changing their mind, nobody is convincing anyone else and nobody believes what the other side says. Best to just smile sweetly and talk about something interesting.
Yes, this is a great forum, I really like it, but does anybody ever change their mind about anything at all, let alone Brexit, as a result of the interchange? You'd have thought they would, but it does not seem so. Or perhaps they do, secretly, but it is somehow a shameful thing to admit it.
Any case, OK, something interesting. The Queen has come out for Norway Plus. That surely fits the bill. That is incredibly interesting. Will it swing any votes on Tuesday in the House of Commons though? It ought to. MPs serve at her pleasure after all. Or do they? Is that just prisoners?
Azealia Banks Ireland tour is lots of fun. Wouldnt you love to be her PR agent
Don’t you have a famine to go die in?” she most recently wrote to one follower. “You lot are a bunch of prideful inbred leprechauns... The rest of the world’s white folk don’t want to associate with you lot at all and it’s because you are barbarians.” And, she added later, “I’m happiest knowing the Irish are quarantined on an isle so they can continue to inbreed and keep their defective genes away from humanity.”
I can't see either the Ireland or the EU having any incentive to soften their demands on the Irish backstop.
Ireland because to do so is to concede on their main requirement of a soft border. Even though No Deal achieves the same effect and comes with additional nasties, in that case you have the [very high probability] prospect of sorting things out later while keeping the backstop. Conceding now cements the bad result.
Ireland psychologically and politicallly: No-one in Ireland voted for Brexit. No-one wants it. It is something imposed on them by a foreign government that from remarks made by its leaders doesn't wish Ireland well. Will people in Ireland blame Varadakar for not giving in to British aggression so they end up in No Deal? Unlikely.
EU: to concede over the backstop is to prioritise a non-member over a member.The EU won't survive as an institution if it does that. It's also the reason why other member states will back Ireland when push comes to shove.
Alatmeier in that article argues for A50 to be extended precisely to avoid a hard border happening by default. He is absolutely not arguing for Ireland to accept a hard border by removing the backstop requirement.
I can't see either the Ireland or the EU having any incentive to soften their demands on the Irish backstop.
Ireland because to do so is to concede on their main requirement of a soft border. Even though No Deal achieves the same effect and comes with additional nasties, in that case you have the [very high probability] prospect of sorting things out later while keeping the backstop. Conceding now cements the bad result.
Don't quite follow.
How would a no deal crash out give Ireland a good chance of keeping the backstop?
Would a no deal not mean that the withdrawal agreement is binned and therefore the backstop is binned?
I can't see either the Ireland or the EU having any incentive to soften their demands on the Irish backstop.
Ireland because to do so is to concede on their main requirement of a soft border. Even though No Deal achieves the same effect and comes with additional nasties, in that case you have the [very high probability] prospect of sorting things out later while keeping the backstop. Conceding now cements the bad result.
Ireland psychologically and politicallly: No-one in Ireland voted for Brexit. No-one wants it. It is something imposed on them by a foreign government that from remarks made by its leaders doesn't wish Ireland well. Will people in Ireland blame Varadakar for not giving in to British aggression so they end up in No Deal? Unlikely.
EU: to concede over the backstop is to prioritise a non-member over a member.The EU won't survive as an institution if it does that. It's also the reason why other member states will back Ireland when push comes to shove.
Alatmeier in that article argues for A50 to be extended precisely to avoid a hard border happening by default. He is absolutely not arguing for Ireland to accept a hard border by removing the backstop requirement.
he spells out to the Irish that a hard border is on the cards start there.
I can't see either the Ireland or the EU having any incentive to soften their demands on the Irish backstop.
Ireland because to do so is to concede on their main requirement of a soft border. Even though No Deal achieves the same effect and comes with additional nasties, in that case you have the [very high probability] prospect of sorting things out later while keeping the backstop. Conceding now cements the bad result.
Don't quite follow.
How would a no deal crash out give Ireland a good chance of keeping the backstop?
Would a no deal not mean that the withdrawal agreement is binned and therefore the backstop is binned?
Yes. As long as the UK never has an agreement with the EU on anything ever. How realistic is that?
Otherwise we can be sure the EU won't have forgotten its demands when it comes to future negotiation.
I can't see either the Ireland or the EU having any incentive to soften their demands on the Irish backstop.
Ireland because to do so is to concede on their main requirement of a soft border. Even though No Deal achieves the same effect and comes with additional nasties, in that case you have the [very high probability] prospect of sorting things out later while keeping the backstop. Conceding now cements the bad result.
Ireland psychologically and politicallly: No-one in Ireland voted for Brexit. No-one wants it. It is something imposed on them by a foreign government that from remarks made by its leaders doesn't wish Ireland well. Will people in Ireland blame Varadakar for not giving in to British aggression so they end up in No Deal? Unlikely.
EU: to concede over the backstop is to prioritise a non-member over a member.The EU won't survive as an institution if it does that. It's also the reason why other member states will back Ireland when push comes to shove.
Alatmeier in that article argues for A50 to be extended precisely to avoid a hard border happening by default. He is absolutely not arguing for Ireland to accept a hard border by removing the backstop requirement.
he spells out to the Irish that a hard border is on the cards start there.
Altmaier argues against a hard border, which will happen by default if there is No Deal. So prevent No Deal by extending A50. He doesn't argue for Ireland to accept a hard border through dropping the backstop requirement. My original assertion is corroborated.
We need the hardest of hard Brexits. No deal. Factories have to close. Big businesses have to move and the service industries have to set up elsewhere. The Harlepudlians have to understand that foreigners were not the root of their problems.
The ERGers must complete the takeover of the country and be allowed to quaff their champagne and gorge their canapes (little pastries with toppings*)- as planned on the 29th.
Then when the political pendulum moves enlightened forces can take back control and the renaissance can start. On a wave of popular support we can rejoin the EU accepting the euro Shengen and a European army and the Faragists can slink back to from whence they came never to be seen again
*For ERGers
The majority of the country wants neither No Deal Brexit or rejoin the EU and certainly not to then add on the Euro and Schengen, neither will ever have sufficient support in the country to be a sustainable way forward.
The only sustainable ways forward are May's Deal, and to a lesser extent stay in the single market and Customs Union but outside the full EU
So you are advocating a Labour Brexit. That's good to hear.
No I am advocating a May Brexit but even a Labour Brexit would be better than No Deal or Remain and then push to join the Euro
You said "stay in the single market and Customs Union but outside the full EU".
Sounds like Labour policy to me.
No I said May's Deal was the most sustainable way forward and to a lesser extent single market and Customs Union. Labour policy may want Customs Union but the EU will require Single Market too
We need the hardest of hard Brexits. No deal. Factories have to close. Big businesses have to move and the service industries have to set up elsewhere. The Harlepudlians have to understand that foreigners were not the root of their problems.
The ERGers must complete the takeover of the country and be allowed to quaff their champagne and gorge their canapes (little pastries with toppings*)- as planned on the 29th.
Then when the political pendulum moves enlightened forces can take back control and the renaissance can start. On a wave of popular support we can rejoin the EU accepting the euro Shengen and a European army and the Faragists can slink back to from whence they came never to be seen again
*For ERGers
The majority of the country wants neither No Deal Brexit or rejoin the EU and certainly not to then add on the Euro and Schengen, neither will ever have sufficient support in the country to be a sustainable way forward.
The only sustainable ways forward are May's Deal, and to a lesser extent stay in the single market and Customs Union but outside the full EU
So you are advocating a Labour Brexit. That's good to hear.
No I am advocating a May Brexit but even a Labour Brexit would be better than No Deal or Remain and then push to join the Euro
If we revoke A50, we keep all our opt outs including the Euro and Schengen. The EU army is neither something that we have to participate in, nor a threat, not least because it is undeployable in an offensive or expeditionary role due to the neutrality of several EU states.
Yes but we also revoke the Leave vote and concerns over sovereignty and free movement from the referendum, though I agree remaining in the EU on current terms better still than rejoininf with the Euro and Schengen
Au contraire. Full-fat EU membership, with the benefits of Schengen and the Euro, would be a much better position than the current 1% fat orange-label version.
No, at most associate membership with the Scandinavia nations and much of Eastern Europe should be considered. EU membership plus the Euro and Schengen should never ever be considered
Azealia Banks Ireland tour is lots of fun. Wouldnt you love to be her PR agent
Don’t you have a famine to go die in?” she most recently wrote to one follower. “You lot are a bunch of prideful inbred leprechauns... The rest of the world’s white folk don’t want to associate with you lot at all and it’s because you are barbarians.” And, she added later, “I’m happiest knowing the Irish are quarantined on an isle so they can continue to inbreed and keep their defective genes away from humanity.”
she may be advised by Grabcoque
I know! And "Irish women are ugly" apparently. Quite ridiculously false and offensive.
Still, it does make a change from the romanticisation (that a word?) of Ireland and the Irish that one often observes from people who know little of either.
Like, if you watch that 'Who Do You Think You Are?' programme, about family trees, people always seem to become suffused with excitement and pleasure when they discover a drop of Irish in their background a century or so ago. If it's, say, Welsh, not so much.
Yes. As long as the UK never has an agreement with the EU on anything ever. How realistic is that?
Otherwise we can be sure the EU won't have forgotten its demands when it comes to future negotiation.
Of course a no deal would be followed (eventually) by a deal. Yes, I get that.
But if we had demonstrated such antipathy to the backstop as to choose chaos and economic self harm in preference to signing up to it, I would have thought that would be the end of the backstop as currently formulated. An alternative would be needed - and I'm sure found - to solve the border issue.
Yes. As long as the UK never has an agreement with the EU on anything ever. How realistic is that?
Otherwise we can be sure the EU won't have forgotten its demands when it comes to future negotiation.
Of course a no deal would be followed (eventually) by a deal. Yes, I get that.
But if we had demonstrated such antipathy to the backstop as to choose chaos and economic self harm in preference to signing up to it, I would have thought that would be the end of the backstop as currently formulated. An alternative would be needed - and I'm sure found - to solve the border issue.
Ireland and the EU aren't being completely anal. The reason for pushing hard on the backstop is that there is no way of avoiding a hard border either in Ireland or in the Irish Sea IF the UK decides to diverge from the EU. The problem doesn't go away with No Deal.
Ireland and the EU aren't being completely anal. The reason for pushing hard on the backstop is that there is no way of avoiding a hard border either in Ireland or in the Irish Sea IF the UK decides to diverge from the EU. The problem doesn't go away with No Deal.
No it does not. It's the central conundrum of Brexit. Leaving the EU 'properly' is impossible unless and until a high tech invisible border(s) can be implemented. That really should have featured more prominently in the 2016 referendum campaign.
Comments
Don’t you have a famine to go die in?” she most recently wrote to one follower. “You lot are a bunch of prideful inbred leprechauns... The rest of the world’s white folk don’t want to associate with you lot at all and it’s because you are barbarians.” And, she added later, “I’m happiest knowing the Irish are quarantined on an isle so they can continue to inbreed and keep their defective genes away from humanity.”
she may be advised by Grabcoque
How would a no deal crash out give Ireland a good chance of keeping the backstop?
Would a no deal not mean that the withdrawal agreement is binned and therefore the backstop is binned?
Otherwise we can be sure the EU won't have forgotten its demands when it comes to future negotiation.
Still, it does make a change from the romanticisation (that a word?) of Ireland and the Irish that one often observes from people who know little of either.
Like, if you watch that 'Who Do You Think You Are?' programme, about family trees, people always seem to become suffused with excitement and pleasure when they discover a drop of Irish in their background a century or so ago. If it's, say, Welsh, not so much.
But if we had demonstrated such antipathy to the backstop as to choose chaos and economic self harm in preference to signing up to it, I would have thought that would be the end of the backstop as currently formulated. An alternative would be needed - and I'm sure found - to solve the border issue.