I'm worried that 80% of MPs are so deluded as to think they represent only themselves, yet claim that is democracy. Did they say on their GE literature they will make their own decisions and ignore the referendum result in the constituency?
That's why some Northern Labour MPs are worried.
The Leave campaign insisted Britain would Leave with a deal. There is no mandate for anything else. So if Britain is not going to Leave with a deal, a fresh mandate is needed.
The ballot paper asked 'Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?' not 'Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union but only with a Deal with the EU?'
The referendum was formally advisory only. In reality, it could not be ignored.
In exactly the same way, the ballot paper asked one question. But the entire prospectus of Leave was built around a proposal that explicitly disavowed no deal Brexit. It is just as preposterous to claim a mandate for no deal Brexit as to claim the referendum was advisory only.
The only mandate the referendum had was to leave the EU, nothing to do with Deal or No Deal and I do not remember many Leave campaigners explicitly ruling out No Deal in all circumstances
So far was no deal from the contemplation of Leavers that a year after the referendum, the current Prime Minister (in his role at the time of Foreign Secretary) told Parliament:
"There is no plan for no deal, because we're going to get a great deal".
There is no mandate for no deal Brexit.
Agree. But we have a deal. Most Tories voted for it. Virtually all Labour MPs didn't. No Deal is an operation of law, its mandate is triggered by invoking Article 50 and then messing around.
This is the real reason why Ireland won't concede, ever, on the backstop. Yes it can follow the UK by diverging from the EU in step. But it goes against its economic interest to do so, and more importantly, against their idea of who they are. It doesn't see why it automatically should be making the concession rather than the UK whose project this is, and which is hostile to Ireland anyway. It thinks, thanks to the backing of the EU, it can face the UK down on this issue.
Yes, and under May they were probably right.
I don’t think Boris will back down (you can argue about his motives)
Unfortunately Varadkar decided to try and strong arm the U.K. for party political benefit.
Ireland can face down the UK even if Boris doesn't back down. This is perhaps the crux of the question about where the balance of power lies that many people don't get.
Can it? GFA counts for little if Ireland puts up a border; backstop counts for nothing if they don't.
Precisely. The second we Brexit Schrodinger's Irish border gets resolved.
Currently there is said to be both a need for a border and a need not to have a border, the cat is said to be alive and dead. Once we Brexit we open the box and find if the border cat is alive or dead and the backstop vanishes.
Boris will blink. Is my prediction. You heard it here first.
Mr. Jessop, I'd be delighted to hear how I'm responsible for the actions of Dominic Grieve, or the decision of pro-EU MPs to repeatedly reject the deal, having voted to leave the EU, making no deal the course we're currently on.
(Snip)
You are doing it again: you point your finger at the remainers and scream that they're the ones who have caused this mess. You don't point at the ERG who gave remainers cover by repeatedly emptying their bowels over anything that wasn't hard no-deal brexit. Why should moderate remainers have voted for it when the very people who wanted Brexit were screeching about how bad it was?
The ERGers set the mood about the WA.
Yet in the eyes of the Brexiteers, it's all someone else's fault. In realty, we are all to blame to some extent.
But the biggest shovel of ordure needs pouring over the brexiteers, and those who wanted Brexit over every other consideration about the good of the country and its people.
I don't see how you can conclude other than those MPs who want to remain or leave with a deal have (collectively) been stupid beyond all belief.
The ERG want to leave without a deal. They're very. very likely to get their way.
They're getting their way, despite being only 50 or 60 strong in Parliament. The other 600 odd MPs have been comprehensively outwitted.
In that case why does Johnson (and by implication yourself also) blame those wanting a deal for the No Deal he himself imposes on the country, after having voted against the deal twice before? Why doesn't he just say, No Deal is cool?
I'll attempt an answer. Because he knows any No Deal will be a Johnson No Deal and he wants to disclaim any responsibility, just he did with his own children.
This is the real reason why Ireland won't concede, ever, on the backstop. Yes it can follow the UK by diverging from the EU in step. But it goes against its economic interest to do so, and more importantly, against their idea of who they are. It doesn't see why it automatically should be making the concession rather than the UK whose project this is, and which is hostile to Ireland anyway. It thinks, thanks to the backing of the EU, it can face the UK down on this issue.
Yes, and under May they were probably right.
I don’t think Boris will back down (you can argue about his motives)
Unfortunately Varadkar decided to try and strong arm the U.K. for party political benefit.
No, Charles, Varadkar has done what any Irish leader would have done. That is why his stance on Brexit enjoys such strong cross-party support in Ireland.
Its not what his predecessor was doing. His predecessor was working on technological solutions. There's cross-party support to 'back Ireland' as there should be but isn't in this country.
This is the real reason why Ireland won't concede, ever, on the backstop. Yes it can follow the UK by diverging from the EU in step. But it goes against its economic interest to do so, and more importantly, against their idea of who they are. It doesn't see why it automatically should be making the concession rather than the UK whose project this is, and which is hostile to Ireland anyway. It thinks, thanks to the backing of the EU, it can face the UK down on this issue.
Yes, and under May they were probably right.
I don’t think Boris will back down (you can argue about his motives)
Unfortunately Varadkar decided to try and strong arm the U.K. for party political benefit.
Ireland can face down the UK even if Boris doesn't back down. This is perhaps the crux of the question about where the balance of power lies that many people don't get.
Can it? GFA counts for little if Ireland puts up a border; backstop counts for nothing if they don't.
If the UK chooses to leave with No Deal, it does not absolve the UK of its responsibilities under the GFA. The UK will just have to face the consequences of its choice.
Agree. And BTW we should not agree to leave with no deal.
This is the real reason why Ireland won't concede, ever, on the backstop. Yes it can follow the UK by diverging from the EU in step. But it goes against its economic interest to do so, and more importantly, against their idea of who they are. It doesn't see why it automatically should be making the concession rather than the UK whose project this is, and which is hostile to Ireland anyway. It thinks, thanks to the backing of the EU, it can face the UK down on this issue.
Yes, and under May they were probably right.
I don’t think Boris will back down (you can argue about his motives)
Unfortunately Varadkar decided to try and strong arm the U.K. for party political benefit.
Ireland can face down the UK even if Boris doesn't back down. This is perhaps the crux of the question about where the balance of power lies that many people don't get.
Can it? GFA counts for little if Ireland puts up a border; backstop counts for nothing if they don't.
Precisely. The second we Brexit Schrodinger's Irish border gets resolved.
Currently there is said to be both a need for a border and a need not to have a border, the cat is said to be alive and dead. Once we Brexit we open the box and find if the border cat is alive or dead and the backstop vanishes.
Boris will blink. Is my prediction. You heard it here first.
He'll probably say that he didn't have enough time to convince the EU he was serious about No Deal, even after they've called his bluff.
This is the real reason why Ireland won't concede, ever, on the backstop. Yes it can follow the UK by diverging from the EU in step. But it goes against its economic interest to do so, and more importantly, against their idea of who they are. It doesn't see why it automatically should be making the concession rather than the UK whose project this is, and which is hostile to Ireland anyway. It thinks, thanks to the backing of the EU, it can face the UK down on this issue.
Yes, and under May they were probably right.
I don’t think Boris will back down (you can argue about his motives)
Unfortunately Varadkar decided to try and strong arm the U.K. for party political benefit.
Ireland can face down the UK even if Boris doesn't back down. This is perhaps the crux of the question about where the balance of power lies that many people don't get.
Can it? GFA counts for little if Ireland puts up a border; backstop counts for nothing if they don't.
Precisely. The second we Brexit Schrodinger's Irish border gets resolved.
Currently there is said to be both a need for a border and a need not to have a border, the cat is said to be alive and dead. Once we Brexit we open the box and find if the border cat is alive or dead and the backstop vanishes.
Boris will blink. Is my prediction. You heard it here first.
I hope very much you are wrong. He will lose my respect if he does.
The fact we are even debating the matter shows how much progress we have made in a positive direction. You were assuring me for the longest time there wasn't a chance we would leave without the awful backstop.
Mr. Jessop, I'd be delighted to hear how I'm responsible for the actions of Dominic Grieve, or the decision of pro-EU MPs to repeatedly reject the deal, having voted to leave the EU, making no deal the course we're currently on.
(Snip)
You are doing it again: you point your finger at the remainers and scream that they're the ones who have caused this mess. You don't point at the ERG who gave remainers cover by repeatedly emptying their bowels over anything that wasn't hard no-deal brexit. Why should moderate remainers have voted for it when the very people who wanted Brexit were screeching about how bad it was?
The ERGers set the mood about the WA.
Yet in the eyes of the Brexiteers, it's all someone else's fault. In realty, we are all to blame to some extent.
But the biggest shovel of ordure needs pouring over the brexiteers, and those who wanted Brexit over every other consideration about the good of the country and its people.
I don't see how you can conclude other than those MPs who want to remain or leave with a deal have (collectively) been stupid beyond all belief.
The ERG want to leave without a deal. They're very. very likely to get their way.
They're getting their way, despite being only 50 or 60 strong in Parliament. The other 600 odd MPs have been comprehensively outwitted.
In that case why does Johnson (and by implication yourself also) blame those wanting a deal for the No Deal he himself imposes on the country, after having voted against the deal twice before? Why doesn't he just say, No Deal is cool?
I have no insight into the motivations of Boris Johnson.
I am just pointing out some simple arithmetic.
There are 650 MPs. According to wiki, the "annual average" membership of the ERG is 21 MPs.
And I am wondering why a group with an "annual average" of 21 MPs are getting their way in a Parliament of 650 MPs.
I am suggesting that those MPs opposed to No Deal have fucked up in a massive way. And they bear a lot of the blame.
Mr. Jessop, I'd be delighted to hear how I'm responsible for the actions of Dominic Grieve, or the decision of pro-EU MPs to repeatedly reject the deal, having voted to leave the EU, making no deal the course we're currently on.
(Snip)
You are doing it again: you point your finger at the remainers and scream that they're the ones who have caused this mess. You don't point at the ERG who gave remainers cover by repeatedly emptying their bowels over anything that wasn't hard no-deal brexit. Why should moderate remainers have voted for it when the very people who wanted Brexit were screeching about how bad it was?
The ERGers set the mood about the WA.
Yet in the eyes of the Brexiteers, it's all someone else's fault. In realty, we are all to blame to some extent.
But the biggest shovel of ordure needs pouring over the brexiteers, and those who wanted Brexit over every other consideration about the good of the country and its people.
I don't see how you can conclude other than those MPs who want to remain or leave with a deal have (collectively) been stupid beyond all belief.
The ERG want to leave without a deal. They're very. very likely to get their way.
They're getting their way, despite being only 50 or 60 strong in Parliament. The other 600 odd MPs have been comprehensively outwitted.
In that case why does Johnson (and by implication yourself also) blame those wanting a deal for the No Deal he himself imposes on the country, after having voted against the deal twice before? Why doesn't he just say, No Deal is cool?
Yep, this is a key point. The government has told us No Deal will be fine and is under control. So if No Deal is not fine it’s because the government was wrong. There will be no-one else to blame.
Tusk doesn't do listening. Just sticks his fingers in his ears and hope Merkel doesn't contradict him. Ridiculous to think there would be a hard border when there is no willingness for one from the UK or Ireland.
This is the real reason why Ireland won't concede, ever, on the backstop. Yes it can follow the UK by diverging from the EU in step. But it goes against its economic interest to do so, and more importantly, against their idea of who they are. It doesn't see why it automatically should be making the concession rather than the UK whose project this is, and which is hostile to Ireland anyway. It thinks, thanks to the backing of the EU, it can face the UK down on this issue.
Yes, and under May they were probably right.
I don’t think Boris will back down (you can argue about his motives)
Unfortunately Varadkar decided to try and strong arm the U.K. for party political benefit.
Ireland can face down the UK even if Boris doesn't back down. This is perhaps the crux of the question about where the balance of power lies that many people don't get.
Can it? GFA counts for little if Ireland puts up a border; backstop counts for nothing if they don't.
If the UK chooses to leave with No Deal, it does not absolve the UK of its responsibilities under the GFA. The UK will just have to face the consequences of its choice.
Agree. And BTW we should not agree to leave with no deal.
It is the Catch 22 of British politics. Boris has shown that he understands the consequences of a border and that someone would have to be insane to advocate one. But if he is insane then he would advocate one.
No problems for Boris, he refuses an extension, we Brexit with No Deal on October 31st, Brexit Party vote collapses to Tories, MPs cannot stop him
I keep posing this but with (as yet) no answer that satisfies me - let's try you.
If the Johnson plan is to No Deal and then fight an election because those circumstances are the ones which are most favourable to him smashing Corbyn at the polls, how come this is (supposedly) also Corbyn's secret wish/plan?
As Corbyn is an idiot, all the polling shows his best shot was for the Tories to extend again so Labour come first with the Brexit Party second and Tories third, even passing the Withdrawal Agreement put Labour and the Tories neck and neck as the Brexit Party took significant Tory votes.
Brexit with No Deal though sees a big Tory lead as most of the Brexit Party vote goes Tory while most of the Remain vote goes LD leaving Corbyn Labour crushes in the middle
Yeah, cuz that's exactly what Boris did for eight years as Mayor London, turned it into a whites only ghetto.
He wasn't pandering to the Xenophobic vote to get elected in London for 8 years.
Do try and keep up
He isn't now either, do try and keep up.
Scott P thinks everyone to the right of Ed Miliband is a racist. A sheltered life he has lived. Boris will win in a wide range of constituencies across the country, I doubt there will be a huge amount of difference from the voters David Cameron had voting for him.
This is the real reason why Ireland won't concede, ever, on the backstop. Yes it can follow the UK by diverging from the EU in step. But it goes against its economic interest to do so, and more importantly, against their idea of who they are. It doesn't see why it automatically should be making the concession rather than the UK whose project this is, and which is hostile to Ireland anyway. It thinks, thanks to the backing of the EU, it can face the UK down on this issue.
Yes, and under May they were probably right.
I don’t think Boris will back down (you can argue about his motives)
Unfortunately Varadkar decided to try and strong arm the U.K. for party political benefit.
Ireland can face down the UK even if Boris doesn't back down. This is perhaps the crux of the question about where the balance of power lies that many people don't get.
Can it? GFA counts for little if Ireland puts up a border; backstop counts for nothing if they don't.
Precisely. The second we Brexit Schrodinger's Irish border gets resolved.
Currently there is said to be both a need for a border and a need not to have a border, the cat is said to be alive and dead. Once we Brexit we open the box and find if the border cat is alive or dead and the backstop vanishes.
Boris will blink. Is my prediction. You heard it here first.
I hope very much you are wrong. He will lose my respect if he does.
The fact we are even debating the matter shows how much progress we have made in a positive direction. You were assuring me for the longest time there wasn't a chance we would leave without the awful backstop.
Boris still has your respect? Have you not been paying attention these past few years?
This is the real reason why Ireland won't concede, ever, on the backstop. Yes it can follow the UK by diverging from the EU in step. But it goes against its economic interest to do so, and more importantly, against their idea of who they are. It doesn't see why it automatically should be making the concession rather than the UK whose project this is, and which is hostile to Ireland anyway. It thinks, thanks to the backing of the EU, it can face the UK down on this issue.
Yes, and under May they were probably right.
I don’t think Boris will back down (you can argue about his motives)
Unfortunately Varadkar decided to try and strong arm the U.K. for party political benefit.
Ireland can face down the UK even if Boris doesn't back down. This is perhaps the crux of the question about where the balance of power lies that many people don't get.
Can it? GFA counts for little if Ireland puts up a border; backstop counts for nothing if they don't.
Precisely. The second we Brexit Schrodinger's Irish border gets resolved.
Currently there is said to be both a need for a border and a need not to have a border, the cat is said to be alive and dead. Once we Brexit we open the box and find if the border cat is alive or dead and the backstop vanishes.
Boris will blink. Is my prediction. You heard it here first.
I hope very much you are wrong. He will lose my respect if he does.
The fact we are even debating the matter shows how much progress we have made in a positive direction. You were assuring me for the longest time there wasn't a chance we would leave without the awful backstop.
We won't leave without the backstop. Categorically.
This is the real reason why Ireland won't concede, ever, on the backstop. Yes it can follow the UK by diverging from the EU in step. But it goes against its economic interest to do so, and more importantly, against their idea of who they are. It doesn't see why it automatically should be making the concession rather than the UK whose project this is, and which is hostile to Ireland anyway. It thinks, thanks to the backing of the EU, it can face the UK down on this issue.
Yes, and under May they were probably right.
I don’t think Boris will back down (you can argue about his motives)
Unfortunately Varadkar decided to try and strong arm the U.K. for party political benefit.
No, Charles, Varadkar has done what any Irish leader would have done. That is why his stance on Brexit enjoys such strong cross-party support in Ireland.
This is the real reason why Ireland won't concede, ever, on the backstop. Yes it can follow the UK by diverging from the EU in step. But it goes against its economic interest to do so, and more importantly, against their idea of who they are. It doesn't see why it automatically should be making the concession rather than the UK whose project this is, and which is hostile to Ireland anyway. It thinks, thanks to the backing of the EU, it can face the UK down on this issue.
Yes, and under May they were probably right.
I don’t think Boris will back down (you can argue about his motives)
Unfortunately Varadkar decided to try and strong arm the U.K. for party political benefit.
Ireland can face down the UK even if Boris doesn't back down. This is perhaps the crux of the question about where the balance of power lies that many people don't get.
Can it? GFA counts for little if Ireland puts up a border; backstop counts for nothing if they don't.
Precisely. The second we Brexit Schrodinger's Irish border gets resolved.
Currently there is said to be both a need for a border and a need not to have a border, the cat is said to be alive and dead. Once we Brexit we open the box and find if the border cat is alive or dead and the backstop vanishes.
Boris will blink. Is my prediction. You heard it here first.
I think so as well, but that might be wishful thinking. if he doesn't he is going to have a mighty job on his hands.
Also just out of interest has anyone on here who runs a business ever been contacted by the Government about anything to do with Brexit (contrary to what we are told on the News). I note the other day a large supplier of food stuff to schools, etc who was making stockpiling plans hadn't received any communication even though he was in a large key business. I deregistered my company in the summer when I retired and I have received nothing at all and a large part of my business was with the EU.
This is the real reason why Ireland won't concede, ever, on the backstop. Yes it can follow the UK by diverging from the EU in step. But it goes against its economic interest to do so, and more importantly, against their idea of who they are. It doesn't see why it automatically should be making the concession rather than the UK whose project this is, and which is hostile to Ireland anyway. It thinks, thanks to the backing of the EU, it can face the UK down on this issue.
Yes, and under May they were probably right.
I don’t think Boris will back down (you can argue about his motives)
Unfortunately Varadkar decided to try and strong arm the U.K. for party political benefit.
Ireland can face down the UK even if Boris doesn't back down. This is perhaps the crux of the question about where the balance of power lies that many people don't get.
Can it? GFA counts for little if Ireland puts up a border; backstop counts for nothing if they don't.
Precisely. The second we Brexit Schrodinger's Irish border gets resolved.
Currently there is said to be both a need for a border and a need not to have a border, the cat is said to be alive and dead. Once we Brexit we open the box and find if the border cat is alive or dead and the backstop vanishes.
No, it doesn’t. The Irish border is of no economic consequence to the UK. All the actual No Deal issues are the ones that affect the mainland. Those will still be there whether or not a Hard Border goes up in Ireland - and it’s those that will drive the UK back to the negotiating table. At which point the backstop will be a pre-requisite for talks resuming.
Tusk doesn't do listening. Just sticks his fingers in his ears and hope Merkel doesn't contradict him. Ridiculous to think there would be a hard border when there is no willingness for one from the UK or Ireland.
If we are out of the single market and customs union how can there not be a hard border?
This is the real reason why Ireland won't concede, ever, on the backstop. Yes it can follow the UK by diverging from the EU in step. But it goes against its economic interest to do so, and more importantly, against their idea of who they are. It doesn't see why it automatically should be making the concession rather than the UK whose project this is, and which is hostile to Ireland anyway. It thinks, thanks to the backing of the EU, it can face the UK down on this issue.
Yes, and under May they were probably right.
I don’t think Boris will back down (you can argue about his motives)
Unfortunately Varadkar decided to try and strong arm the U.K. for party political benefit.
Ireland can face down the UK even if Boris doesn't back down. This is perhaps the crux of the question about where the balance of power lies that many people don't get.
Can it? GFA counts for little if Ireland puts up a border; backstop counts for nothing if they don't.
Precisely. The second we Brexit Schrodinger's Irish border gets resolved.
Currently there is said to be both a need for a border and a need not to have a border, the cat is said to be alive and dead. Once we Brexit we open the box and find if the border cat is alive or dead and the backstop vanishes.
Boris will blink. Is my prediction. You heard it here first.
I hope very much you are wrong. He will lose my respect if he does.
The fact we are even debating the matter shows how much progress we have made in a positive direction. You were assuring me for the longest time there wasn't a chance we would leave without the awful backstop.
We won't leave without the backstop. Categorically.
What odds to you give on that "categorically" certainty?
Tusk doesn't do listening. Just sticks his fingers in his ears and hope Merkel doesn't contradict him. Ridiculous to think there would be a hard border when there is no willingness for one from the UK or Ireland.
If we are out of the single market and customs union how can there not be a hard border?
Tusk doesn't do listening. Just sticks his fingers in his ears and hope Merkel doesn't contradict him. Ridiculous to think there would be a hard border when there is no willingness for one from the UK or Ireland.
If we are out of the single market and customs union how can there not be a hard border?
Boris would whip against the WA, never mind he has voted for it himself. Tory loyalists would outnumber the presumed further half dozen labour mps in favour so it would fall.
Tusk doesn't do listening. Just sticks his fingers in his ears and hope Merkel doesn't contradict him. Ridiculous to think there would be a hard border when there is no willingness for one from the UK or Ireland.
As Corbyn is an idiot, all the polling shows his best shot was for the Tories to extend again so Labour come first with the Brexit Party second and Tories third, even passing the Withdrawal Agreement put Labour and the Tories neck and neck as the Brexit Party took significant Tory votes.
Brexit with No Deal though sees a big Tory lead as most of the Brexit Party vote goes Tory while most of the Remain vote goes LD leaving Corbyn Labour crushes in the middle
Or the far more likely explanation - Corbyn is not an idiot and a No Deal Brexit is NOT his secret plan.
Tusk doesn't do listening. Just sticks his fingers in his ears and hope Merkel doesn't contradict him. Ridiculous to think there would be a hard border when there is no willingness for one from the UK or Ireland.
Jesus fucking Christ do none of you lot actually take the time to understand the situation? Google WTO MFN.
This is the real reason why Ireland won't concede, ever, on the backstop. Yes it can follow the UK by diverging from the EU in step. But it goes against its economic interest to do so, and more importantly, against their idea of who they are. It doesn't see why it automatically should be making the concession rather than the UK whose project this is, and which is hostile to Ireland anyway. It thinks, thanks to the backing of the EU, it can face the UK down on this issue.
Yes, and under May they were probably right.
I don’t think Boris will back down (you can argue about his motives)
Unfortunately Varadkar decided to try and strong arm the U.K. for party political benefit.
Ireland can face down the UK even if Boris doesn't back down. This is perhaps the crux of the question about where the balance of power lies that many people don't get.
Can it? GFA counts for little if Ireland puts up a border; backstop counts for nothing if they don't.
Precisely. The second we Brexit Schrodinger's Irish border gets resolved.
Currently there is said to be both a need for a border and a need not to have a border, the cat is said to be alive and dead. Once we Brexit we open the box and find if the border cat is alive or dead and the backstop vanishes.
No, it doesn’t. The Irish border is of no economic consequence to the UK. All the actual No Deal issues are the ones that affect the mainland. Those will still be there whether or not a Hard Border goes up in Ireland - and it’s those that will drive the UK back to the negotiating table. At which point the backstop will be a pre-requisite for talks resuming.
Or the UK doesn't 'drive back' to the negotiating table but holds open the possibility of talks.
If a hard border does come about that will drive Ireland back to talks. So we can refuse the backstop until they drop it. If a hard border does not come about then it will show the backstop to be the heaping pile of bovine manure we always said it was.
This is the real reason why Ireland won't concede, ever, on the backstop. Yes it can follow the UK by diverging from the EU in step. But it goes against its economic interest to do so, and more importantly, against their idea of who they are. It doesn't see why it automatically should be making the concession rather than the UK whose project this is, and which is hostile to Ireland anyway. It thinks, thanks to the backing of the EU, it can face the UK down on this issue.
Yes, and under May they were probably right.
I don’t think Boris will back down (you can argue about his motives)
Unfortunately Varadkar decided to try and strong arm the U.K. for party political benefit.
Ireland can face down the UK even if Boris doesn't back down. This is perhaps the crux of the question about where the balance of power lies that many people don't get.
Can it? GFA counts for little if Ireland puts up a border; backstop counts for nothing if they don't.
Precisely. The second we Brexit Schrodinger's Irish border gets resolved.
Currently there is said to be both a need for a border and a need not to have a border, the cat is said to be alive and dead. Once we Brexit we open the box and find if the border cat is alive or dead and the backstop vanishes.
Boris will blink. Is my prediction. You heard it here first.
I hope very much you are wrong. He will lose my respect if he does.
The fact we are even debating the matter shows how much progress we have made in a positive direction. You were assuring me for the longest time there wasn't a chance we would leave without the awful backstop.
We won't leave without the backstop. Categorically.
What odds to you give on that "categorically" certainty?
I'm happy to have a straight bet for the cost of my Conservative Party membership. Can't remember how much that is - £35?
Tusk doesn't do listening. Just sticks his fingers in his ears and hope Merkel doesn't contradict him. Ridiculous to think there would be a hard border when there is no willingness for one from the UK or Ireland.
Jesus fucking Christ do none of you lot actually take the time to understand the situation? Google WTO MFN.
Clueless, if you wish for a hard border it wont happen.
This is the real reason why Ireland won't concede, ever, on the backstop. Yes it can follow the UK by diverging from the EU in step. But it goes against its economic interest to do so, and more importantly, against their idea of who they are. It doesn't see why it automatically should be making the concession rather than the UK whose project this is, and which is hostile to Ireland anyway. It thinks, thanks to the backing of the EU, it can face the UK down on this issue.
Yes, and under May they were probably right.
I don’t think Boris will back down (you can argue about his motives)
Unfortunately Varadkar decided to try and strong arm the U.K. for party political benefit.
Ireland can face down the UK even if Boris doesn't back down. This is perhaps the crux of the question about where the balance of power lies that many people don't get.
Can it? GFA counts for little if Ireland puts up a border; backstop counts for nothing if they don't.
Precisely. The second we Brexit Schrodinger's Irish border gets resolved.
Currently there is said to be both a need for a border and a need not to have a border, the cat is said to be alive and dead. Once we Brexit we open the box and find if the border cat is alive or dead and the backstop vanishes.
No, it doesn’t. The Irish border is of no economic consequence to the UK. All the actual No Deal issues are the ones that affect the mainland. Those will still be there whether or not a Hard Border goes up in Ireland - and it’s those that will drive the UK back to the negotiating table. At which point the backstop will be a pre-requisite for talks resuming.
Or the UK doesn't 'drive back' to the negotiating table but holds open the possibility of talks.
If a hard border does come about that will drive Ireland back to talks. So we can refuse the backstop until they drop it. If a hard border does not come about then it will show the backstop to be the heaping pile of bovine manure we always said it was.
Either way, so long as we hold firm we win.
Becoming less free, poorer and more dependent on the goodwill of others is a funny kind of victory.
This is the real reason why Ireland won't concede, ever, on the backstop. Yes it can follow the UK by diverging from the EU in step. But it goes against its economic interest to do so, and more importantly, against their idea of who they are. It doesn't see why it automatically should be making the concession rather than the UK whose project this is, and which is hostile to Ireland anyway. It thinks, thanks to the backing of the EU, it can face the UK down on this issue.
This proposal is frankly bizarre, and offensive to the Irish. I am not sure what Johnson thinks it might achieve apart from hastening No Deal and securing long lasting Irish enmity in the bargain.
Every configuration of the problem is bizarre and offensive to someone. The Commons finds the backstop bizarre and offensive (though I don't). Boris has to find something which the Commons will accept. Such voting evidence as there is shows that TMs deal without the backstop is the only current candidate. The ERG extremists will never be satisfied, nor will the DUP. Moderate Labour MPs are the key to a solution. No Deal is bizarre and offensive to even more people than a tweaked TM deal.
The commons doesn't really find the back stop bizarre and offensive. About 2-3 dozen mps do, though a handful of those including boris proved they are willing to stomach it, and around 250-300 find Brexit bizarre and offensive. Theyd vote down anything the backstop was irrelevant to those people opposing the WA.
Tusk doesn't do listening. Just sticks his fingers in his ears and hope Merkel doesn't contradict him. Ridiculous to think there would be a hard border when there is no willingness for one from the UK or Ireland.
If we are out of the single market and customs union how can there not be a hard border?
Because no one will enforce it
Turning it into a smugglers’ paradise with dissident groups running the show. Dodgy.
Tusk doesn't do listening. Just sticks his fingers in his ears and hope Merkel doesn't contradict him. Ridiculous to think there would be a hard border when there is no willingness for one from the UK or Ireland.
Jesus fucking Christ do none of you lot actually take the time to understand the situation? Google WTO MFN.
Clueless, if you wish for a hard border it wont happen.
Oh god I forgot that you're too much of an idiot to Google. I didn't factor that in.
Ireland may not want a "hard border" with the UK, but for the EU it will be a border with an external entity, and a well defined border is intrinsic to the CU and the SM. So the EU will require Ireland to put it in place. The onus then falls to Ireland to persuade the EU that there are alternatives to a physical border. So Ireland has a pretty strong incentive to cooperate with the UK in exploring those alternatives.
The noteworthy thing about Boris Johnson's sub-Churchillian tweeted video is how he doesn't even pretend to have anything to say to those who do not support Brexit and how he expressly sets up London and the south east as the enemy. Considering he has a London seat himself, that's quite brave.
Perhaps he intends to move back to the country and change seats?
This is the real reason why Ireland won't concede, ever, on the backstop. Yes it can follow the UK by diverging from the EU in step. But it goes against its economic interest to do so, and more importantly, against their idea of who they are. It doesn't see why it automatically should be making the concession rather than the UK whose project this is, and which is hostile to Ireland anyway. It thinks, thanks to the backing of the EU, it can face the UK down on this issue.
Yes, and under May they were probably right.
I don’t think Boris will back down (you can argue about his motives)
Unfortunately Varadkar decided to try and strong arm the U.K. for party political benefit.
Ireland can face down the UK even if Boris doesn't back down. This is perhaps the crux of the question about where the balance of power lies that many people don't get.
Can it? GFA counts for little if Ireland puts up a border; backstop counts for nothing if they don't.
Precisely. The second we Brexit Schrodinger's Irish border gets resolved.
Currently there is said to be both a need for a border and a need not to have a border, the cat is said to be alive and dead. Once we Brexit we open the box and find if the border cat is alive or dead and the backstop vanishes.
No, it doesn’t. The Irish border is of no economic consequence to the UK. All the actual No Deal issues are the ones that affect the mainland. Those will still be there whether or not a Hard Border goes up in Ireland - and it’s those that will drive the UK back to the negotiating table. At which point the backstop will be a pre-requisite for talks resuming.
Or the UK doesn't 'drive back' to the negotiating table but holds open the possibility of talks.
If a hard border does come about that will drive Ireland back to talks. So we can refuse the backstop until they drop it. If a hard border does not come about then it will show the backstop to be the heaping pile of bovine manure we always said it was.
Either way, so long as we hold firm we win.
Becoming less free, poorer and more dependent on the goodwill of others is a funny kind of victory.
I find whistling to myself and shouting wanker at the Telly more productive than arguing these days
Mr. Jessop, I'd be delighted to hear how I'm responsible for the actions of Dominic Grieve, or the decision of pro-EU MPs to repeatedly reject the deal, having voted to leave the EU, making no deal the course we're currently on.
(Snip)
You are doing it again: you point your finger at the remainers and scream that they're the ones who have caused this mess. You don't point at the ERG who gave remainers cover by repeatedly emptying their bowels over anything that wasn't hard no-deal brexit. Why should moderate remainers have voted for it when the very people who wanted Brexit were screeching about how bad it was?
The ERGers set the mood about the WA.
Yet in the eyes of the Brexiteers, it's all someone else's fault. In realty, we are all to blame to some extent.
But the biggest shovel of ordure needs pouring over the brexiteers, and those who wanted Brexit over every other consideration about the good of the country and its people.
I don't see how you can conclude other than those MPs who want to remain or leave with a deal have (collectively) been stupid beyond all belief.
The ERG want to leave without a deal. They're very. very likely to get their way.
They're getting their way, despite being only 50 or 60 strong in Parliament. The other 600 odd MPs have been comprehensively outwitted.
In that case why does Johnson (and by implication yourself also) blame those wanting a deal for the No Deal he himself imposes on the country, after having voted against the deal twice before? Why doesn't he just say, No Deal is cool?
He will, but not yet as he still needs to give those who do want a deal in his party the cover to not move on him. Its like how Corbyns opponents pop up and whinge but beyond the Tiggers take no more than minor action, as they dont like him but are too cowardly to act.
Dealers in the Tories are either ok with or resigned to no deal, or currently fooling themselves so they can do nothing.
Step 1 - it's not happening Step 2 - it could happen but we wont back it Step 3 - its happening and it's too late for us to stop it
That refinery piece is another classic of it's type. The first half warns of the threat to refinery businesses from a flood of foreign fuel. The second half warns of fuel shortages.
No Deal is an operation of EU law, not that of the UK Parliament.
The UK Parliament can prevent it happening, and can legislate to make allowing it happen illegal.
No they can't. They cannot require the EU to agree a deal that is acceptable to the HoC. They cannot require the EU to grant another extension. They cannot require the UK government to agree a deal. All they can do is revoke or vote for the deal that the EU is offering. If they do neither then we have no deal.
Exactly
Is it going to become obvious quite soon that for sane leavers and sane remainers the only safe course is to accept TMs deal, which at the very least buys quite a lot of time for thoughtful consideration of our past errors? In terms of the realities of political and civil order revocation is not an option.
You'd like to think so but sanity has been at a premium to date.
The interesting thing I suppose about Boris’s Irish proposal is that it is based on a premise that a customs union border does present an actual issue which requires a solution.
That’s an advance at least on Dan Hannan and others who continue to shout that there is no actual problem in the first place.
Tusk doesn't do listening. Just sticks his fingers in his ears and hope Merkel doesn't contradict him. Ridiculous to think there would be a hard border when there is no willingness for one from the UK or Ireland.
If we are out of the single market and customs union how can there not be a hard border?
Because no one will enforce it
Turning it into a smugglers’ paradise with dissident groups running the show. Dodgy.
Isn't a no border with smuggling just as dangerous for peace as a hard border? Who are the smugglers likely to be? Likely the former militias, unionist and nationalist, who always took part in illegal activity to make money to fund their violence. That is the other paradox of the Irish border; physical border presence will lead to violence: neither state (EU and UK) enforcing their rules will lead to smuggling and therefore violence. The only thing that keeps Irish peach is a deal with what is acceptable on the border that isn't a border.
I'm starting to think the only option is a poll in NI about unification (or a NI ref on the backstop), but a) I don't suppose many UK politicians want to countenance that because actually it is English interests that dislike the backstop and care about the union b) I don't suppose the RoI actually want NI to join them right now because of the economic and cultural impact that would have and c) that doesn't end the possibility of violence either. Also unification should not be a solution to a UK problem, but a decision of Irish people who have healed from the history of English entanglement, elsewise it won't be a long term unification.
< Johnson is not speaking to the country, he is speaking to that narrow demographic he needs to win an election. It’s a 35% strategy. Post-Brexit, UK citizens will be less free and ruled by a government the majority has rejected, while the UK itself will be entirely dependent on the goodwill of others to keep on trading. This is the future. Do those uplands get more sunlit?
Yes, the full SportsDirectisation of the economy under Johnson, a cackhanded attempt at redress by daughter of Corbyn, then blossoming fascism (labelled as "common sense"). Sunlit indeed.
OK, for the dim amongst us - you weren't bitching when Tony Blair got Labour 5 more years on a 35% strategy, back when it suited your politics.
It was a disgrace to democracy, and I was, as ever, bitching my ass off at the time. More so if anything, as it confirmed that about 60% of people in the UK were quite all right with illegal wars of aggression.
The DUP made a monumental strategic mistake backing Brexit. They forgot about their number one priority. As a result, the position of Northern Ireland in the UK has been substantially weakened.
That refinery piece is another classic of it's type. The first half warns of the threat to refinery businesses from a flood of foreign fuel. The second half warns of fuel shortages.
Perhaps you also find it ridiculous to say that both we are in danger of severe food shortages, and our farmers will suffer from the inability to export their produce? Or that Iran has both 10% of the world's oil and chronic domestic fuel shortages? The world is more complex, and can fuck up in more complex ways, than you think.
Comments
Do try and keep up
The fact we are even debating the matter shows how much progress we have made in a positive direction. You were assuring me for the longest time there wasn't a chance we would leave without the awful backstop.
I am just pointing out some simple arithmetic.
There are 650 MPs. According to wiki, the "annual average" membership of the ERG is 21 MPs.
And I am wondering why a group with an "annual average" of 21 MPs are getting their way in a Parliament of 650 MPs.
I am suggesting that those MPs opposed to No Deal have fucked up in a massive way. And they bear a lot of the blame.
Joe Biden............. 29% 28% 29%
Bernie Sanders..... 15% 15% 15%
Elizabeth Warren. 14% 16% 10%
Pete Buttigieg...... 5% 3% 5%
Kamala Harris 5% 4% 7%
Beto O'Rourke 3% 1% 6%
Brexit with No Deal though sees a big Tory lead as most of the Brexit Party vote goes Tory while most of the Remain vote goes LD leaving Corbyn Labour crushes in the middle
Also just out of interest has anyone on here who runs a business ever been contacted by the Government about anything to do with Brexit (contrary to what we are told on the News). I note the other day a large supplier of food stuff to schools, etc who was making stockpiling plans hadn't received any communication even though he was in a large key business. I deregistered my company in the summer when I retired and I have received nothing at all and a large part of my business was with the EU.
1979: "13 dead, never forgotten - we got 18 and Mountbatten".
1998: The GFA.
2012: Queen smiles and shakes with Martin McGuinness.
'Progress' is a term much thrown around - and sometimes not correctly - but the above is surely a definitive example.
If a hard border does come about that will drive Ireland back to talks. So we can refuse the backstop until they drop it.
If a hard border does not come about then it will show the backstop to be the heaping pile of bovine manure we always said it was.
Either way, so long as we hold firm we win.
And, yes, he WILL blink. It will be a case of Blinking Boris.
:-)
https://www.gov.scot/publications/government-expenditure-revenue-scotland-gers/
“Earn less, spend more”.....nice work if you can get it!
Dealers in the Tories are either ok with or resigned to no deal, or currently fooling themselves so they can do nothing.
Step 1 - it's not happening
Step 2 - it could happen but we wont back it
Step 3 - its happening and it's too late for us to stop it
That’s an advance at least on Dan Hannan and others who continue to shout that there is no actual problem in the first place.
I'm starting to think the only option is a poll in NI about unification (or a NI ref on the backstop), but a) I don't suppose many UK politicians want to countenance that because actually it is English interests that dislike the backstop and care about the union b) I don't suppose the RoI actually want NI to join them right now because of the economic and cultural impact that would have and c) that doesn't end the possibility of violence either. Also unification should not be a solution to a UK problem, but a decision of Irish people who have healed from the history of English entanglement, elsewise it won't be a long term unification.
All this was predicted on 24 June 2016.