Intderesting intderactive map of the impact of Brexit on Scotland. Visually dominated by the farming and fishing areas but that is an artefact of geographiocal area/population density. The report makes it clear that urban areas are also hit. The heterogeneity is striking - the New Town of Edinburgh is at as much risk as your average sheep heft. But Lossiemouth does much better than Peterheid probably because fishing has been replaced by military bases.
Does anyone think that if a deal isn't agreed now, Johnson will be able to negotiate one in the future?
A NI only backstop one if he gets a Tory majority yes but otherwise no as the DUP will veto anything further than Boris has already proposed (assuming more Labour MPs don't back a Boris Deal)
It's the lack of introspection that continually gets me.
Death cult Leavers never stop to ask themselves why they have abjectly failed to persuade anything like a majority in the House of Commons (or the country at large for that matter) that no-deal Brexit is something that should be contemplated as a viable course of action.
It's the inflammatory language from people who condemn it that gets me.
There's no other term for people so exuberantly willing to risk chaos and real harm as they work themselves up into an extremist frenzy, crazed by the contrast between the reality of Brexit and their original wild visions of milk and honey.
There are plenty, and seeing as the only other recent group that people in the political bubble liked to call a "death cult" were ISIS, it is completely over the top, and quite insulting to the memory of those slaughtered by them
As long as people don't use terms like "surrender bill", we will be ok.
Surrender bill fits - Remainacs have lost the plot here, with group think it always had a chance of happening
If you are going to use your playground epithets please at least spell them correctly. The only people that have "lost the plot" are the WW2 obsessed xenophobes that make up a large proportion of those that obsess about Britain leaving the EU.
The main obsessives about Britain leaving the EU seems to come from those who want to remain See: ISIL comment
I'm sure if he hadn't pointlessly committed himself to the 31 October deadline, No Deal would be the last thing he wanted. If he wants it now - and who knows what's going on in his head? - it's nothing to do with Brexit intrinsically, but only a consequence of his own political self-interest.
Cummings told him to go all out 'No Deal' to kill off TBP, then get an election to get a majority then whatver (leave with May's Deal?)
I think he committed himself to that date with the Tory leadership contest in mind, not for any reason relating to the BXP.
There will not be another renegotiation and another referendum.
Repeat after me:
1. Parliament may not bind its successors. Nor may dodgy Prime Ministers 2. Whatever Cameron said in 2016, the law Parliament passed was very clear: the referendum was only advisory 3. Whatever Leavers may try to fantasise, World War 2 did not invalidate democracy because Chamberlain promised "Peace in our Time" a year earlier
Public opinion has c hanged. Leavers had a chance to get us out, and the ERG's fundamentalist madmen blew it.
Does anyone think that if a deal isn't agreed now, Johnson will be able to negotiate one in the future?
Probably not, but it's a hell of a lot more likely than getting a deal agreed by all relevant boddies and ratified so that we can leave with a deal three weeks tomorrow - the chances of which are precisely zero.
The idea that a no-deal exit, even on the IFS's doomsday predictor, is more damaging is pretty disgraceful. Nobody on here backed the 'Krauts' poster yesterday and I think you'd be wise to withdraw your above line of argument, which is the other cheek of the same ambiguously-wiped arse.
This is a constant theme on PB. Every time I argue for compromise from both sides, the only people attacking me are Remainers.
Yes. Because you're the most obvious concern troll that pb has had in months, parroting Leave lines to take uncritically.
That must be why I criticized prorogation on a number of occasions, have continuously advocated CU membership and thoroughly condemned the racist Leave.EU poster yesterday.
I often wonder if extremists know they are extremists or genuinely see themselves as reasonable. I still can't tell with you. You really seem to think that anyone who doesn't believe every line in the arch-Remainer playbook is some sort of plant. No, some people just take each debate on a case by case basis. I know that is a hard topic for ideologues.
You claim to be a Remainer yet you uncritically parrot every anti-EU line going, cheerlead for the Prime Minister and find an objection to anything advocated by other Remain supporters. It's pretty easy to spot a troll. Just be true to your views, which would command more respect if they were presented with a more realistic persona.
Does anyone think that if a deal isn't agreed now, Johnson will be able to negotiate one in the future?
A NI only backstop one if he gets a Tory majority yes but otherwise no as the DUP will veto anything further than Boris has already proposed (assuming more Labour MPs don't back a Boris Deal)
But then again, when he was elected, you thought he was going to do that by now.
I've evidenced my claim. Yes, it's shocking. What's still more shocking is the reaction of the average Leaver is "well...".
Evidencing financial impacts doesn't mean your specific analogy in relation to that was not a transparent and lazy attempt to troll. Such an analogy makes it more likely people will dismiss the impacts of no deal, not less, so your intent was obviously not to persuade since that would have beena very counter productive way to do it. I can only assume therefore that you did it for the lols. As someone very concerned about no deal I wish I could be so flippant and get jollies from such analogies.
We've so far got as far as £110 billion a year as a price to pay for no deal Brexit without a Leaver on here so much as blinking - the main complaint has been "yes, but ISIS would have been more damaging than that". One has to wonder what degree of harm would persuade any Leaver on here that it wasn't worth it.
Utterly ridiculous. The only reason people are comparing the two is because you are trying to force the meme that they are at all similar
Does anyone think that if a deal isn't agreed now, Johnson will be able to negotiate one in the future?
Absolutely yes!
He'll be able to credibly say to Varadkar that he's messed us around long enough on the backstop and it gets dropped - NOW - or its no deal and no backstop.
At the minute Parliament is preventing No Deal and so the Irish and the EU have no reason to compromise.
Does anyone think that if a deal isn't agreed now, Johnson will be able to negotiate one in the future?
A NI only backstop one if he gets a Tory majority yes but otherwise no as the DUP will veto anything further than Boris has already proposed (assuming more Labour MPs don't back a Boris Deal)
But then again, when he was elected, you thought he was going to do that by now.
I never said he would do that unless he wins the next general election as the DUP would veto it
Welcome to PB in 2019, where the economic effects of non-tariff barrier friction are unironically described as being worse than the plans of those responsible for the Khafsa and Sinjar massacres.
Yes the Sky Brussels correspondent is saying on TV that the whole EU parliament is convinced that the next step is an extension.
"Give us what we want or we will keep grovelling and paying you a billion pounds a month" is not the strongest negotiating line. What shocker.
Maybe it is stronger than anything you might come up with.
The big problem is that the Leave side doesn't really have any proper negotiating capability in it's philosophy. It is all based on the old fashioned notion of win lose. I win, you lose. Fantasies about war and dastardly foreigners. Negotiating is about compromise and a certain amount of guile, and looking for the win-win. Boris Johnson is just a narcissistic clown of a journalist. He has no more experience or understanding of negotiation than he does of brain surgery.
If it’s the only one that has the power of nobile officium how can the Supreme Court exert jurisdiction over that .
Putting that aside today’s ruling is really the best the petitioners could have hoped for given the circumstances, Bozo hasn’t broken any law yet .
And because they’ve effectively held this over and not ruled there’s nothing for the government to appeal on .
If the case had been dismissed the petitioners would have had to start again , and now Bozo has given undertakings to both the inner and outer court to obey and not frustrate the Benn Act .
And let’s not forget the three judges here are the same ones who ruled in the original prorogation case where they found it unlawful.
I doubt very much they’re going to look kindly on any further unlawful actions by the PM.
The Supreme Court is an appellate body, not a court of first instance. So no one can approach the SC directly for a remedy - it can only hear claims on appeal. All the SC can do is examine and rule on whether the law has been properly applied by the court of original jurisdiction. In a similar vein, only employment tribunals can hear unfair dismissal claims, appeals from an ET can go to the SC, but the SC can’t hear such a claim in the first instance.
I've evidenced my claim. Yes, it's shocking. What's still more shocking is the reaction of the average Leaver is "well...".
Evidencing financial impacts doesn't mean your specific analogy in relation to that was not a transparent and lazy attempt to troll. Such an analogy makes it more likely people will dismiss the impacts of no deal, not less, so your intent was obviously not to persuade since that would have beena very counter productive way to do it. I can only assume therefore that you did it for the lols. As someone very concerned about no deal I wish I could be so flippant and get jollies from such analogies.
We've so far got as far as £110 billion a year as a price to pay for no deal Brexit without a Leaver on here so much as blinking - the main complaint has been "yes, but ISIS would have been more damaging than that". One has to wonder what degree of harm would persuade any Leaver on here that it wasn't worth it.
Utterly ridiculous. The only reason people are comparing the two is because you are trying to force the meme that they are at all similar
£110 billion a year is a gigantic sum. Yet no-deal Leavers apparently regard that as just a bagatelle to secure their mad obsession.
It's the lack of introspection that continually gets me.
Death cult Leavers never stop to ask themselves why they have abjectly failed to persuade anything like a majority in the House of Commons (or the country at large for that matter) that no-deal Brexit is something that should be contemplated as a viable course of action.
It's the inflammatory language from people who condemn it that gets me.
There's no other term for people so exuberantly willing to risk chaos and real harm as they work themselves up into an extremist frenzy, crazed by the contrast between the reality of Brexit and their original wild visions of milk and honey.
There are plenty, and seeing as the only other recent group that people in the political bubble liked to call a "death cult" were ISIS, it is completely over the top, and quite insulting to the memory of those slaughtered by them
The aggregate damage that the death cult Leavers would do to Britain if they get their way would be far in excess of anything that ISIS could dream of.
That's just plain wrong. In any case, I dont think the attempt to get it to catch on is working.
It's the lack of introspection that continually gets me.
Death cult Leavers never stop to ask themselves why they have abjectly failed to persuade anything like a majority in the House of Commons (or the country at large for that matter) that no-deal Brexit is something that should be contemplated as a viable course of action.
It's the inflammatory language from people who condemn it that gets me.
What should be the consequences of voting down every deal when there is a time limit on how long negotiations can last, when those voting it down have pledged to honour the result of the referendum?
It's the way everyone completely ignores any countervailing evidence that spoils their narrative that gets me.
For example, you and other Leavers keep insisting that "The Remainer MPs in Parliament keep voting everything down, it's a conspiracy to wreck Brexit; they were elected to follow the referendum result and they've broken their word!"
Despite clear evidence that there isn't a clique of Remainer MPs who have voted everyything down - virtually every MP has voted for one or more specific options of Brexit. And virtually all of them (with the exception of the ERG) has voted for the options that most march with that which they'd undertaken to deliver in their manifestos.
And it gets continually ignored; the (now disproven) narrative gets repeated and repeated as if repetition could substitute for honesty, and it appears to be simply because the actuality is inconvenient and the fantasy is simple and appealing to them.
After a while, it's impossible to avoid the conclusion that such people are either deliberately dishonest or trolls.
Yes, I have accepted countless offers of well paid jobs that weren't offered to me, but they don't seem to think that's good enough at the dole office when I dont turn up to the jobs they find me.
Of the different types of Brexit that various MPs have voted for it is only the Brady Amendment flavour - the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop - that appears not to be agreeable with the EU. The various options that garnered support from the Opposition benches, such as the Customs Union, or Single Market membership, are not obviously problematic for the EU.
It follows, therefore, that if we were to agree a compromise between ourselves on something that was towards that end of the spectrum that the EU would be likely to agree to it.
This would not be to frustrate the referendum result, but would require a bit more time and a willingness to compromise from the leaders of the Conservative and Labour parties.
You suggested that one of our fellow PBers should feed their kitchen scraps to their chickens.
Believe it or not - and I still find it hard to come to terms with as someone who keeps chickens - that is strictly illegal.
It results from an EU directive transposed into British law. For all I know it was the British who pushed for it so this is not per se an attack on the EU. It is an attack on the idiocy of all governments that try and legislate every tiny part of our lives.
It even applies if your chickens are pets and even to things like cabbage leaves from the outside of the cabbage or cauliflower.
I've evidenced my claim. Yes, it's shocking. What's still more shocking is the reaction of the average Leaver is "well...".
Evidencing financial impacts doesn't mean your specific analogy in relation to that was not a transparent and lazy attempt to troll. Such an analogy makes it more likely people will dismiss the impacts of no deal, not less, so your intent was obviously not to persuade since that would have beena very counter productive way to do it. I can only assume therefore that you did it for the lols. As someone very concerned about no deal I wish I could be so flippant and get jollies from such analogies.
We've so far got as far as £110 billion a year as a price to pay for no deal Brexit without a Leaver on here so much as blinking - the main complaint has been "yes, but ISIS would have been more damaging than that". One has to wonder what degree of harm would persuade any Leaver on here that it wasn't worth it.
Utterly ridiculous. The only reason people are comparing the two is because you are trying to force the meme that they are at all similar
£110 billion a year is a gigantic sum. Yet no-deal Leavers apparently regard that as just a bagatelle to secure their mad obsession.
Who are the no deal leavers you are arguing with? It's just a bad comparison, it doesn't work, there's no shame in that.
Does anyone think that if a deal isn't agreed now, Johnson will be able to negotiate one in the future?
Absolutely yes!
He'll be able to credibly say to Varadkar that he's messed us around long enough on the backstop and it gets dropped - NOW - or its no deal and no backstop.
At the minute Parliament is preventing No Deal and so the Irish and the EU have no reason to compromise.
If it got out that a U.K. prime minister told a representative of the Irish people that he’d “messed around” the British people, it would create paroxysms of rage in Ireland that would mean any hope of compromise was impossible.
There is no compromise on the backstop. It’s an Irish “red line” I’m afraid.
You suggested that one of our fellow PBers should feed their kitchen scraps to their chickens.
Believe it or not - and I still find it hard to come to terms with as someone who keeps chickens - that is strictly illegal.
It results from an EU directive transposed into British law. For all I know it was the British who pushed for it so this is not per se an attack on the EU. It is an attack on the idiocy of all governments that try and legislate every tiny part of our lives.
It even applies if your chickens are pets and even to things like cabbage leaves from the outside of the cabbage or cauliflower.
I can understand that if it were avian material in question - but what is the logic re the cauliflower?
I've evidenced my claim. Yes, it's shocking. What's still more shocking is the reaction of the average Leaver is "well...".
Evidencing financial impacts doesn't mean your specific analogy in relation to that was not a transparent and lazy attempt to troll. Such an analogy makes it more likely people will dismiss the impacts of no deal, not less, so your intent was obviously not to persuade since that would have beena very counter productive way to do it. I can only assume therefore that you did it for the lols. As someone very concerned about no deal I wish I could be so flippant and get jollies from such analogies.
We've so far got as far as £110 billion a year as a price to pay for no deal Brexit without a Leaver on here so much as blinking - the main complaint has been "yes, but ISIS would have been more damaging than that". One has to wonder what degree of harm would persuade any Leaver on here that it wasn't worth it.
Utterly ridiculous. The only reason people are comparing the two is because you are trying to force the meme that they are at all similar
£110 billion a year is a gigantic sum. Yet no-deal Leavers apparently regard that as just a bagatelle to secure their mad obsession.
Who are the no deal leavers you are arguing with? It's just a bad comparison, it doesn't work, there's no shame in that.
No-deal Leavers are looking to mutilate the country, cause chaos and disruption, permanently damage the country's economy and for why? This has gone far beyond backward-looking reactionary impulses and has reached mania.
It IS going to be a No Deal manifesto but saying they want the Boris Deal as their choice (which the EU has said they can't have)
How will that withstand a campaign?
Boris goes around the country saying I've got this wonderful proosal that will sort everything out.
The EU is saying no now but if you give me a mandate via a majority for this proposal to take back to the EU they might move.
If they still don't move, even after you've given me a mandate for my proposal then we'll have to no deal as we can't keep going on like this.
That will basically be the Con pitch I would think.
See also: I've got this wonderful proposal that will sort everything out: widespread nationalisation.
The economists say no now, but if you give me a mandate via a majority for this proposal they might move.
If they still don't move, even after you've given me a mandate for my proposal, then we'll have to go full Marxism as we can't keep going on like this.
You suggested that one of our fellow PBers should feed their kitchen scraps to their chickens.
Believe it or not - and I still find it hard to come to terms with as someone who keeps chickens - that is strictly illegal.
It results from an EU directive transposed into British law. For all I know it was the British who pushed for it so this is not per se an attack on the EU. It is an attack on the idiocy of all governments that try and legislate every tiny part of our lives.
It even applies if your chickens are pets and even to things like cabbage leaves from the outside of the cabbage or cauliflower.
I can understand that if it were avian material in question - but what is the logic re the cauliflower?
The claim is that it could be contaminated with other products from the kitchen. But you are asking me to explain something I fundamentally disagree with and don't understand.
It's the lack of introspection that continually gets me.
Death cult Leavers never stop to ask themselves why they have abjectly failed to persuade anything like a majority in the House of Commons (or the country at large for that matter) that no-deal Brexit is something that should be contemplated as a viable course of action.
It's the inflammatory language from people who condemn it that gets me.
There's no other term for people so exuberantly willing to risk chaos and real harm as they work themselves up into an extremist frenzy, crazed by the contrast between the reality of Brexit and their original wild visions of milk and honey.
There are plenty, and seeing as the only other recent group that people in the political bubble liked to call a "death cult" were ISIS, it is completely over the top, and quite insulting to the memory of those slaughtered by them
As long as people don't use terms like "surrender bill", we will be ok.
Surrender bill fits - Remainacs have lost the plot here, with group think it always had a chance of happening
If you are going to use your playground epithets please at least spell them correctly. The only people that have "lost the plot" are the WW2 obsessed xenophobes that make up a large proportion of those that obsess about Britain leaving the EU.
You don't know what "epithet" means.
Thanks for the heads up on human/dinosaur timelines, though.
If it got out that a U.K. prime minister told a representative of the Irish people that he’d “messed around” the British people, it would create paroxysms of rage in Ireland that would mean any hope of compromise was impossible.
There is no compromise on the backstop. It’s an Irish “red line” I’m afraid.
Perhaps a 7 year time limit if that gets a Deal done?
It was even on the television news at 6pm just the other day. The news reporter was talking all about this Brexxit, so i watched him say his stuff about it, and he was talking all about Brexitt until the next item, he was that interested.
You suggested that one of our fellow PBers should feed their kitchen scraps to their chickens.
Believe it or not - and I still find it hard to come to terms with as someone who keeps chickens - that is strictly illegal.
It results from an EU directive transposed into British law. For all I know it was the British who pushed for it so this is not per se an attack on the EU. It is an attack on the idiocy of all governments that try and legislate every tiny part of our lives.
It even applies if your chickens are pets and even to things like cabbage leaves from the outside of the cabbage or cauliflower.
You are allowed to feed chickens kitchen scraps if your household is completely vegan. Why a vegan might want to keep chickens is unclear.
"There is a complete ban on using kitchen waste from non-vegan households and from catering waste containing products of animal origin. It is illegal to use catering waste from kitchens which handle meat, or vegetarian kitchens which may handle dairy products, eggs etc. This ban also includes catering waste from restaurants and commercial kitchens producing vegan food."
The reason is because of the danger of epidemics of disease such as Foot and mouth, which was thought to have been caused by contaminated pig feed in 2001 and resulted in the slaughter of millions of animals.
You suggested that one of our fellow PBers should feed their kitchen scraps to their chickens.
Believe it or not - and I still find it hard to come to terms with as someone who keeps chickens - that is strictly illegal.
It results from an EU directive transposed into British law. For all I know it was the British who pushed for it so this is not per se an attack on the EU. It is an attack on the idiocy of all governments that try and legislate every tiny part of our lives.
It even applies if your chickens are pets and even to things like cabbage leaves from the outside of the cabbage or cauliflower.
If it got out that a U.K. prime minister told a representative of the Irish people that he’d “messed around” the British people, it would create paroxysms of rage in Ireland that would mean any hope of compromise was impossible.
There is no compromise on the backstop. It’s an Irish “red line” I’m afraid.
Perhaps a 7 year time limit if that gets a Deal done?
They require a guarantee that there will never be even the slightest impediment to movement between the two jurisdictions in Ireland. That’s a matter of national importance in Ireland. Despite Mr Thompson’s protestations, Ireland was a single legal entity from at least 1542 (they would say before) until 1922 (Kingdom of Ireland until 1801 and jurisdictionally separate from Eng & Sco even as part of the U.K.) and partition remains deeply sensitive. Accepting anything short of the backstop isn’t politically acceptable. It’s a matter of identity that trumps economics. They can’t be bought off any more than Brexiteers can.
It was very generous of Hillary Benn and his colleagues to provide another nice shiny excuse for the nuttier kind of Leaver to use to explain why the EU doesn't cave in to an obviously unworkable proposal. But they didn't really need to bother - the no-dealers would easily have found some other excuse and someone else to blame.
I've evidenced my claim. Yes, it's shocking. What's still more shocking is the reaction of the average Leaver is "well...".
Evidencing financial impacts doesn't mean your specific analogy in relation to that was not a transparent and lazy attempt to troll. Such an analogy makes it more likely people will dismiss the impacts of no deal, not less, so your intent was obviously not to persuade since that would have beena very counter productive way to do it. I can only assume therefore that you did it for the lols. As someone very concerned about no deal I wish I could be so flippant and get jollies from such analogies.
We've so far got as far as £110 billion a year as a price to pay for no deal Brexit without a Leaver on here so much as blinking - the main complaint has been "yes, but ISIS would have been more damaging than that". One has to wonder what degree of harm would persuade any Leaver on here that it wasn't worth it.
Utterly ridiculous. The only reason people are comparing the two is because you are trying to force the meme that they are at all similar
£110 billion a year is a gigantic sum. Yet no-deal Leavers apparently regard that as just a bagatelle to secure their mad obsession.
Who are the no deal leavers you are arguing with? It's just a bad comparison, it doesn't work, there's no shame in that.
No-deal Leavers are looking to mutilate the country, cause chaos and disruption, permanently damage the country's economy and for why? This has gone far beyond backward-looking reactionary impulses and has reached mania.
Yet Remain MPs were prepared to risk that rather than pass an agreement between our PM and the EU
It IS going to be a No Deal manifesto but saying they want the Boris Deal as their choice (which the EU has said they can't have)
How will that withstand a campaign?
Boris goes around the country saying I've got this wonderful proposal that will sort everything out.
The EU is saying no now but if you give me a mandate via a majority for this proposal to take back to the EU they might move.
If they still don't move, even after you've given me a mandate for my proposal then we'll have to no deal as we can't keep going on like this.
That will basically be the Con pitch I would think.
‘I’ve failed spectacularly to get this deal but please give me another go. And when I fail again as I’m very likely to do I’ll have a mandate to trash the economy and break up the nation’.
Welcome to PB in 2019, where the economic effects of non-tariff barrier friction are unironically described as being worse than the plans of those responsible for the Khafsa and Sinjar massacres.
You suggested that one of our fellow PBers should feed their kitchen scraps to their chickens.
Believe it or not - and I still find it hard to come to terms with as someone who keeps chickens - that is strictly illegal.
It results from an EU directive transposed into British law. For all I know it was the British who pushed for it so this is not per se an attack on the EU. It is an attack on the idiocy of all governments that try and legislate every tiny part of our lives.
It even applies if your chickens are pets and even to things like cabbage leaves from the outside of the cabbage or cauliflower.
Ha! That is amazing I will investigate further. Who knew I was a hardened Crim.
It IS going to be a No Deal manifesto but saying they want the Boris Deal as their choice (which the EU has said they can't have)
How will that withstand a campaign?
Boris goes around the country saying I've got this wonderful proposal that will sort everything out.
The EU is saying no now but if you give me a mandate via a majority for this proposal to take back to the EU they might move.
If they still don't move, even after you've given me a mandate for my proposal then we'll have to no deal as we can't keep going on like this.
That will basically be the Con pitch I would think.
‘I’ve failed spectacularly to get this deal but please give me another go. And when I fail again as I’m very likely to do I’ll have a mandate to trash the economy and break up the nation’.
Nope, doesn’t get my vote.
Something makes me think you were never the target auidance.
Yes the Sky Brussels correspondent is saying on TV that the whole EU parliament is convinced that the next step is an extension.
"Give us what we want or we will keep grovelling and paying you a billion pounds a month" is not the strongest negotiating line. What shocker.
Maybe it is stronger than anything you might come up with.
The big problem is that the Leave side doesn't really have any proper negotiating capability in it's philosophy. It is all based on the old fashioned notion of win lose. I win, you lose. Fantasies about war and dastardly foreigners. Negotiating is about compromise and a certain amount of guile, and looking for the win-win. Boris Johnson is just a narcissistic clown of a journalist. He has no more experience or understanding of negotiation than he does of brain surgery.
Relative to no deal, Boris's proposals absolutely are a win-win.
The problem is that Varadkar et al are not comparing it to no deal, they're comparing it to the backstop. But the backstop isn't the baseline, nor was it agreed, the baseline should be no deal.
Dispel the myth of either remaining or the backstop, make it Boris's deal or no deal and Boris's deal is a win/win compromise.
If it got out that a U.K. prime minister told a representative of the Irish people that he’d “messed around” the British people, it would create paroxysms of rage in Ireland that would mean any hope of compromise was impossible.
There is no compromise on the backstop. It’s an Irish “red line” I’m afraid.
Perhaps a 7 year time limit if that gets a Deal done?
They require a guarantee that there will never be even the slightest impediment to movement between the two jurisdictions in Ireland. That’s a matter of national importance in Ireland. Despite Mr Thompson’s protestations, Ireland was a single legal entity from at least 1542 (they would say before) until 1922 (Kingdom of Ireland until 1801 and jurisdictionally separate from Eng & Sco even as part of the U.K.) and partition remains deeply sensitive. Accepting anything short of the backstop isn’t politically acceptable. It’s a matter of identity that trumps economics. They can’t be bought off any more than Brexiteers can.
So we go to no deal then. Where are they going to build the customs posts in a no deal scenario?
It was very generous of Hillary Benn and his colleagues to provide another nice shiny excuse for the nuttier kind of Leaver to use to explain why the EU doesn't cave in to an obviously unworkable proposal. But they didn't really need to bother - the no-dealers would easily have found some other excuse and someone else to blame.
Richard, please don't pretend that you actually read things before deciding that they are 'brilliant' or 'unworkable'. You've been found out more than once. It's embarrassing.
It was very generous of Hillary Benn and his colleagues to provide another nice shiny excuse for the nuttier kind of Leaver to use to explain why the EU doesn't cave in to an obviously unworkable proposal. But they didn't really need to bother - the no-dealers would easily have found some other excuse and someone else to blame.
Richard, please don't pretend that you actually read things before deciding that they are 'brilliant' or 'unworkable'. You've been found out more than once. It's embarrassing.
Boris goes around the country saying I've got this wonderful proposal that will sort everything out.
The EU is saying no now but if you give me a mandate via a majority for this proposal to take back to the EU they might move.
If they still don't move, even after you've given me a mandate for my proposal then we'll have to no deal as we can't keep going on like this.
That will basically be the Con pitch I would think.
All very well.
But given the public (allegedly) are incapable of getting their little heads around Labour's 'second referendum' policy they would surely have zero chance of processing the positively Byzantine complexities of that.
If it got out that a U.K. prime minister told a representative of the Irish people that he’d “messed around” the British people, it would create paroxysms of rage in Ireland that would mean any hope of compromise was impossible.
There is no compromise on the backstop. It’s an Irish “red line” I’m afraid.
Perhaps a 7 year time limit if that gets a Deal done?
They require a guarantee that there will never be even the slightest impediment to movement between the two jurisdictions in Ireland. That’s a matter of national importance in Ireland. Despite Mr Thompson’s protestations, Ireland was a single legal entity from at least 1542 (they would say before) until 1922 (Kingdom of Ireland until 1801 and jurisdictionally separate from Eng & Sco even as part of the U.K.) and partition remains deeply sensitive. Accepting anything short of the backstop isn’t politically acceptable. It’s a matter of identity that trumps economics. They can’t be bought off any more than Brexiteers can.
So we go to no deal then. Where are they going to build the customs posts in a no deal scenario?
Somewhere just back from the Border I would assume. They need to put them up to remain in the Single Market and EU - which is theIt strategic counterweight to being dominated by this country. Whatever happens they won’t blame the EU for the customs posts.
I've evidenced my claim. Yes, it's shocking. What's still more shocking is the reaction of the average Leaver is "well...".
Evidencing financial impacts doesn't mean your specific analogy in relation to that was not a transparent and lazy attempt to troll. Such an analogy makes it more likely people will dismiss the impacts of no deal, not less, so your intent was obviously not to persuade since that would have beena very counter productive way to do it. I can only assume therefore that you did it for the lols. As someone very concerned about no deal I wish I could be so flippant and get jollies from such analogies.
We've so far got as far as £110 billion a year as a price to pay for no deal Brexit without a Leaver on here so much as blinking - the main complaint has been "yes, but ISIS would have been more damaging than that". One has to wonder what degree of harm would persuade any Leaver on here that it wasn't worth it.
There's one standing right here! That's why there's been switchers.
Yes the Sky Brussels correspondent is saying on TV that the whole EU parliament is convinced that the next step is an extension.
"Give us what we want or we will keep grovelling and paying you a billion pounds a month" is not the strongest negotiating line. What shocker.
Maybe it is stronger than anything you might come up with.
The big problem is that the Leave side doesn't really have any proper negotiating capability in it's philosophy. It is all based on the old fashioned notion of win lose. I win, you lose. Fantasies about war and dastardly foreigners. Negotiating is about compromise and a certain amount of guile, and looking for the win-win. Boris Johnson is just a narcissistic clown of a journalist. He has no more experience or understanding of negotiation than he does of brain surgery.
Relative to no deal, Boris's proposals absolutely are a win-win.
The problem is that Varadkar et al are not comparing it to no deal, they're comparing it to the backstop. But the backstop isn't the baseline, nor was it agreed, the baseline should be no deal.
Dispel the myth of either remaining or the backstop, make it Boris's deal or no deal and Boris's deal is a win/win compromise.
No it’s not because the Irish lose. It’s one of your beloved “red lines”.
Yes the Sky Brussels correspondent is saying on TV that the whole EU parliament is convinced that the next step is an extension.
"Give us what we want or we will keep grovelling and paying you a billion pounds a month" is not the strongest negotiating line. What shocker.
Maybe it is stronger than anything you might come up with.
The big problem is that the Leave side doesn't really have any proper negotiating capability in it's philosophy. It is all based on the old fashioned notion of win lose. I win, you lose. Fantasies about war and dastardly foreigners. Negotiating is about compromise and a certain amount of guile, and looking for the win-win. Boris Johnson is just a narcissistic clown of a journalist. He has no more experience or understanding of negotiation than he does of brain surgery.
Relative to no deal, Boris's proposals absolutely are a win-win.
The problem is that Varadkar et al are not comparing it to no deal, they're comparing it to the backstop. But the backstop isn't the baseline, nor was it agreed, the baseline should be no deal.
Dispel the myth of either remaining or the backstop, make it Boris's deal or no deal and Boris's deal is a win/win compromise.
One person's win-win compromise is another person's giving in to threats. If the EU caves to the UK on this they will be filleted in every subsequent trade negotiation. Brexiteers need to get a lot better at understanding others' incentives.
If it got out that a U.K. prime minister told a representative of the Irish people that he’d “messed around” the British people, it would create paroxysms of rage in Ireland that would mean any hope of compromise was impossible.
There is no compromise on the backstop. It’s an Irish “red line” I’m afraid.
Perhaps a 7 year time limit if that gets a Deal done?
They require a guarantee that there will never be even the slightest impediment to movement between the two jurisdictions in Ireland. That’s a matter of national importance in Ireland. Despite Mr Thompson’s protestations, Ireland was a single legal entity from at least 1542 (they would say before) until 1922 (Kingdom of Ireland until 1801 and jurisdictionally separate from Eng & Sco even as part of the U.K.) and partition remains deeply sensitive. Accepting anything short of the backstop isn’t politically acceptable. It’s a matter of identity that trumps economics. They can’t be bought off any more than Brexiteers can.
So we go to no deal then. Where are they going to build the customs posts in a no deal scenario?
On the border.
What nobody has explained to me is that if the UK Gmt claims that it will happily have an open border with Eire, why does it bother with customs, immigration, etc. at Heathrow, Dover, etc. etc.? I've asked this on PB, no answer forthcoming.
Claiming import duty from some industrial estate in County Derry is not the same thing, any more than my being chartged VAT and a Post Office robbery fee for a parcel from Japan from a holding warehouse in, I think, Coventry is the same as having an actual border and border force at the points of entry.
They require a guarantee that there will never be even the slightest impediment to movement between the two jurisdictions in Ireland. That’s a matter of national importance in Ireland. Despite Mr Thompson’s protestations, Ireland was a single legal entity from at least 1542 (they would say before) until 1922 (Kingdom of Ireland until 1801 and jurisdictionally separate from Eng & Sco even as part of the U.K.) and partition remains deeply sensitive. Accepting anything short of the backstop isn’t politically acceptable. It’s a matter of identity that trumps economics. They can’t be bought off any more than Brexiteers can.
OK, you do seem certain.
I did think that was just the one possible contender as an eleventh hour compromise to get something done. NI only backstop, long-dated sunset clause.
No Deal was always the default position if a deal wasn't done. A deal was done, yet parliament thought the risk of No Deal was worth taking in order to vote it down.
Three times.
Now we are told that No Deal is actually worse than ISIS taking control of the country! What were those moderate MPs thinking?
If it got out that a U.K. prime minister told a representative of the Irish people that he’d “messed around” the British people, it would create paroxysms of rage in Ireland that would mean any hope of compromise was impossible.
There is no compromise on the backstop. It’s an Irish “red line” I’m afraid.
Perhaps a 7 year time limit if that gets a Deal done?
They require a guarantee that there will never be even the slightest impediment to movement between the two jurisdictions in Ireland. That’s a matter of national importance in Ireland. Despite Mr Thompson’s protestations, Ireland was a single legal entity from at least 1542 (they would say before) until 1922 (Kingdom of Ireland until 1801 and jurisdictionally separate from Eng & Sco even as part of the U.K.) and partition remains deeply sensitive. Accepting anything short of the backstop isn’t politically acceptable. It’s a matter of identity that trumps economics. They can’t be bought off any more than Brexiteers can.
So we go to no deal then. Where are they going to build the customs posts in a no deal scenario?
It's all about the Blame Game now.
A border imposed by Britain as a consequence of Brexit w/o backstop is quite a different thing to one agreed by an Irish government. See the war Irish Civil War for details.
If there was any plausibility to supposed technical solutions then Brexiteers would have no fear of the backstop.
I think it fair to say that the Backstop is important not just to Ireland, but also to other parties in the Commons. I think far fewer Lab MPs would support a WA without it.
No Deal was always the default position if a deal wasn't done. A deal was done, yet parliament thought the risk of No Deal was worth taking in order to vote it down.
Three times.
Now we are told that No Deal is actually worse than ISIS taking control of the country! What were those moderate MPs thinking?
They were thinking, of course, that no sane government could possibly contemplate crashing us out in chaos, because the immediate and lasting damage would be completely unacceptable. They were right.
Of course it was a theoretical possibility, but not one that anyone on any side of the argument (including the Vote Leave and Leave.EU campaigns) thought plausible, let alone desirable.
To be honest i don't understand why you arent more worried about this Brexxit thing. Ive discovered it today and it looks a bit worrying to be frank/ Its all to do with europe and the exit door which is in ireland they say
There are people talking about it on the radio station now and they seem concerned about it too so its not just me
AND if you type Brexxit into the Microsoft search browser you get 42000 pings on the webb so its on there as well. try it I'm right
ok im going to go away and learn more about brexxit i suggest you do it as well bye
Does anyone think that if a deal isn't agreed now, Johnson will be able to negotiate one in the future?
Absolutely yes!
He'll be able to credibly say to Varadkar that he's messed us around long enough on the backstop and it gets dropped - NOW - or its no deal and no backstop.
At the minute Parliament is preventing No Deal and so the Irish and the EU have no reason to compromise.
If it got out that a U.K. prime minister told a representative of the Irish people that he’d “messed around” the British people, it would create paroxysms of rage in Ireland that would mean any hope of compromise was impossible.
There is no compromise on the backstop. It’s an Irish “red line” I’m afraid.
Then they're going to have to start building border posts.
No Deal was always the default position if a deal wasn't done. A deal was done, yet parliament thought the risk of No Deal was worth taking in order to vote it down.
Three times.
Now we are told that No Deal is actually worse than ISIS taking control of the country! What were those moderate MPs thinking?
They were thinking, of course, that no sane government could possibly contemplate crashing us out in chaos, because the immediate and lasting damage would be completely unacceptable. They were right.
Well we all know the real reason they kept voting down every deal was to engineer another chance at Remaining, I just want people to admit it!
No Deal was always the default position if a deal wasn't done. A deal was done, yet parliament thought the risk of No Deal was worth taking in order to vote it down.
Three times.
Now we are told that No Deal is actually worse than ISIS taking control of the country! What were those moderate MPs thinking?
They were thinking, of course, that no sane government could possibly contemplate crashing us out in chaos, because the immediate and lasting damage would be completely unacceptable. They were right.
That was a very stupid and unnecessary risk they took then. With such a negative impact they should have not been willing to risk that no deal might become policy. That they did demonstrates their concern about no deal impacts does not stretch far enough to take on any political cost to stop it in any way short of their preferred option. People who actually fear no deal are much more willing to bend on Brexit options to avoid it!
No Deal was always the default position if a deal wasn't done. A deal was done, yet parliament thought the risk of No Deal was worth taking in order to vote it down.
Three times.
Now we are told that No Deal is actually worse than ISIS taking control of the country! What were those moderate MPs thinking?
They were thinking, of course, that no sane government could possibly contemplate crashing us out in chaos, because the immediate and lasting damage would be completely unacceptable. They were right.
That was a very stupid and unnecessary risk they took then. With such a negative impact they should have not been willing to risk that no deal might become policy. That they did demonstrates their concern about no deal impacts does not stretch far enough to take on any political cost to stop it in any way short of their preferred option.
Exactly. They consider any form of leaving almost as bad as No Deal, so it is worth risking it to get a shot at Remaining.
They require a guarantee that there will never be even the slightest impediment to movement between the two jurisdictions in Ireland. That’s a matter of national importance in Ireland. Despite Mr Thompson’s protestations, Ireland was a single legal entity from at least 1542 (they would say before) until 1922 (Kingdom of Ireland until 1801 and jurisdictionally separate from Eng & Sco even as part of the U.K.) and partition remains deeply sensitive. Accepting anything short of the backstop isn’t politically acceptable. It’s a matter of identity that trumps economics. They can’t be bought off any more than Brexiteers can.
OK, you do seem certain.
I did think that was just the one possible contender as an eleventh hour compromise to get something done. NI only backstop, long-dated sunset clause.
Not by 31 Oct, obviously, but some fine day.
I would never lay claim to certainty (and I’m not Irish) but I am confident about this. But I’ve been wrong before so let’s not give up hope of a breakthrough.
All I ask is that people stop arrogantly assuming that it’s all about money. Much as Brexiteers bang on about us “standing alone” against the Nazis in 1940 (despite having the world’s biggest empire behind us), they stood alone against us for about 750 years.
No Deal was always the default position if a deal wasn't done. A deal was done, yet parliament thought the risk of No Deal was worth taking in order to vote it down.
Three times.
Now we are told that No Deal is actually worse than ISIS taking control of the country! What were those moderate MPs thinking?
They were thinking, of course, that no sane government could possibly contemplate crashing us out in chaos, because the immediate and lasting damage would be completely unacceptable. They were right.
Well we all know the real reason they kept voting down every deal was to engineer another chance at Remaining, I just want people to admit it!
No, that's not right for many of them. Boris, Rees-Mogg and the other nutjobs were certainly not trying to engineer another chance at Remaining. I don't think Labour as a whole was either (although some Labour or now ex-Labour MPs, like Chuka, were). They were just trying to stuff the Tories.
That was a very stupid and unnecessary risk they took then. With such a negative impact they should have not been willing to risk that no deal might become policy. That they did demonstrates their concern about no deal impacts does not stretch far enough to take on any political cost to stop it in any way short of their preferred option. People who actually fear no deal are much more willing to bend on Brexit options to avoid it!
Agreed. It was stupid. They should have listened to Theresa May.
I just have a weird feeling that the talks between Varadkar and Johnson might produce something that leads to a deal .
Call me nuts but I just think we might all be surprised.
Whatever side of the debate you’re on the only chance to save the country from spilling into even more toxicity and polarization is a deal .
We must return to a time when politics was more dull , I admit the drama over the last few years and the nail biting Commons votes has been like Christmas to political junkies of which there are many here myself included but I think enough is enough now .
Remainers like myself might detest Brexit , but this battle now can’t be won , too much has happened .
The EU simply can’t have the UK remaining , in a constant state of internal warfare with each election turning into a proxy on it .
I want a good relationship with the EU and the UK to return to some degree of sanity .
Only a deal can now get us to this point .
A no deal or another referendum will never deliver any kind of closure .
No Deal was always the default position if a deal wasn't done. A deal was done, yet parliament thought the risk of No Deal was worth taking in order to vote it down.
Three times.
Now we are told that No Deal is actually worse than ISIS taking control of the country! What were those moderate MPs thinking?
They were thinking, of course, that no sane government could possibly contemplate crashing us out in chaos, because the immediate and lasting damage would be completely unacceptable. They were right.
Well we all know the real reason they kept voting down every deal was to engineer another chance at Remaining, I just want people to admit it!
No, that's not right for many of them. Boris, Rees-Mogg and the other nutjobs were certainly not trying to engineer another chance at Remaining. I don't think Labour as a whole was either (although some Labour or now ex-Labour MPs, like Chuka, were). They were just trying to stuff the Tories.
Obviously I dont mean the ERG as they explicitly wanted No Deal. I dont agree with the way they voted either, but at least they are not trying to overturn the referendum result, whilst pretending to honour it.
No Deal was always the default position if a deal wasn't done. A deal was done, yet parliament thought the risk of No Deal was worth taking in order to vote it down.
Three times.
Now we are told that No Deal is actually worse than ISIS taking control of the country! What were those moderate MPs thinking?
They were thinking, of course, that no sane government could possibly contemplate crashing us out in chaos, because the immediate and lasting damage would be completely unacceptable. They were right.
That was a very stupid and unnecessary risk they took then. With such a negative impact they should have not been willing to risk that no deal might become policy. That they did demonstrates their concern about no deal impacts does not stretch far enough to take on any political cost to stop it in any way short of their preferred option. People who actually fear no deal are much more willing to bend on Brexit options to avoid it!
I am not particularly worried by No Deal. My job and savings are not at risk.
No Deal is not an end state, it merely restarts negotiations with UK divided against ourselves and holding few remaining cards. It wouldn't last long.
I just have a weird feeling that the talks between Varadkar and Johnson might produce something that leads to a deal .
Call me nuts but I just think we might all be surprised.
Whatever side of the debate you’re on the only chance to save the country from spilling into even more toxicity and polarization is a deal .
We must return to a time when politics was more dull , I admit the drama over the last few years and the nail biting Commons votes has been like Christmas to political junkies of which there are many here myself included but I think enough is enough now .
Remainers like myself might detest Brexit , but this battle now can’t be won , too much has happened .
The EU simply can’t have the UK remaining , in a constant state of internal warfare with each election turning into a proxy on it .
I want a good relationship with the EU and the UK to return to some degree of sanity .
Only a deal can now get us to this point .
A no deal or another referendum will never deliver any kind of closure .
I just have a weird feeling that the talks between Varadkar and Johnson might produce something that leads to a deal .
Call me nuts but I just think we might all be surprised.
Whatever side of the debate you’re on the only chance to save the country from spilling into even more toxicity and polarization is a deal .
We must return to a time when politics was more dull , I admit the drama over the last few years and the nail biting Commons votes has been like Christmas to political junkies of which there are many here myself included but I think enough is enough now .
Remainers like myself might detest Brexit , but this battle now can’t be won , too much has happened .
The EU simply can’t have the UK remaining , in a constant state of internal warfare with each election turning into a proxy on it .
I want a good relationship with the EU and the UK to return to some degree of sanity .
Only a deal can now get us to this point .
A no deal or another referendum will never deliver any kind of closure .
This is a good point, however I fear that however true it is it does not follow that there is political courage to return to that more dull politics some of us crave. On the contrary, in the short term at least there are political gains to continued brinkmanship and blamesmanship.
However much it would be better for their countries longer term to make a breakthrough, do Varadkar and Boris have a genuine desire to have one? The Tories are already working on their GE lines about being prevented from leaving, which they think will work, and for Varadkar the EU seems very on board with the idea of just extending and hoping again - even if they are rightly being guided by Ireland's interests in all this, it'll take a lot to pull back now.
You suggested that one of our fellow PBers should feed their kitchen scraps to their chickens.
Believe it or not - and I still find it hard to come to terms with as someone who keeps chickens - that is strictly illegal.
It results from an EU directive transposed into British law. For all I know it was the British who pushed for it so this is not per se an attack on the EU. It is an attack on the idiocy of all governments that try and legislate every tiny part of our lives.
It even applies if your chickens are pets and even to things like cabbage leaves from the outside of the cabbage or cauliflower.
Ha! That is amazing I will investigate further. Who knew I was a hardened Crim.
I am saying nothing for fear of incriminating myself.
You suggested that one of our fellow PBers should feed their kitchen scraps to their chickens.
Believe it or not - and I still find it hard to come to terms with as someone who keeps chickens - that is strictly illegal.
It results from an EU directive transposed into British law. For all I know it was the British who pushed for it so this is not per se an attack on the EU. It is an attack on the idiocy of all governments that try and legislate every tiny part of our lives.
It even applies if your chickens are pets and even to things like cabbage leaves from the outside of the cabbage or cauliflower.
I looked into this earlier a bit. I think it was British law first, brought in after the foot and mouth epidemic in 2001. Then the British pushed for it to be adopted EU-wide. I haven't managed to find out whether the EU regulation applies to only commercial waste/animal husbandry or across the board.
One article about it contrasted it to Korea and Japan which regulate how swill should be treated in what was described as a modern way.
So looks like an example of where the UK got its way in the EU, but unfortunately on a matter where it completely overreacted and we have a pointlessly draconian law.
“And ultimately it will be the judgment of the British people in the referendum that I promised and that I will deliver.
[Snip]
When the British people speak, their voice will be respected – not ignored.
If we vote to leave, then we will leave.
There will not be another renegotiation and another referendum.
So I say to my European counterparts with whom I am negotiating.
This is our only chance to get this right – for Britain and for the whole European Union.
I say to those who are thinking about voting to leave.
Think very carefully, because this choice cannot be undone.”
What you don't understand is that he wrote another speech, in which he said "well actually I'm a prisoner of my party and I don't actually mean any of it, and if you don't agree with me I'll withdraw all cooperation and watch your children die". Apparently this is how Conservatives handle things. I'm just a mortal who believes in at least trying to be true to my word, but apparently the upper echelon of the Party have a licence to behave like c***s all the live-long day.
Boris making assurances to his colleagues only to go completely in the opposite direction? Has this ever happened before?
It is firmly established now that Johnson is a compulsive, pathological liar - no more to be believed than Hitler should have been by Chamberlain in 1938.
No Deal was always the default position if a deal wasn't done. A deal was done, yet parliament thought the risk of No Deal was worth taking in order to vote it down.
Three times.
Now we are told that No Deal is actually worse than ISIS taking control of the country! What were those moderate MPs thinking?
They were thinking, of course, that no sane government could possibly contemplate crashing us out in chaos, because the immediate and lasting damage would be completely unacceptable. They were right.
That was a very stupid and unnecessary risk they took then. With such a negative impact they should have not been willing to risk that no deal might become policy. That they did demonstrates their concern about no deal impacts does not stretch far enough to take on any political cost to stop it in any way short of their preferred option. People who actually fear no deal are much more willing to bend on Brexit options to avoid it!
I am not particularly worried by No Deal. My job and savings are not at risk.
No Deal is not an end state, it merely restarts negotiations with UK divided against ourselves and holding few remaining cards. It wouldn't last long.
And that's fine - but many people blubber about the awfulness of no deal without meaning it. If they meant it they would act differently. The Tories who quit over no deal are an example of those who, eventually, did mean what they said about it, but many more do not.
You suggested that one of our fellow PBers should feed their kitchen scraps to their chickens.
Believe it or not - and I still find it hard to come to terms with as someone who keeps chickens - that is strictly illegal.
It results from an EU directive transposed into British law. For all I know it was the British who pushed for it so this is not per se an attack on the EU. It is an attack on the idiocy of all governments that try and legislate every tiny part of our lives.
It even applies if your chickens are pets and even to things like cabbage leaves from the outside of the cabbage or cauliflower.
No Deal was always the default position if a deal wasn't done. A deal was done, yet parliament thought the risk of No Deal was worth taking in order to vote it down.
Three times.
Now we are told that No Deal is actually worse than ISIS taking control of the country! What were those moderate MPs thinking?
They were thinking, of course, that no sane government could possibly contemplate crashing us out in chaos, because the immediate and lasting damage would be completely unacceptable. They were right.
That was a very stupid and unnecessary risk they took then. With such a negative impact they should have not been willing to risk that no deal might become policy. That they did demonstrates their concern about no deal impacts does not stretch far enough to take on any political cost to stop it in any way short of their preferred option. People who actually fear no deal are much more willing to bend on Brexit options to avoid it!
I am not particularly worried by No Deal. My job and savings are not at risk.
No Deal is not an end state, it merely restarts negotiations with UK divided against ourselves and holding few remaining cards. It wouldn't last long.
And that's fine - but many people blubber about the awfulness of no deal without meaning it. If they meant it they would act differently. The Tories who quit over no deal are an example of those who, eventually, did mean what they said about it, but many more do not.
Of course if I was in another business then I might be more bothered. Perhaps Cummings is right and creative destruction of some of our exporting industries is needed.
The idea that a no-deal exit, even on the IFS's doomsday predictor, is more damaging is pretty disgraceful. Nobody on here backed the 'Krauts' poster yesterday and I think you'd be wise to withdraw your above line of argument, which is the other cheek of the same ambiguously-wiped arse.
This is a constant theme on PB. Every time I argue for compromise from both sides, the only people attacking me are Remainers.
Yes. Because you're the most obvious concern troll that pb has had in months, parroting Leave lines to take uncritically.
That must be why I criticized prorogation on a number of occasions, have continuously advocated CU membership and thoroughly condemned the racist Leave.EU poster yesterday.
I often wonder if extremists know they are extremists or genuinely see themselves as reasonable. I still can't tell with you. You really seem to think that anyone who doesn't believe every line in the arch-Remainer playbook is some sort of plant. No, some people just take each debate on a case by case basis. I know that is a hard topic for ideologues.
You claim to be a Remainer yet you uncritically parrot every anti-EU line going, cheerlead for the Prime Minister and find an objection to anything advocated by other Remain supporters. It's pretty easy to spot a troll. Just be true to your views, which would command more respect if they were presented with a more realistic persona.
Now you are just making up lies. I don't like Boris. I think he is a lazy charlatan and was reckless with the prorogation. I have said this on here multiple times. I have never cheered for him in any way. You are just imagining that I do because your mental view of the world is so ideological you have to make up facts to justify it.
I just have a weird feeling that the talks between Varadkar and Johnson might produce something that leads to a deal .
Call me nuts but I just think we might all be surprised.
Whatever side of the debate you’re on the only chance to save the country from spilling into even more toxicity and polarization is a deal .
We must return to a time when politics was more dull , I admit the drama over the last few years and the nail biting Commons votes has been like Christmas to political junkies of which there are many here myself included but I think enough is enough now .
Remainers like myself might detest Brexit , but this battle now can’t be won , too much has happened .
The EU simply can’t have the UK remaining , in a constant state of internal warfare with each election turning into a proxy on it .
I want a good relationship with the EU and the UK to return to some degree of sanity .
Only a deal can now get us to this point .
A no deal or another referendum will never deliver any kind of closure .
I do so hope you are right.
Thanks . I don’t think enough people realize that Remaining is now no longer an option .
You won’t find many people as pro EU as myself however I think the UK is now entering a very dark chapter if this polarization gets even worse .
Because for politicians winning at all costs is sadly ignoring the damage to the country .
I’ve no doubt that a general election before Brexit will be the ugliest we’ve ever seen , that Johnson and Cummings will resort to further dividing the country and what’s left at the end .
A deal and an orderly exit means we can move on to the future relationship , this area is less toxic and divisive . Leave voters and Remainers won’t be stuck throwing rocks at each other , there indeed could be a decent cross over between them in their views on things like workers rights , the environment, food standards .
I just have a weird feeling that the talks between Varadkar and Johnson might produce something that leads to a deal .
Call me nuts but I just think we might all be surprised.
Whatever side of the debate you’re on the only chance to save the country from spilling into even more toxicity and polarization is a deal .
We must return to a time when politics was more dull , I admit the drama over the last few years and the nail biting Commons votes has been like Christmas to political junkies of which there are many here myself included but I think enough is enough now .
Remainers like myself might detest Brexit , but this battle now can’t be won , too much has happened .
The EU simply can’t have the UK remaining , in a constant state of internal warfare with each election turning into a proxy on it .
I want a good relationship with the EU and the UK to return to some degree of sanity .
Only a deal can now get us to this point .
A no deal or another referendum will never deliver any kind of closure .
I don't agree. Having that wretched crook in office for the next five years is the worst of all worlds and if he strikes a deal -which will take years to unravel anyway -will almost certainly win him an election
I just have a weird feeling that the talks between Varadkar and Johnson might produce something that leads to a deal .
Call me nuts but I just think we might all be surprised.
Whatever side of the debate you’re on the only chance to save the country from spilling into even more toxicity and polarization is a deal .
We must return to a time when politics was more dull , I admit the drama over the last few years and the nail biting Commons votes has been like Christmas to political junkies of which there are many here myself included but I think enough is enough now .
Remainers like myself might detest Brexit , but this battle now can’t be won , too much has happened .
The EU simply can’t have the UK remaining , in a constant state of internal warfare with each election turning into a proxy on it .
I want a good relationship with the EU and the UK to return to some degree of sanity .
Only a deal can now get us to this point .
A no deal or another referendum will never deliver any kind of closure .
I do so hope you are right.
Thanks . I don’t think enough people realize that Remaining is now no longer an option .
You won’t find many people as pro EU as myself however I think the UK is now entering a very dark chapter if this polarization gets even worse .
Because for politicians winning at all costs is sadly ignoring the damage to the country .
I’ve no doubt that a general election before Brexit will be the ugliest we’ve ever seen , that Johnson and Cummings will resort to further dividing the country and what’s left at the end .
A deal and an orderly exit means we can move on to the future relationship , this area is less toxic and divisive . Leave voters and Remainers won’t be stuck throwing rocks at each other , there indeed could be a decent cross over between them in their views on things like workers rights , the environment, food standards .
100% agree. Every single MP should now be supporting a deal and doing what they can to find a deal with a majority.
You suggested that one of our fellow PBers should feed their kitchen scraps to their chickens.
Believe it or not - and I still find it hard to come to terms with as someone who keeps chickens - that is strictly illegal.
It results from an EU directive transposed into British law. For all I know it was the British who pushed for it so this is not per se an attack on the EU. It is an attack on the idiocy of all governments that try and legislate every tiny part of our lives.
It even applies if your chickens are pets and even to things like cabbage leaves from the outside of the cabbage or cauliflower.
I looked into this earlier a bit. I think it was British law first, brought in after the foot and mouth epidemic in 2001. Then the British pushed for it to be adopted EU-wide. I haven't managed to find out whether the EU regulation applies to only commercial waste/animal husbandry or across the board.
One article about it contrasted it to Korea and Japan which regulate how swill should be treated in what was described as a modern way.
So looks like an example of where the UK got its way in the EU, but unfortunately on a matter where it completely overreacted and we have a pointlessly draconian law.
Certainly the British law is across the board. No idea if the EU side of it is as proscriptive.
Comments
https://www.gov.scot/publications/local-level-brexit-vulnerabilities-scotland-brexit-vulnerabilities-index-bvi/
Intderesting intderactive map of the impact of Brexit on Scotland. Visually dominated by the farming and fishing areas but that is an artefact of geographiocal area/population density. The report makes it clear that urban areas are also hit. The heterogeneity is striking - the New Town of Edinburgh is at as much risk as your average sheep heft. But Lossiemouth does much better than Peterheid probably because fishing has been replaced by military bases.
The sooner the Cabinet forces him out the better for the UK.
He'll be able to credibly say to Varadkar that he's messed us around long enough on the backstop and it gets dropped - NOW - or its no deal and no backstop.
At the minute Parliament is preventing No Deal and so the Irish and the EU have no reason to compromise.
https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1181967787780120577?s=20
See you on the next thread.
The big problem is that the Leave side doesn't really have any proper negotiating capability in it's philosophy. It is all based on the old fashioned notion of win lose. I win, you lose. Fantasies about war and dastardly foreigners. Negotiating is about compromise and a certain amount of guile, and looking for the win-win. Boris Johnson is just a narcissistic clown of a journalist. He has no more experience or understanding of negotiation than he does of brain surgery.
Boris goes around the country saying I've got this wonderful proposal that will sort everything out.
The EU is saying no now but if you give me a mandate via a majority for this proposal to take back to the EU they might move.
If they still don't move, even after you've given me a mandate for my proposal then we'll have to no deal as we can't keep going on like this.
That will basically be the Con pitch I would think.
It follows, therefore, that if we were to agree a compromise between ourselves on something that was towards that end of the spectrum that the EU would be likely to agree to it.
This would not be to frustrate the referendum result, but would require a bit more time and a willingness to compromise from the leaders of the Conservative and Labour parties.
Believe it or not - and I still find it hard to come to terms with as someone who keeps chickens - that is strictly illegal.
It results from an EU directive transposed into British law. For all I know it was the British who pushed for it so this is not per se an attack on the EU. It is an attack on the idiocy of all governments that try and legislate every tiny part of our lives.
It even applies if your chickens are pets and even to things like cabbage leaves from the outside of the cabbage or cauliflower.
There is no compromise on the backstop. It’s an Irish “red line” I’m afraid.
I've got this wonderful proposal that will sort everything out: widespread nationalisation.
The economists say no now, but if you give me a mandate via a majority for this proposal they might move.
If they still don't move, even after you've given me a mandate for my proposal, then we'll have to go full Marxism as we can't keep going on like this.
The Benn Act has fucked the UK govt. It's disgraceful really.
Thanks for the heads up on human/dinosaur timelines, though.
So it must be quite important, I think,
Just my tuppenorth!
Yep.
"There is a complete ban on using kitchen waste from non-vegan households and from catering waste containing products of animal origin. It is illegal to use catering waste from kitchens which handle meat, or vegetarian kitchens which may handle dairy products, eggs etc. This ban also includes catering waste from restaurants and commercial kitchens producing vegan food."
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/supplying-and-using-animal-by-products-as-farm-animal-feed
The reason is because of the danger of epidemics of disease such as Foot and mouth, which was thought to have been caused by contaminated pig feed in 2001 and resulted in the slaughter of millions of animals.
Poland doesn't exactly have many youngsters as they are all here now.
Nope, doesn’t get my vote.
The problem is that Varadkar et al are not comparing it to no deal, they're comparing it to the backstop. But the backstop isn't the baseline, nor was it agreed, the baseline should be no deal.
Dispel the myth of either remaining or the backstop, make it Boris's deal or no deal and Boris's deal is a win/win compromise.
No Labour majority, and the absence of no deal.
When pollsters conflate different ideas within a single question that gets called out as unclear.
But given the public (allegedly) are incapable of getting their little heads around Labour's 'second referendum' policy they would surely have zero chance of processing the positively Byzantine complexities of that.
What nobody has explained to me is that if the UK Gmt claims that it will happily have an open border with Eire, why does it bother with customs, immigration, etc. at Heathrow, Dover, etc. etc.? I've asked this on PB, no answer forthcoming.
Claiming import duty from some industrial estate in County Derry is not the same thing, any more than my being chartged VAT and a Post Office robbery fee for a parcel from Japan from a holding warehouse in, I think, Coventry is the same as having an actual border and border force at the points of entry.
I did think that was just the one possible contender as an eleventh hour compromise to get something done. NI only backstop, long-dated sunset clause.
Not by 31 Oct, obviously, but some fine day.
Three times.
Now we are told that No Deal is actually worse than ISIS taking control of the country! What were those moderate MPs thinking?
A border imposed by Britain as a consequence of Brexit w/o backstop is quite a different thing to one agreed by an Irish government. See the war Irish Civil War for details.
If there was any plausibility to supposed technical solutions then Brexiteers would have no fear of the backstop.
I think it fair to say that the Backstop is important not just to Ireland, but also to other parties in the Commons. I think far fewer Lab MPs would support a WA without it.
Of course it was a theoretical possibility, but not one that anyone on any side of the argument (including the Vote Leave and Leave.EU campaigns) thought plausible, let alone desirable.
There are people talking about it on the radio station now and they seem concerned about it too so its not just me
AND if you type Brexxit into the Microsoft search browser you get 42000 pings on the webb so its on there as well. try it I'm right
ok im going to go away and learn more about brexxit i suggest you do it as well bye
Or is that a "red line" too..?
All I ask is that people stop arrogantly assuming that it’s all about money. Much as Brexiteers bang on about us “standing alone” against the Nazis in 1940 (despite having the world’s biggest empire behind us), they stood alone against us for about 750 years.
https://twitter.com/brexitalex/status/1181934276612370433?s=21
Call me nuts but I just think we might all be surprised.
Whatever side of the debate you’re on the only chance to save the country from spilling into even more toxicity and polarization is a deal .
We must return to a time when politics was more dull , I admit the drama over the last few years and the nail biting Commons votes has been like Christmas to political junkies of which there are many here myself included but I think enough is enough now .
Remainers like myself might detest Brexit , but this battle now can’t be won , too much has happened .
The EU simply can’t have the UK remaining , in a constant state of internal warfare with each election turning into a proxy on it .
I want a good relationship with the EU and the UK to return to some degree of sanity .
Only a deal can now get us to this point .
A no deal or another referendum will never deliver any kind of closure .
No Deal is not an end state, it merely restarts negotiations with UK divided against ourselves and holding few remaining cards. It wouldn't last long.
However much it would be better for their countries longer term to make a breakthrough, do Varadkar and Boris have a genuine desire to have one? The Tories are already working on their GE lines about being prevented from leaving, which they think will work, and for Varadkar the EU seems very on board with the idea of just extending and hoping again - even if they are rightly being guided by Ireland's interests in all this, it'll take a lot to pull back now.
One article about it contrasted it to Korea and Japan which regulate how swill should be treated in what was described as a modern way.
So looks like an example of where the UK got its way in the EU, but unfortunately on a matter where it completely overreacted and we have a pointlessly draconian law.
You won’t find many people as pro EU as myself however I think the UK is now entering a very dark chapter if this polarization gets even worse .
Because for politicians winning at all costs is sadly ignoring the damage to the country .
I’ve no doubt that a general election before Brexit will be the ugliest we’ve ever seen , that Johnson and Cummings will resort to further dividing the country and what’s left at the end .
A deal and an orderly exit means we can move on to the future relationship , this area is less toxic and divisive . Leave voters and Remainers won’t be stuck throwing rocks at each other , there indeed could be a decent cross over between them in their views on things like workers rights , the environment, food standards .