'Emotionally, we are completely and utterly furious. We are suffering. But there's nothing in our minds to be really furious about. My brother was just extraordinarily unlucky.'
Huge credit to this family. It’s very easy for dispassionate scientists to weigh up the odds, but it cannot be easy to be one of the unlucky families.
We don't whilst the Government fails to take the problem of imported viral shit seriously enough.
The single best measure that could be taken right now to promote public health would be blanket hotel quarantine for incoming air travellers, if necessary accompanied by a rationing system so that returning UK & Irish nationals have to join a virtual queue for the available quarantine rooms, and aren't allowed back until places become available.
We could then open air bridges to individual countries once we'd properly kicked the crap out of this virus, but only to countries that had done at least as effective a job. Anything else is reckless.
That's what NZ has done with brutal effectiveness. Lots of Kiwis have been stranded abroad for a YEAR
Australia is the same.
One has to book the quarantine accommodation well in advance, before your flights. It’s limited to a few hundred passengers per day per city, so the airlines flying in long-haul are only selling business and first tickets. It’s AU$8-10k all-in.
There’s a lot of antipodeans hanging around the sandpit, living in hotels or taking low-paid service jobs while they wait for the whole thing to blow over. Many sad stories of funerals missed and financial problems.
God I've criticised the hell out of them this past year, but some very responsible headlines in the morning's papers. Let's hope the rolling news is equally responsible this morning.
Edit: Apart from that stupid cartoon the Times - of all papers - let through.
When I pointed out that any perceived issues with the "British" vaccine held some political risk for BoZo and chums, the fanbois claimed it as the most idiotic post ever.
Now that a national paper has put the same idea in a cartoon, the whining is even louder.
When I pointed out that any perceived issues with the "British" vaccine held some political risk for BoZo and chums, the fanbois claimed it as the most idiotic post ever.
Now that a national paper has put the same idea in a cartoon, the whining is even louder.
Savvy punters would take note...
Your hatred of Boris leads you to some strange places.....
In early March, European Council President Charles Michel claimed the UK had “imposed an outright ban on the export of vaccines or vaccine components produced on their territory”. That claim was wrong because doses manufactured in the UK had already been exported to Australia a fortnight earlier.
The UK government swiftly denied Michel’s claim of an “outright ban” and stressed it had not blocked any exports. However it has repeatedly refused to say whether any vaccines had been sent abroad and if so, where.
I am surprised we haven't had the Johnson fanclub blame it on Blair's shortsightedness when crafting the GFA.
Write out 100 times, "it is never Boris Johnson's fault".
I think the biggest problem with the GFA is that it fossilised sectarianism in the form of power sharing. Essential though that was to bring peace, it does prevent a move to post sectarian politics. It also entrenched the dysfunctional Stormont non-government.
I don't think that possible to move forward without revision, but what a tinderbox reopening the constitutional status of Northern Ireland would be.
I spend a lot of my time (well not for the last 12 months) in Northern Ireland, and sectarianism is still rampant.
I am amazed that the fragile peace has continued for so long. I am not sure some English politicians (yes Theresa and Boris) understand the fragility of a peaceful life in the province. I thought Mrs May was foolish to make the post GE2017 arrangement with the DUP, but contrary to my expectations it worked out OK. Johnson's border in the North Sea was equally foolish, but not as foolish as land borders between the North and South would have been.
The Brexit brokered by Johnson is incompatible with the GFA and probably peace in the North. A return to the troubles might be seen to be a price worth paying for the Brexit that Johnson's backers demanded.
The only plan for post-sectarianism can be reunification, and that would piss one side off for a couple of generations.
The fundamental assumptions underpinning the GFA are no longer valid
Rather than stretching and straining to keep it intact it would be better to develop a new solution to achieve its objectives
In early March, European Council President Charles Michel claimed the UK had “imposed an outright ban on the export of vaccines or vaccine components produced on their territory”. That claim was wrong because doses manufactured in the UK had already been exported to Australia a fortnight earlier.
The UK government swiftly denied Michel’s claim of an “outright ban” and stressed it had not blocked any exports. However it has repeatedly refused to say whether any vaccines had been sent abroad and if so, where.
The irony being of course that the EU are doing exactly the same thing.
Hong Kong (CNN): China's armed forces conducted simultaneous military exercises to the west and east of Taiwan on Monday in a move analysts said was a warning to the self-ruled island and its supporter, the United States.
Meanwhile, at least 10 People's Liberation Army (PLA) warplanes, including four J-16 and four J-10 fighter jets, a Y-8 anti-submarine warfare aircraft and a KJ-500 early warning aircraft, entered Taiwan's self-declared air defense identification zone (ADIZ), according to Taiwan's Defense Ministry.
When I pointed out that any perceived issues with the "British" vaccine held some political risk for BoZo and chums, the fanbois claimed it as the most idiotic post ever.
Now that a national paper has put the same idea in a cartoon, the whining is even louder.
Savvy punters would take note...
Savvy anybody would swiftly pass on from your deranged postings and have a sip of something sweet to take the nasty bitter taste away.
Good morning everyone. I see that while Ydoethur's post yesterday when he said that all teachers were thinking of leaving the profession was criticised as hyperbole, not least by myself, the NEU has a survey which suggests that over a third do.
Good morning everyone. I see that while Ydoethur's post yesterday when he said that all teachers were thinking of leaving the profession was criticised as hyperbole, not least by myself, the NEU has a survey which suggests that over a third do.
Very, very sad.
I think teachers are normally a high turnover job though - lots who try it realise it’s not for them.
I wonder whether the chance of a blood clot at second dose is the same, or whether having had no reaction to one dose, having another is safe?
The BBC said yesterday that all of the adverse results had been in response to the first dose but obviously relatively few have received the second dose of AZ and they are likely, in the main, to be in the least risk groups so it may be early days.
Ooh! You think you are clever! Clever boy made a funny!
No. The GFA is predicated on the assumption that both the UK and the RoI are members of the EU. That is not the case anymore.
Which was obvious all along and emphasises the point that far too little attention was paid to the issue during the period 2016-19. Johnson himself demonstrated total irresponsibility over the issue, either blatantly lying or being pig-ignorant of what he was saying.
I wonder whether the chance of a blood clot at second dose is the same, or whether having had no reaction to one dose, having another is safe?
The BBC said yesterday that all of the adverse results had been in response to the first dose but obviously relatively few have received the second dose of AZ and they are likely, in the main, to be in the least risk groups so it may be early days.
Of course it's early days. I just wondered whether it's a 'per dose' risk, or relates to some underlying susceptibility. Hopefully we will have some clues before too long.
I wonder whether the chance of a blood clot at second dose is the same, or whether having had no reaction to one dose, having another is safe?
It was said yesterday that the vast majority (90%?) of blood clots were observed on the first dose, but that statistic can hide all sorts of things - tiny numbers of clots in the first place, that most people have had only one dose anyway, that people who suffered from blood clots might have the second dose withheld etc. What does seem reasonable is that people unaffected by the first dose will also be unaffected by the second, but there will presumably be a pile of research on this to be published shortly.
I have my second dose (of Pfizer) confirmed for tomorrow - yay!
Good morning everyone. I see that while Ydoethur's post yesterday when he said that all teachers were thinking of leaving the profession was criticised as hyperbole, not least by myself, the NEU has a survey which suggests that over a third do.
Very, very sad.
I think teachers are normally a high turnover job though - lots who try it realise it’s not for them.
Not sure It's normally as high as it now appears though. There must be figures somewhere.
Edit. Once upon a time of course, female teachers tended to leave as a consequence of pregnancy, and not go back for 5-10 years, if at all. And many years ago female teachers who married had to leave.
Good morning everyone. I see that while Ydoethur's post yesterday when he said that all teachers were thinking of leaving the profession was criticised as hyperbole, not least by myself, the NEU has a survey which suggests that over a third do.
Very, very sad.
I'm unsure how different that is to normal. Usually the popularity of my old job varied with overall employment levels. It rose when national unemployment grew and vice versa.
Ooh! You think you are clever! Clever boy made a funny!
No. The GFA is predicated on the assumption that both the UK and the RoI are members of the EU. That is not the case anymore.
Which was obvious all along and emphasises the point that far too little attention was paid to the issue during the period 2016-19. Johnson himself demonstrated total irresponsibility over the issue, either blatantly lying or being pig-ignorant of what he was saying.
No he didn't.
He tried to suggest alternative solutions, the EU were not interested as they wanted to solely prioritise their own interests of maintaining the "integrity" of the Single Market. The responsibility for this lies 100% on the EU's refusal to be grown up and compromise.
The entire "spirit of the Good Friday Agreement" was one of compromise - not getting a leg over others and an unwavering adherence to the rules.
The UK Government should in response to the violence invoke Article 16 and say the Protocol will not be enforced until a compromise is reached which makes all communities on the island happy. Until then NI should be 100% part of the UK and if the EU wishes to build border posts then that should be on them, but I doubt they will, they were bluffing all along.
I wonder whether the chance of a blood clot at second dose is the same, or whether having had no reaction to one dose, having another is safe?
The BBC said yesterday that all of the adverse results had been in response to the first dose but obviously relatively few have received the second dose of AZ and they are likely, in the main, to be in the least risk groups so it may be early days.
Of course it's early days. I just wondered whether it's a 'per dose' risk, or relates to some underlying susceptibility. Hopefully we will have some clues before too long.
Only time will tell us the true impact of all the vaccines. We're effectively on the middle of a trial. Thus far the success has been quite stunning.
I am surprised we haven't had the Johnson fanclub blame it on Blair's shortsightedness when crafting the GFA.
Write out 100 times, "it is never Boris Johnson's fault".
I think the biggest problem with the GFA is that it fossilised sectarianism in the form of power sharing. Essential though that was to bring peace, it does prevent a move to post sectarian politics. It also entrenched the dysfunctional Stormont non-government.
I don't think that possible to move forward without revision, but what a tinderbox reopening the constitutional status of Northern Ireland would be.
I spend a lot of my time (well not for the last 12 months) in Northern Ireland, and sectarianism is still rampant.
I am amazed that the fragile peace has continued for so long. I am not sure some English politicians (yes Theresa and Boris) understand the fragility of a peaceful life in the province. I thought Mrs May was foolish to make the post GE2017 arrangement with the DUP, but contrary to my expectations it worked out OK. Johnson's border in the North Sea was equally foolish, but not as foolish as land borders between the North and South would have been.
The Brexit brokered by Johnson is incompatible with the GFA and probably peace in the North. A return to the troubles might be seen to be a price worth paying for the Brexit that Johnson's backers demanded.
The only plan for post-sectarianism can be reunification, and that would piss one side off for a couple of generations.
For someone who spends a lot of time here, you clearly missed that the core issue is not sectarianism, its national identity.
Sectarianism is based around national identity. The two are inextricably linked.
Actually no, this is not the 80s. You fail to understand how far this place has moved and indeed how robust it is has been for the last 20 odd years. It would be very helpful if every outside halfwit would stop telling us how 'fragile' it all is. You rarely hear that talk from people here of whatever hue, its almost always people outside the boundaries who use such terminology. For sectarianism to exist requires people both hold a strong group identity position and in turn see an enemy of a sort that is not solely related to their choice of citizenship and you have no idea how few people self-allocate such a strong religion/national identity that it actively sees an enemy to discriminate against or show hostility to.
Most people here don't parade their identity because they don't get defined with it and have no interest in broadcasting it. They know their views and that's all there is to it. Maybe you can enlighten me regarding exactly who you spend your time in NI with because if those people do like to parade their identity from the get go, they are the problem. They are also the minority.
The majority of people I meet get on with their lives. The people I deal with call the minority who cause trouble "idiots" and suggest that much of the unpleasantness, when it occurs, is underpinned by criminality as much as anything else.
With all due respect to you, and you clearly know considerably more than I do, one cannot help butnotice the national identify question is linked to sectarianism by the nature, that for exaple flagstones are painted red white and blue in Unionists areas and green, orange and white in Nationalist areas, and the areas in question house people from respective religious backgrounds.
I suspect you are right and I should STFU, about stuff I don't know enough about, but surely English politicians with even less understanding than me would be wise to avoid antagonising the vocal minority of "idiots", because they can make life very unpleasant for everyone else.
I wonder whether the chance of a blood clot at second dose is the same, or whether having had no reaction to one dose, having another is safe?
It was said yesterday that the vast majority (90%?) of blood clots were observed on the first dose, but that statistic can hide all sorts of things - tiny numbers of clots in the first place, that most people have had only one dose anyway, that people who suffered from blood clots might have the second dose withheld etc. What does seem reasonable is that people unaffected by the first dose will also be unaffected by the second, but there will presumably be a pile of research on this to be published shortly.
I have my second dose (of Pfizer) confirmed for tomorrow - yay!
Surely the vast majority of AZN have been first doses? Second doses only started a few weeks back.
Which was obvious all along and emphasises the point that far too little attention was paid to the issue during the period 2016-19. Johnson himself demonstrated total irresponsibility over the issue, either blatantly lying or being pig-ignorant of what he was saying.
Ooh! You think you are clever! Clever boy made a funny!
No. The GFA is predicated on the assumption that both the UK and the RoI are members of the EU. That is not the case anymore.
Which was obvious all along and emphasises the point that far too little attention was paid to the issue during the period 2016-19. Johnson himself demonstrated total irresponsibility over the issue, either blatantly lying or being pig-ignorant of what he was saying.
No he didn't.
He tried to suggest alternative solutions, the EU were not interested as they wanted to solely prioritise their own interests of maintaining the "integrity" of the Single Market. The responsibility for this lies 100% on the EU's refusal to be grown up and compromise.
The entire "spirit of the Good Friday Agreement" was one of compromise - not getting a leg over others and an unwavering adherence to the rules.
The UK Government should in response to the violence invoke Article 16 and say the Protocol will not be enforced until a compromise is reached which makes all communities on the island happy. Until then NI should be 100% part of the UK and if the EU wishes to build border posts then that should be on them, but I doubt they will, they were bluffing all along.
While I am certain, Mr T, that you and I are not going to agree over this (although perhaps surprisingly, we often seem to Like similar posts) I'm not at sure that your solution would not in itself create a reason in some minds for violence and other criminal behaviours. As it did before.
The one that sticks out to me is Chile, which seems to have quite an epidemic. I think most of the vaccine there is the Chinese one, which doesn't seem very effective.
Good morning everyone. I see that while Ydoethur's post yesterday when he said that all teachers were thinking of leaving the profession was criticised as hyperbole, not least by myself, the NEU has a survey which suggests that over a third do.
Very, very sad.
I think teachers are normally a high turnover job though - lots who try it realise it’s not for them.
Not sure It's normally as high as it now appears though. There must be figures somewhere.
Edit. Once upon a time of course, female teachers tended to leave as a consequence of pregnancy, and not go back for 5-10 years, if at all. And many years ago female teachers who married had to leave.
My sister is an experienced teacher, more than 20 years, and she has really not enjoyed trying to teach remotely, She is a primary school teacher and trying to engage with a class through screens, maintain some level of concentration and dealing with parents with a very wide range of technical skills (to put it politely) has been utterly exhausting. The protocols when at school haven't been a lot of fun either. She has no intention of giving up but she has been absolutely clear that this has been the hardest year of her career despite the additional time off. An increase in those minded to leave is hardly surprising.
The violence in Northern Ireland is a direct result of Brexit.
It was predicted at the time, and ignored by BoZo because he wanted to be World King and throwing NI under the bus (sic) was his route.
Only the permanently deluded continue to deny this.
Even Hoey, who campaigned for Brexit, says the border BoZo imposed is the proximate cause.
And still some people here deny its existence
If the Protocol is causing violence then the Protocol Article 16 gives the right to suspend its provisions to avoid violence, so invoke that and move on. Problem solved. What's the issue? 🤔
I'm not sure the message on the bus had much to do with it. There were Brexit options that did not require a sea border. Both the EU and UK politicians who refused to back concessionary position prior to Boris being elected, and of course Boris and his cronies doing the thing they said they would never do.
Ooh! You think you are clever! Clever boy made a funny!
No. The GFA is predicated on the assumption that both the UK and the RoI are members of the EU. That is not the case anymore.
Which was obvious all along and emphasises the point that far too little attention was paid to the issue during the period 2016-19. Johnson himself demonstrated total irresponsibility over the issue, either blatantly lying or being pig-ignorant of what he was saying.
No he didn't.
He tried to suggest alternative solutions, the EU were not interested as they wanted to solely prioritise their own interests of maintaining the "integrity" of the Single Market. The responsibility for this lies 100% on the EU's refusal to be grown up and compromise.
The entire "spirit of the Good Friday Agreement" was one of compromise - not getting a leg over others and an unwavering adherence to the rules.
The UK Government should in response to the violence invoke Article 16 and say the Protocol will not be enforced until a compromise is reached which makes all communities on the island happy. Until then NI should be 100% part of the UK and if the EU wishes to build border posts then that should be on them, but I doubt they will, they were bluffing all along.
While I am certain, Mr T, that you and I are not going to agree over this (although perhaps surprisingly, we often seem to Like similar posts) I'm not at sure that your solution would not in itself create a reason in some minds for violence and other criminal behaviours. As it did before.
Well we're seeing violence and criminal behaviour with the Protocol the EU insisted upon so their solution has failed, time to try something else.
And no, rejoining the EU is not the solution. That is a prison and undemocratic, any solution needs to recognise the UK being a sovereign state and NI being a part of the UK.
I'm not sure the message on the bus had much to do with it. There were Brexit options that did not require a sea border. Both the EU and UK politicians who refused to back concessionary position prior to Boris being elected, and of course Boris and his cronies doing the thing they said they would never do.
Why should the EU do anything - this is an internal issue of a third party country.
Ooh! You think you are clever! Clever boy made a funny!
No. The GFA is predicated on the assumption that both the UK and the RoI are members of the EU. That is not the case anymore.
Which was obvious all along and emphasises the point that far too little attention was paid to the issue during the period 2016-19. Johnson himself demonstrated total irresponsibility over the issue, either blatantly lying or being pig-ignorant of what he was saying.
The challenge of course is how to create a revised GFA that squares the circle: 1. No border and free movement on the Island of Ireland 2. No status difference between GB and NI
It *can* be done if the UK doesn't diverge heavily from the EU - and so far we have given no signs that we plan to. Similarly, we could do sector deals which take away large chunks of the problem - food as a prime example.
We are categorically not going to diverge downward on food standards - the government repeatedly insist this is the case. A food standards deal should therefore be doable which removes the absurd issues that have knackered both food supply and food / farming industry over there. We don't need checks and paperwork if we guarantee that our standards will never be lower than theirs. Which our government insists is the case.
And yet, we will not enter into any agreement with the EU to set that undertaking into law. I honestly don't believe that the government wants to allow weevil-infested food to be imported from America, which makes the objection political rather than practical.
Even there I don't get the problem. "Our standards will be higher than EU standards" is something they can trumpet surely. Which completely removes all of the hell that the industry is going through. They *could* do it. But won't.
I'm not sure the message on the bus had much to do with it. There were Brexit options that did not require a sea border. Both the EU and UK politicians who refused to back concessionary position prior to Boris being elected, and of course Boris and his cronies doing the thing they said they would never do.
Why should the EU do anything - this is an internal issue of a third party country.
Because one of their members has a land border with said third party country and was determined not to have a hard border with it?
Nice story being discussed on LBC quoting The Sun where apparently Patel is accusing Burnham of being a friend of the Rochdale grooming gang.
With respect to the Greater Manchester Mayoral election, I don't think this intervention is going to swing the campaign in favour of whomever the Tories have put up as candidate.
I'm not sure the message on the bus had much to do with it. There were Brexit options that did not require a sea border. Both the EU and UK politicians who refused to back concessionary position prior to Boris being elected, and of course Boris and his cronies doing the thing they said they would never do.
Why should the EU do anything - this is an internal issue of a third party country.
Ooh! You think you are clever! Clever boy made a funny!
No. The GFA is predicated on the assumption that both the UK and the RoI are members of the EU. That is not the case anymore.
Which was obvious all along and emphasises the point that far too little attention was paid to the issue during the period 2016-19. Johnson himself demonstrated total irresponsibility over the issue, either blatantly lying or being pig-ignorant of what he was saying.
No he didn't.
He tried to suggest alternative solutions, the EU were not interested as they wanted to solely prioritise their own interests of maintaining the "integrity" of the Single Market. The responsibility for this lies 100% on the EU's refusal to be grown up and compromise.
The entire "spirit of the Good Friday Agreement" was one of compromise - not getting a leg over others and an unwavering adherence to the rules.
The UK Government should in response to the violence invoke Article 16 and say the Protocol will not be enforced until a compromise is reached which makes all communities on the island happy. Until then NI should be 100% part of the UK and if the EU wishes to build border posts then that should be on them, but I doubt they will, they were bluffing all along.
While I am certain, Mr T, that you and I are not going to agree over this (although perhaps surprisingly, we often seem to Like similar posts) I'm not at sure that your solution would not in itself create a reason in some minds for violence and other criminal behaviours. As it did before.
Well we're seeing violence and criminal behaviour with the Protocol the EU insisted upon so their solution has failed, time to try something else.
And no, rejoining the EU is not the solution. That is a prison and undemocratic, any solution needs to recognise the UK being a sovereign state and NI being a part of the UK.
@Yokes has quite righly skewered me for talking about things in NI I only know a little about. Your analysis is even worse than mine and not based on observation, but by dogma to support a Boris Johnson failure.
I'm not sure the message on the bus had much to do with it. There were Brexit options that did not require a sea border. Both the EU and UK politicians who refused to back concessionary position prior to Boris being elected, and of course Boris and his cronies doing the thing they said they would never do.
Why should the EU do anything - this is an internal issue of a third party country.
Because one of their members has a land border with said third party country and was determined not to have a hard border with it?
Were the EU a party who signed the Good Friday Agreement?
More to the point were they the Government who drove a bus through it without any thought of the consequences?
The violence in Northern Ireland is a direct result of Brexit.
It was predicted at the time, and ignored by BoZo because he wanted to be World King and throwing NI under the bus (sic) was his route.
Only the permanently deluded continue to deny this.
Even Hoey, who campaigned for Brexit, says the border BoZo imposed is the proximate cause.
And still some people here deny its existence
If the Protocol is causing violence then the Protocol Article 16 gives the right to suspend its provisions to avoid violence, so invoke that and move on. Problem solved. What's the issue? 🤔
Generations of politicians , leaders and academics have struggled with The Irish Question. Philip-the-keyboard-warrior-Thompson solves it all with a few clicks of his keyboard. We are all in awe 😂
I'm not sure the message on the bus had much to do with it. There were Brexit options that did not require a sea border. Both the EU and UK politicians who refused to back concessionary position prior to Boris being elected, and of course Boris and his cronies doing the thing they said they would never do.
Why should the EU do anything - this is an internal issue of a third party country.
Ooh! You think you are clever! Clever boy made a funny!
No. The GFA is predicated on the assumption that both the UK and the RoI are members of the EU. That is not the case anymore.
Which was obvious all along and emphasises the point that far too little attention was paid to the issue during the period 2016-19. Johnson himself demonstrated total irresponsibility over the issue, either blatantly lying or being pig-ignorant of what he was saying.
No he didn't.
He tried to suggest alternative solutions, the EU were not interested as they wanted to solely prioritise their own interests of maintaining the "integrity" of the Single Market. The responsibility for this lies 100% on the EU's refusal to be grown up and compromise.
The entire "spirit of the Good Friday Agreement" was one of compromise - not getting a leg over others and an unwavering adherence to the rules.
The UK Government should in response to the violence invoke Article 16 and say the Protocol will not be enforced until a compromise is reached which makes all communities on the island happy. Until then NI should be 100% part of the UK and if the EU wishes to build border posts then that should be on them, but I doubt they will, they were bluffing all along.
While I am certain, Mr T, that you and I are not going to agree over this (although perhaps surprisingly, we often seem to Like similar posts) I'm not at sure that your solution would not in itself create a reason in some minds for violence and other criminal behaviours. As it did before.
Well we're seeing violence and criminal behaviour with the Protocol the EU insisted upon so their solution has failed, time to try something else.
And no, rejoining the EU is not the solution. That is a prison and undemocratic, any solution needs to recognise the UK being a sovereign state and NI being a part of the UK.
@Yokes has quite righly skewered me for talking about things in NI I only know a little about. Your analysis is even worse than mine and not based on observation, but by dogma to support a Boris Johnson failure.
A belief in democracy is absolutely dogmatic yes, but not to support Boris Johnson, it is to support democracy. Democracy trumps everything else in a free society.
The UK voted to leave the EU. Therefore any NI solution must recognise the UK as not being part of the EU. If your "solution" is to have the UK tied to the EU then that's no more a solution than the UK's solution to Nationalists is to say "you're tied to the UK, suck it up".
Nice story being discussed on LBC quoting The Sun where apparently Patel is accusing Burnham of being a friend of the Rochdale grooming gang.
With respect to the Greater Manchester Mayoral election, I don't think this intervention is going to swing the campaign in favour of whomever the Tories have put up as candidate.
It's one of those notions that if the right people get hold of it, and encourage it to gain traction it can bolster support for Johnson, Patel and their friends. If one hears a lie enough times it can appear to become the truth.
Good morning everyone. I see that while Ydoethur's post yesterday when he said that all teachers were thinking of leaving the profession was criticised as hyperbole, not least by myself, the NEU has a survey which suggests that over a third do.
Very, very sad.
I think teachers are normally a high turnover job though - lots who try it realise it’s not for them.
Not sure It's normally as high as it now appears though. There must be figures somewhere.
Edit. Once upon a time of course, female teachers tended to leave as a consequence of pregnancy, and not go back for 5-10 years, if at all. And many years ago female teachers who married had to leave.
When I pointed out that any perceived issues with the "British" vaccine held some political risk for BoZo and chums, the fanbois claimed it as the most idiotic post ever.
Now that a national paper has put the same idea in a cartoon, the whining is even louder.
Savvy punters would take note...
Your hatred of Boris leads you to some strange places.....
Quite. I'm sure that Boris wakes up trembling every morning at the thought of Scott and Paste spamming the inanity of the internet to below the line comments of a political blog.
I've said before that sensible people not deluded by Boris derangement, like myself, felt little I'll to politicians trying their best at the beginning of the crisis and give little but some credit to them for vaccinations. It seems odd to me that Scott and his ilk don't want to give Boris credit for vaccinations but want to hold it against him for any shortfalls - this seems to make no logical sense to me.
Nice story being discussed on LBC quoting The Sun where apparently Patel is accusing Burnham of being a friend of the Rochdale grooming gang.
With respect to the Greater Manchester Mayoral election, I don't think this intervention is going to swing the campaign in favour of whomever the Tories have put up as candidate.
It's one of those notions that if the right people get hold of it, and encourage it to gain traction it can bolster support for Johnson, Patel and their friends. If one hears a lie enough times it can appear to become the truth.
Like the lie that Britain needed to stay within the EU single market and customs union as part of the GFA.
A total and utter lie. There is no obligation within the GFA to do so. It may have been an assumption, but that's a flaw in the GFA if so that needs fixing, not a flaw of Brexit.
Ooh! You think you are clever! Clever boy made a funny!
No. The GFA is predicated on the assumption that both the UK and the RoI are members of the EU. That is not the case anymore.
Which was obvious all along and emphasises the point that far too little attention was paid to the issue during the period 2016-19. Johnson himself demonstrated total irresponsibility over the issue, either blatantly lying or being pig-ignorant of what he was saying.
No he didn't.
He tried to suggest alternative solutions, the EU were not interested as they wanted to solely prioritise their own interests of maintaining the "integrity" of the Single Market. The responsibility for this lies 100% on the EU's refusal to be grown up and compromise.
The entire "spirit of the Good Friday Agreement" was one of compromise - not getting a leg over others and an unwavering adherence to the rules.
The UK Government should in response to the violence invoke Article 16 and say the Protocol will not be enforced until a compromise is reached which makes all communities on the island happy. Until then NI should be 100% part of the UK and if the EU wishes to build border posts then that should be on them, but I doubt they will, they were bluffing all along.
While I am certain, Mr T, that you and I are not going to agree over this (although perhaps surprisingly, we often seem to Like similar posts) I'm not at sure that your solution would not in itself create a reason in some minds for violence and other criminal behaviours. As it did before.
Well we're seeing violence and criminal behaviour with the Protocol the EU insisted upon so their solution has failed, time to try something else.
And no, rejoining the EU is not the solution. That is a prison and undemocratic, any solution needs to recognise the UK being a sovereign state and NI being a part of the UK.
@Yokes has quite righly skewered me for talking about things in NI I only know a little about. Your analysis is even worse than mine and not based on observation, but by dogma to support a Boris Johnson failure.
A belief in democracy is absolutely dogmatic yes, but not to support Boris Johnson, it is to support democracy. Democracy trumps everything else in a free society.
The UK voted to leave the EU. Therefore any NI solution must recognise the UK as not being part of the EU. If your "solution" is to have the UK tied to the EU then that's no more a solution than the UK's solution to Nationalists is to say "you're tied to the UK, suck it up".
You ignore the complexities (as you are doing) of that particular conundrum at your peril.
I'm not sure the message on the bus had much to do with it. There were Brexit options that did not require a sea border. Both the EU and UK politicians who refused to back concessionary position prior to Boris being elected, and of course Boris and his cronies doing the thing they said they would never do.
Why should the EU do anything - this is an internal issue of a third party country.
Because one of their members has a land border with said third party country and was determined not to have a hard border with it?
Were the EU a party who signed the Good Friday Agreement?
More to the point were they the Government who drove a bus through it without any thought of the consequences?
The first question is irrelevant to the point I made and Ireland's position. And they were a signatory. The second suggests that the UK was to be trapped in the EU forever to meet an agreement which was based on a set of facts at the time it was entered. You want to score political points but surely you can see how absurd and undemocratic such a conclusion would be.
May's solution was best on this and we need to try and get back there. Once again the loons on both sides who voted that down should hang their heads in shame.
Ooh! You think you are clever! Clever boy made a funny!
No. The GFA is predicated on the assumption that both the UK and the RoI are members of the EU. That is not the case anymore.
Which was obvious all along and emphasises the point that far too little attention was paid to the issue during the period 2016-19. Johnson himself demonstrated total irresponsibility over the issue, either blatantly lying or being pig-ignorant of what he was saying.
No he didn't.
He tried to suggest alternative solutions, the EU were not interested as they wanted to solely prioritise their own interests of maintaining the "integrity" of the Single Market. The responsibility for this lies 100% on the EU's refusal to be grown up and compromise.
The entire "spirit of the Good Friday Agreement" was one of compromise - not getting a leg over others and an unwavering adherence to the rules.
The UK Government should in response to the violence invoke Article 16 and say the Protocol will not be enforced until a compromise is reached which makes all communities on the island happy. Until then NI should be 100% part of the UK and if the EU wishes to build border posts then that should be on them, but I doubt they will, they were bluffing all along.
While I am certain, Mr T, that you and I are not going to agree over this (although perhaps surprisingly, we often seem to Like similar posts) I'm not at sure that your solution would not in itself create a reason in some minds for violence and other criminal behaviours. As it did before.
Well we're seeing violence and criminal behaviour with the Protocol the EU insisted upon so their solution has failed, time to try something else.
And no, rejoining the EU is not the solution. That is a prison and undemocratic, any solution needs to recognise the UK being a sovereign state and NI being a part of the UK.
@Yokes has quite righly skewered me for talking about things in NI I only know a little about. Your analysis is even worse than mine and not based on observation, but by dogma to support a Boris Johnson failure.
A belief in democracy is absolutely dogmatic yes, but not to support Boris Johnson, it is to support democracy. Democracy trumps everything else in a free society.
The UK voted to leave the EU. Therefore any NI solution must recognise the UK as not being part of the EU. If your "solution" is to have the UK tied to the EU then that's no more a solution than the UK's solution to Nationalists is to say "you're tied to the UK, suck it up".
You ignore the complexities (as you are doing) of that particular conundrum at your peril.
So do you.
Look at the violence the insistence upon a Protocol have done. This is a direct consequence of the EU's refusal to compromise until now and the dogmatic insistence upon the likes of Scott etc that the EU's integrity must be respected. Any solution winning the support of all communities must treat all communities with respect. There needs to be compromise.
Ooh! You think you are clever! Clever boy made a funny!
No. The GFA is predicated on the assumption that both the UK and the RoI are members of the EU. That is not the case anymore.
Which was obvious all along and emphasises the point that far too little attention was paid to the issue during the period 2016-19. Johnson himself demonstrated total irresponsibility over the issue, either blatantly lying or being pig-ignorant of what he was saying.
Completely wrong.
The British tried on many occasions to work a new solution & the Taoiseach before Varadkar was working with them. Varadkar and Connelly then “weaponised” the border because they thought it gave them a negotiating advantage.
They are the only two politicians in the Brexit farrago that I really feel contempt for.
I'm not sure the message on the bus had much to do with it. There were Brexit options that did not require a sea border. Both the EU and UK politicians who refused to back concessionary position prior to Boris being elected, and of course Boris and his cronies doing the thing they said they would never do.
Why should the EU do anything - this is an internal issue of a third party country.
Because one of their members has a land border with said third party country and was determined not to have a hard border with it?
Were the EU a party who signed the Good Friday Agreement?
More to the point were they the Government who drove a bus through it without any thought of the consequences?
The first question is irrelevant to the point I made and Ireland's position. And they were a signatory. The second suggests that the UK was to be trapped in the EU forever to meet an agreement which was based on a set of facts at the time it was entered. You want to score political points but surely you can see how absurd and undemocratic such a conclusion would be.
May's solution was best on this and we need to try and get back there. Once again the loons on both sides who voted that down should hang their heads in shame.
May's solution was an undemocratic disgrace. Tying the UK to a union the UK had democratically voted to leave is a Hotel California prison not a solution. Good riddance to it.
David Blevins of Sky reporting that it is recreational rioting from young people from deprived areas, having been in lockdown for a year with nothing better to-do
Ooh! You think you are clever! Clever boy made a funny!
No. The GFA is predicated on the assumption that both the UK and the RoI are members of the EU. That is not the case anymore.
Which was obvious all along and emphasises the point that far too little attention was paid to the issue during the period 2016-19. Johnson himself demonstrated total irresponsibility over the issue, either blatantly lying or being pig-ignorant of what he was saying.
No he didn't.
He tried to suggest alternative solutions, the EU were not interested as they wanted to solely prioritise their own interests of maintaining the "integrity" of the Single Market. The responsibility for this lies 100% on the EU's refusal to be grown up and compromise.
The entire "spirit of the Good Friday Agreement" was one of compromise - not getting a leg over others and an unwavering adherence to the rules.
The UK Government should in response to the violence invoke Article 16 and say the Protocol will not be enforced until a compromise is reached which makes all communities on the island happy. Until then NI should be 100% part of the UK and if the EU wishes to build border posts then that should be on them, but I doubt they will, they were bluffing all along.
While I sympathy for your position I fear it would be inflammatory
Ooh! You think you are clever! Clever boy made a funny!
No. The GFA is predicated on the assumption that both the UK and the RoI are members of the EU. That is not the case anymore.
Which was obvious all along and emphasises the point that far too little attention was paid to the issue during the period 2016-19. Johnson himself demonstrated total irresponsibility over the issue, either blatantly lying or being pig-ignorant of what he was saying.
No he didn't.
He tried to suggest alternative solutions, the EU were not interested as they wanted to solely prioritise their own interests of maintaining the "integrity" of the Single Market. The responsibility for this lies 100% on the EU's refusal to be grown up and compromise.
The entire "spirit of the Good Friday Agreement" was one of compromise - not getting a leg over others and an unwavering adherence to the rules.
The UK Government should in response to the violence invoke Article 16 and say the Protocol will not be enforced until a compromise is reached which makes all communities on the island happy. Until then NI should be 100% part of the UK and if the EU wishes to build border posts then that should be on them, but I doubt they will, they were bluffing all along.
While I am certain, Mr T, that you and I are not going to agree over this (although perhaps surprisingly, we often seem to Like similar posts) I'm not at sure that your solution would not in itself create a reason in some minds for violence and other criminal behaviours. As it did before.
Well we're seeing violence and criminal behaviour with the Protocol the EU insisted upon so their solution has failed, time to try something else.
And no, rejoining the EU is not the solution. That is a prison and undemocratic, any solution needs to recognise the UK being a sovereign state and NI being a part of the UK.
@Yokes has quite righly skewered me for talking about things in NI I only know a little about. Your analysis is even worse than mine and not based on observation, but by dogma to support a Boris Johnson failure.
A belief in democracy is absolutely dogmatic yes, but not to support Boris Johnson, it is to support democracy. Democracy trumps everything else in a free society.
The UK voted to leave the EU. Therefore any NI solution must recognise the UK as not being part of the EU. If your "solution" is to have the UK tied to the EU then that's no more a solution than the UK's solution to Nationalists is to say "you're tied to the UK, suck it up".
You're on fire today Philip, much like the buses on the Shankhill Road. You can witter on about stuff you have no understanding of to your hearts content, but that old rubbish is not for me today. To work!
Ooh! You think you are clever! Clever boy made a funny!
No. The GFA is predicated on the assumption that both the UK and the RoI are members of the EU. That is not the case anymore.
Which was obvious all along and emphasises the point that far too little attention was paid to the issue during the period 2016-19. Johnson himself demonstrated total irresponsibility over the issue, either blatantly lying or being pig-ignorant of what he was saying.
No he didn't.
He tried to suggest alternative solutions, the EU were not interested as they wanted to solely prioritise their own interests of maintaining the "integrity" of the Single Market. The responsibility for this lies 100% on the EU's refusal to be grown up and compromise.
The entire "spirit of the Good Friday Agreement" was one of compromise - not getting a leg over others and an unwavering adherence to the rules.
The UK Government should in response to the violence invoke Article 16 and say the Protocol will not be enforced until a compromise is reached which makes all communities on the island happy. Until then NI should be 100% part of the UK and if the EU wishes to build border posts then that should be on them, but I doubt they will, they were bluffing all along.
While I sympathy for your position I fear it would be inflammatory
Ooh! You think you are clever! Clever boy made a funny!
No. The GFA is predicated on the assumption that both the UK and the RoI are members of the EU. That is not the case anymore.
Which was obvious all along and emphasises the point that far too little attention was paid to the issue during the period 2016-19. Johnson himself demonstrated total irresponsibility over the issue, either blatantly lying or being pig-ignorant of what he was saying.
No he didn't.
He tried to suggest alternative solutions, the EU were not interested as they wanted to solely prioritise their own interests of maintaining the "integrity" of the Single Market. The responsibility for this lies 100% on the EU's refusal to be grown up and compromise.
The entire "spirit of the Good Friday Agreement" was one of compromise - not getting a leg over others and an unwavering adherence to the rules.
The UK Government should in response to the violence invoke Article 16 and say the Protocol will not be enforced until a compromise is reached which makes all communities on the island happy. Until then NI should be 100% part of the UK and if the EU wishes to build border posts then that should be on them, but I doubt they will, they were bluffing all along.
While I am certain, Mr T, that you and I are not going to agree over this (although perhaps surprisingly, we often seem to Like similar posts) I'm not at sure that your solution would not in itself create a reason in some minds for violence and other criminal behaviours. As it did before.
Well we're seeing violence and criminal behaviour with the Protocol the EU insisted upon so their solution has failed, time to try something else.
And no, rejoining the EU is not the solution. That is a prison and undemocratic, any solution needs to recognise the UK being a sovereign state and NI being a part of the UK.
@Yokes has quite righly skewered me for talking about things in NI I only know a little about. Your analysis is even worse than mine and not based on observation, but by dogma to support a Boris Johnson failure.
A belief in democracy is absolutely dogmatic yes, but not to support Boris Johnson, it is to support democracy. Democracy trumps everything else in a free society.
The UK voted to leave the EU. Therefore any NI solution must recognise the UK as not being part of the EU. If your "solution" is to have the UK tied to the EU then that's no more a solution than the UK's solution to Nationalists is to say "you're tied to the UK, suck it up".
You ignore the complexities (as you are doing) of that particular conundrum at your peril.
So do you.
Look at the violence the insistence upon a Protocol have done. This is a direct consequence of the EU's refusal to compromise until now and the dogmatic insistence upon the likes of Scott etc that the EU's integrity must be respected. Any solution winning the support of all communities must treat all communities with respect. There needs to be compromise.
I think the GFA did not consider Brexit as a possibility, but a democratic decision was made and it seemed odd to me that the greatest minds in the EU worked on how this would tie us into their influence rather than deal with the Irish border as something which needs special consideration. They could have boosted support for Irish reunification by not acting like idiots
When I pointed out that any perceived issues with the "British" vaccine held some political risk for BoZo and chums, the fanbois claimed it as the most idiotic post ever.
Now that a national paper has put the same idea in a cartoon, the whining is even louder.
Savvy punters would take note...
Your hatred of Boris leads you to some strange places.....
Quite. I'm sure that Boris wakes up trembling every morning at the thought of Scott and Paste spamming the inanity of the internet to below the line comments of a political blog.
I've said before that sensible people not deluded by Boris derangement, like myself, felt little I'll to politicians trying their best at the beginning of the crisis and give little but some credit to them for vaccinations. It seems odd to me that Scott and his ilk don't want to give Boris credit for vaccinations but want to hold it against him for any shortfalls - this seems to make no logical sense to me.
To be fair Scott is overwhelmed with bitterness over Brexit, and his postings reflect that and his hatred of Boris
He is unable to make any balanced arguments, or say anything ill, of his religious zeal for the EU and all things EU
I'm not sure the message on the bus had much to do with it. There were Brexit options that did not require a sea border. Both the EU and UK politicians who refused to back concessionary position prior to Boris being elected, and of course Boris and his cronies doing the thing they said they would never do.
Why should the EU do anything - this is an internal issue of a third party country.
I'm not sure the message on the bus had much to do with it. There were Brexit options that did not require a sea border. Both the EU and UK politicians who refused to back concessionary position prior to Boris being elected, and of course Boris and his cronies doing the thing they said they would never do.
Why should the EU do anything - this is an internal issue of a third party country.
Because one of their members has a land border with said third party country and was determined not to have a hard border with it?
Were the EU a party who signed the Good Friday Agreement?
More to the point were they the Government who drove a bus through it without any thought of the consequences?
The first question is irrelevant to the point I made and Ireland's position. And they were a signatory. The second suggests that the UK was to be trapped in the EU forever to meet an agreement which was based on a set of facts at the time it was entered. You want to score political points but surely you can see how absurd and undemocratic such a conclusion would be.
May's solution was best on this and we need to try and get back there. Once again the loons on both sides who voted that down should hang their heads in shame.
International treaties once signed continue in perpetuity - unless and until both sides negotiate and agree changes.
The Good Friday Agreement is an international agreement that we have decided to ignore and challenge.
When I pointed out that any perceived issues with the "British" vaccine held some political risk for BoZo and chums, the fanbois claimed it as the most idiotic post ever.
Now that a national paper has put the same idea in a cartoon, the whining is even louder.
Savvy punters would take note...
Horrible place to be, so wedded to one side of an argument you’re left having to pretend not to be cheering deaths.
It can’t have been your most idiotic post anyway, the ones when you tried to wriggle out of having a bet with me on Farage and the 2015 debates by not knowing what 9/4 meant can’t be beaten on that front, but who claimed it was? I said Sir Keir’s best hope was something going wrong with the vaccine
David Blevins of Sky reporting that it is recreational rioting from young people from deprived areas, having been in lockdown for a year with nothing better to-do
Recreational rioting is a great excuse but you need to look beyond that and ask who is organising it....
Ooh! You think you are clever! Clever boy made a funny!
No. The GFA is predicated on the assumption that both the UK and the RoI are members of the EU. That is not the case anymore.
Which was obvious all along and emphasises the point that far too little attention was paid to the issue during the period 2016-19. Johnson himself demonstrated total irresponsibility over the issue, either blatantly lying or being pig-ignorant of what he was saying.
The challenge of course is how to create a revised GFA that squares the circle: 1. No border and free movement on the Island of Ireland 2. No status difference between GB and NI
It *can* be done if the UK doesn't diverge heavily from the EU - and so far we have given no signs that we plan to. Similarly, we could do sector deals which take away large chunks of the problem - food as a prime example.
We are categorically not going to diverge downward on food standards - the government repeatedly insist this is the case. A food standards deal should therefore be doable which removes the absurd issues that have knackered both food supply and food / farming industry over there. We don't need checks and paperwork if we guarantee that our standards will never be lower than theirs. Which our government insists is the case.
And yet, we will not enter into any agreement with the EU to set that undertaking into law. I honestly don't believe that the government wants to allow weevil-infested food to be imported from America, which makes the objection political rather than practical.
Even there I don't get the problem. "Our standards will be higher than EU standards" is something they can trumpet surely. Which completely removes all of the hell that the industry is going through. They *could* do it. But won't.
It’s to do with dynamic change
What if the EU passes a rule that says “only pigs bred in Denmark or of sufficient quality” and we are forced to adopt that rule
The violence in Northern Ireland is a direct result of Brexit.
It was predicted at the time, and ignored by BoZo because he wanted to be World King and throwing NI under the bus (sic) was his route.
Only the permanently deluded continue to deny this.
Even Hoey, who campaigned for Brexit, says the border BoZo imposed is the proximate cause.
And still some people here deny its existence
If the Protocol is causing violence then the Protocol Article 16 gives the right to suspend its provisions to avoid violence, so invoke that and move on. Problem solved. What's the issue? 🤔
I'm not sure the message on the bus had much to do with it. There were Brexit options that did not require a sea border. Both the EU and UK politicians who refused to back concessionary position prior to Boris being elected, and of course Boris and his cronies doing the thing they said they would never do.
Why should the EU do anything - this is an internal issue of a third party country.
Because one of their members has a land border with said third party country and was determined not to have a hard border with it?
Were the EU a party who signed the Good Friday Agreement?
More to the point were they the Government who drove a bus through it without any thought of the consequences?
The first question is irrelevant to the point I made and Ireland's position. And they were a signatory. The second suggests that the UK was to be trapped in the EU forever to meet an agreement which was based on a set of facts at the time it was entered. You want to score political points but surely you can see how absurd and undemocratic such a conclusion would be.
May's solution was best on this and we need to try and get back there. Once again the loons on both sides who voted that down should hang their heads in shame.
International treaties once signed continue in perpetuity - unless and until both sides negotiate and agree changes.
The Good Friday Agreement is an international agreement that we have decided to ignore and challenge.
What provision of the GFA have we chosen to ignore and challenge?
The GFA does not oblige either party to be part of the EU. Had it been Ireland that had voted to leave the EU do you think the UK could or should have been able to prevent them from doing so under the GFA?
If the GFA assumed the UK and Ireland would remain in the EU then that was a mistaken assumption. Both Ireland and the UK legally ratified (Ireland via referendums) the Article 50 provisions in the Lisbon Treaty post-GFA.
I'm not sure the message on the bus had much to do with it. There were Brexit options that did not require a sea border. Both the EU and UK politicians who refused to back concessionary position prior to Boris being elected, and of course Boris and his cronies doing the thing they said they would never do.
Why should the EU do anything - this is an internal issue of a third party country.
Because one of their members has a land border with said third party country and was determined not to have a hard border with it?
Were the EU a party who signed the Good Friday Agreement?
More to the point were they the Government who drove a bus through it without any thought of the consequences?
The first question is irrelevant to the point I made and Ireland's position. And they were a signatory. The second suggests that the UK was to be trapped in the EU forever to meet an agreement which was based on a set of facts at the time it was entered. You want to score political points but surely you can see how absurd and undemocratic such a conclusion would be.
May's solution was best on this and we need to try and get back there. Once again the loons on both sides who voted that down should hang their heads in shame.
International treaties once signed continue in perpetuity - unless and until both sides negotiate and agree changes.
The Good Friday Agreement is an international agreement that we have decided to ignore and challenge.
That is tosh, International agreements can always be revoked by any sovereign country who is willing to live with the consequences of that act. And we have not ignored it, hence the protocol.
I'm not sure the message on the bus had much to do with it. There were Brexit options that did not require a sea border. Both the EU and UK politicians who refused to back concessionary position prior to Boris being elected, and of course Boris and his cronies doing the thing they said they would never do.
Why should the EU do anything - this is an internal issue of a third party country.
Because one of their members has a land border with said third party country and was determined not to have a hard border with it?
Were the EU a party who signed the Good Friday Agreement?
More to the point were they the Government who drove a bus through it without any thought of the consequences?
The Good Friday Agreement was an elegant balancing act.
It was built on certain assumptions.
When those assumptions are no longer valid isn’t it foolish and counterproductive to try to maintain the GFA unchanged?
David Blevins of Sky reporting that it is recreational rioting from young people from deprived areas, having been in lockdown for a year with nothing better to-do
Recreational rioting is a great excuse but you need to look beyond that and ask who is organising it....
David Blevins is Sky's Northern Ireland correspondent and he made these comments not me
I'm not sure the message on the bus had much to do with it. There were Brexit options that did not require a sea border. Both the EU and UK politicians who refused to back concessionary position prior to Boris being elected, and of course Boris and his cronies doing the thing they said they would never do.
Why should the EU do anything - this is an internal issue of a third party country.
I'm not sure the message on the bus had much to do with it. There were Brexit options that did not require a sea border. Both the EU and UK politicians who refused to back concessionary position prior to Boris being elected, and of course Boris and his cronies doing the thing they said they would never do.
Why should the EU do anything - this is an internal issue of a third party country.
Because one of their members has a land border with said third party country and was determined not to have a hard border with it?
Were the EU a party who signed the Good Friday Agreement?
More to the point were they the Government who drove a bus through it without any thought of the consequences?
The first question is irrelevant to the point I made and Ireland's position. And they were a signatory. The second suggests that the UK was to be trapped in the EU forever to meet an agreement which was based on a set of facts at the time it was entered. You want to score political points but surely you can see how absurd and undemocratic such a conclusion would be.
May's solution was best on this and we need to try and get back there. Once again the loons on both sides who voted that down should hang their heads in shame.
International treaties once signed continue in perpetuity - unless and until both sides negotiate and agree changes.
The Good Friday Agreement is an international agreement that we have decided to ignore and challenge.
What provision of the GFA have we chosen to ignore and challenge?
The GFA does not oblige either party to be part of the EU. Had it been Ireland that had voted to leave the EU do you think the UK could or should have been able to prevent them from doing so under the GFA?
If the GFA assumed the UK and Ireland would remain in the EU then that was a mistaken assumption. Both Ireland and the UK legally ratified (Ireland via referendums) the Article 50 provisions in the Lisbon Treaty post-GFA.
The fact Northern Ireland was part of the UK as it was then (so free movement of goods without border checks).,
David Blevins of Sky reporting that it is recreational rioting from young people from deprived areas, having been in lockdown for a year with nothing better to-do
There is absolutely a key point here - Easter violence in Norniron isn't unique to 2021.
David Blevins of Sky reporting that it is recreational rioting from young people from deprived areas, having been in lockdown for a year with nothing better to-do
Now BigG. I have left for the day, and there may be a grain of truth in that assertion, but you also have consider what else has given them the excuse to riot.
Here in Wales we have been locked down since December, with little sign of improvement. When the disaffected of South Wales marched on the Senedd last week to lynch Drakeford they left beer cans and chip wrappers in their wake, not burned out buses.
The violence in Northern Ireland is a direct result of Brexit.
It was predicted at the time, and ignored by BoZo because he wanted to be World King and throwing NI under the bus (sic) was his route.
Only the permanently deluded continue to deny this.
Even Hoey, who campaigned for Brexit, says the border BoZo imposed is the proximate cause.
And still some people here deny its existence
If the Protocol is causing violence then the Protocol Article 16 gives the right to suspend its provisions to avoid violence, so invoke that and move on. Problem solved. What's the issue? 🤔
Not a permanent solution
So it would be responsible for representatives of all affected communities to begin talks to find a permanent solution.
Once all affected communities agree to a permanent solution then Article 16 can be withdrawn. Or more likely it would be voided by the new solution replacing it anyway.
I'm not sure the message on the bus had much to do with it. There were Brexit options that did not require a sea border. Both the EU and UK politicians who refused to back concessionary position prior to Boris being elected, and of course Boris and his cronies doing the thing they said they would never do.
Why should the EU do anything - this is an internal issue of a third party country.
I'm not sure the message on the bus had much to do with it. There were Brexit options that did not require a sea border. Both the EU and UK politicians who refused to back concessionary position prior to Boris being elected, and of course Boris and his cronies doing the thing they said they would never do.
Why should the EU do anything - this is an internal issue of a third party country.
Because one of their members has a land border with said third party country and was determined not to have a hard border with it?
Were the EU a party who signed the Good Friday Agreement?
More to the point were they the Government who drove a bus through it without any thought of the consequences?
The Good Friday Agreement was an elegant balancing act.
It was built on certain assumptions.
When those assumptions are no longer valid isn’t it foolish and counterproductive to try to maintain the GFA unchanged?
Wouldn't it make more sense to have done some work on resolving potential issues prior to making fundamental changes.
The last bank I remember trying to do that with a computer system was the TSB - I seem to remember that project not exactly being problem free.
I'm not sure the message on the bus had much to do with it. There were Brexit options that did not require a sea border. Both the EU and UK politicians who refused to back concessionary position prior to Boris being elected, and of course Boris and his cronies doing the thing they said they would never do.
Why should the EU do anything - this is an internal issue of a third party country.
The EU themselves threatened the protocol earlier this year when they thought it suited them
In the end NI, UK, ROI, and the EU need to resolve the issues collectively
I’d say the EU needs to delegate to RoI and not get involved
I'd suggest it should be done like the GFA itself. Get Sinn Fien, the DUP (as heirs to the UUP), ROI, the UK and a neutral third party like the USA involved.
ROI should negotiate on behalf of the EU, not the other way around.
I'm not sure the message on the bus had much to do with it. There were Brexit options that did not require a sea border. Both the EU and UK politicians who refused to back concessionary position prior to Boris being elected, and of course Boris and his cronies doing the thing they said they would never do.
Why should the EU do anything - this is an internal issue of a third party country.
Because one of their members has a land border with said third party country and was determined not to have a hard border with it?
Were the EU a party who signed the Good Friday Agreement?
More to the point were they the Government who drove a bus through it without any thought of the consequences?
The Good Friday Agreement was an elegant balancing act.
It was built on certain assumptions.
When those assumptions are no longer valid isn’t it foolish and counterproductive to try to maintain the GFA unchanged?
Wouldn't it make more sense to have done some work on resolving potential issues prior to making fundamental changes.
The last bank I remember trying to do that with a computer system was the TSB - I seem to remember that project not exactly being problem free.
No.
One party had no interest in resolving potential issues, so in those circumstances democracy means you need to get on and do the fundamental changes first and then deal with the fallout afterwards.
David Blevins of Sky reporting that it is recreational rioting from young people from deprived areas, having been in lockdown for a year with nothing better to-do
Now BigG. I have left for the day, and there may be a grain of truth in that assertion, but you also have consider what else has given them the excuse to riot.
Here in Wales we have been locked down since December, with little sign of improvement. When the disaffected of South Wales marched on the Senedd last week to lynch Drakeford they left beer cans and chip wrappers in their wake, not burned out buses.
Blevins seemed to be of the opinion it is the young rebelling against one year lockdown and of course it has connections to the troubles but that was not the underlying cause
I'm not sure the message on the bus had much to do with it. There were Brexit options that did not require a sea border. Both the EU and UK politicians who refused to back concessionary position prior to Boris being elected, and of course Boris and his cronies doing the thing they said they would never do.
Why should the EU do anything - this is an internal issue of a third party country.
Because one of their members has a land border with said third party country and was determined not to have a hard border with it?
Were the EU a party who signed the Good Friday Agreement?
More to the point were they the Government who drove a bus through it without any thought of the consequences?
The Good Friday Agreement was an elegant balancing act.
It was built on certain assumptions.
When those assumptions are no longer valid isn’t it foolish and counterproductive to try to maintain the GFA unchanged?
Wouldn't it make more sense to have done some work on resolving potential issues prior to making fundamental changes.
The last bank I remember trying to do that with a computer system was the TSB - I seem to remember that project not exactly being problem free.
No.
One party had no interest in resolving potential issues, so in those circumstances democracy means you need to get on and do the fundamental changes first and then deal with the fallout afterwards.
Any evidence to back up your statement?
I really cannot imagine Ireland had zero interest in the issue - which is your sole basis of your argument unless you are confirming the fact Boris couldn't care less..
David Blevins of Sky reporting that it is recreational rioting from young people from deprived areas, having been in lockdown for a year with nothing better to-do
There is absolutely a key point here - Easter violence in Norniron isn't unique to 2021.
Every conversations I've had with people over there says this is way more than the usual Easter riots and there seems to be a lot more to it than the usual burn a trailer or 2 (for insurance purposes).
Setting the usual "your mum", no YOUR mum" debate aside, all sides are in agreement that the customs border down the Irish Sea is unworkable. The question is how we find a workable - note that word - alternative: 1. Hard border in Ireland. No, aside from the international legal agreement preventing such a thing it would bring bombs back to the mainland 2. No border in Ireland or the Irish Sea. No, illegal under WTO rules. There has to be a border somewhere and all importing states treated under the same WTO rules where no other agreement exists 3. An e-border in Ireland. No, the technology doesn't exist. This was the preferred solution amongst some Tory Brexiteers but none of them were prepared to wait for it to be invented before leaving the EEA/CU. Because they know it doesn't exist. 4. Compromise. As we can't just open the border without a UK/EU agreement, we must reach a new agreement. The political hole is deep and dark - we need a new agreement as the existing one we triumphed doesn't work. However the alternative may be worse.
I have to come back to what I keep stating - we have no plans to diverge below EEA standards. It is the EEA standards checks that are crippling, the CU declarations are a pain but can be largely minimised with a VAT agreement. And we're still in soft VAT union with the EU.
With the ruinous impact on trade, it is in the government's interest to make a deal where all this works properly. What fixes NI will fix GB as well. I suspect that any other trade barrier with anyone else would be negotiated to a compromise and paraded as a triumph. Its only politics stopping them from doing the same with the EU.
David Blevins of Sky reporting that it is recreational rioting from young people from deprived areas, having been in lockdown for a year with nothing better to-do
Now BigG. I have left for the day, and there may be a grain of truth in that assertion, but you also have consider what else has given them the excuse to riot.
Here in Wales we have been locked down since December, with little sign of improvement. When the disaffected of South Wales marched on the Senedd last week to lynch Drakeford they left beer cans and chip wrappers in their wake, not burned out buses.
Blevins seemed to be of the opinion it is the young rebelling against one year lockdown and of course it has connections to the troubles but that was not the underlying cause
Normally you moan non stop about Sky News and their team being rubbish, now you want to accept their word as gospel.
I'm not sure the message on the bus had much to do with it. There were Brexit options that did not require a sea border. Both the EU and UK politicians who refused to back concessionary position prior to Boris being elected, and of course Boris and his cronies doing the thing they said they would never do.
Why should the EU do anything - this is an internal issue of a third party country.
Because one of their members has a land border with said third party country and was determined not to have a hard border with it?
Were the EU a party who signed the Good Friday Agreement?
More to the point were they the Government who drove a bus through it without any thought of the consequences?
The Good Friday Agreement was an elegant balancing act.
It was built on certain assumptions.
When those assumptions are no longer valid isn’t it foolish and counterproductive to try to maintain the GFA unchanged?
Wouldn't it make more sense to have done some work on resolving potential issues prior to making fundamental changes.
The last bank I remember trying to do that with a computer system was the TSB - I seem to remember that project not exactly being problem free.
No.
One party had no interest in resolving potential issues, so in those circumstances democracy means you need to get on and do the fundamental changes first and then deal with the fallout afterwards.
Any evidence to back up your statement?
I really cannot imagine Ireland had zero interest in the issue - which is your sole basis of your argument unless you are confirming the fact Boris couldn't care less..
Yes there is evidence.
Varadkar's predecessor was working on practical compromise solutions to the NI border.
Varadkar replaced him a week after Theresa May's disastrous 2017 election failure left her weak and exposed with a minority government in a Remainer dominated Parliament.
It was the combination of May being weak and Varadkar taking over that led to Varadkar and the EU scrapping the practical compromise solutions the UK and NI had been working on and instead weaponising the border.
Good morning everyone. I see that while Ydoethur's post yesterday when he said that all teachers were thinking of leaving the profession was criticised as hyperbole, not least by myself, the NEU has a survey which suggests that over a third do.
Very, very sad.
I think teachers are normally a high turnover job though - lots who try it realise it’s not for them.
Not sure It's normally as high as it now appears though. There must be figures somewhere.
Edit. Once upon a time of course, female teachers tended to leave as a consequence of pregnancy, and not go back for 5-10 years, if at all. And many years ago female teachers who married had to leave.
Normally it’s about 10% per year.
Presumably that % that *actually* leave not who are "thinking of leaving"?
'Emotionally, we are completely and utterly furious. We are suffering. But there's nothing in our minds to be really furious about. My brother was just extraordinarily unlucky.'
Huge credit to this family. It’s very easy for dispassionate scientists to weigh up the odds, but it cannot be easy to be one of the unlucky families.
Yes, massive credit to his family - meanwhile the BTL comments are a disgrace.
What if the EU passes a rule that says “only pigs bred in Denmark or of sufficient quality” and we are forced to adopt that rule
It isn't an insurmountable barrier. We literally wrote most of the safety standards (whether food or other) for the EU. We are clear that we will be improving standards and increasing safety not the opposite. So a theoretical improvement in standards from the EU at some unspecified point in the future should hold no fear.
We are playing silly buggers because of the *theoretical* risks in the future that aren't even risks.
David Blevins of Sky reporting that it is recreational rioting from young people from deprived areas, having been in lockdown for a year with nothing better to-do
Now BigG. I have left for the day, and there may be a grain of truth in that assertion, but you also have consider what else has given them the excuse to riot.
Here in Wales we have been locked down since December, with little sign of improvement. When the disaffected of South Wales marched on the Senedd last week to lynch Drakeford they left beer cans and chip wrappers in their wake, not burned out buses.
Blevins seemed to be of the opinion it is the young rebelling against one year lockdown and of course it has connections to the troubles but that was not the underlying cause
Normally you moan non stop about Sky News and their team being rubbish, now you want to accept their word as gospel.
With respect I am quoting their NI journalist
I can only repeat what he says, are you saying his reporting is untrue or just having a go at me
I'm not sure the message on the bus had much to do with it. There were Brexit options that did not require a sea border. Both the EU and UK politicians who refused to back concessionary position prior to Boris being elected, and of course Boris and his cronies doing the thing they said they would never do.
Why should the EU do anything - this is an internal issue of a third party country.
The EU themselves threatened the protocol earlier this year when they thought it suited them
In the end NI, UK, ROI, and the EU need to resolve the issues collectively
I’d say the EU needs to delegate to RoI and not get involved
I'd suggest it should be done like the GFA itself. Get Sinn Fien, the DUP (as heirs to the UUP), ROI, the UK and a neutral third party like the USA involved.
ROI should negotiate on behalf of the EU, not the other way around.
The problem with this is that there are larger parties involved which include the EU. So for there to be a frictionless border in NI between the UK and the EU there really has to be a frictionless border elsewhere, eg, Dover. May's solution provided that albeit at a cost that you did not like.
What would help a lot would be to remove some of the friction and to provide some substance to the paper thin deal Boris signed. So if it was accepted that there was regulatory equivalence, which there plainly is at present, then border checks on foodstuffs, for example, could be obviated. We need to accept that the current state of play will not necessarily always be the case so there would have to be arbitration re changes and the right on the part of either party to give notice but this is the way ahead.
I therefore think the opposite of you. What we actually want is an agreement between the UK and the EU that will have the incidental effect of defusing the border there as well as resolving issues elsewhere. The problem is that the EU are still in a huff and their embarrassment re vaccines is not helping that. We may have to wait a bit.
Comments
'Emotionally, we are completely and utterly furious. We are suffering. But there's nothing in our minds to be really furious about. My brother was just extraordinarily unlucky.'
Huge credit to this family. It’s very easy for dispassionate scientists to weigh up the odds, but it cannot be easy to be one of the unlucky families.
One has to book the quarantine accommodation well in advance, before your flights. It’s limited to a few hundred passengers per day per city, so the airlines flying in long-haul are only selling business and first tickets. It’s AU$8-10k all-in.
There’s a lot of antipodeans hanging around the sandpit, living in hotels or taking low-paid service jobs while they wait for the whole thing to blow over. Many sad stories of funerals missed and financial problems.
God I've criticised the hell out of them this past year, but some very responsible headlines in the morning's papers. Let's hope the rolling news is equally responsible this morning.
Edit: Apart from that stupid cartoon the Times - of all papers - let through.
Now that a national paper has put the same idea in a cartoon, the whining is even louder.
Savvy punters would take note...
https://twitter.com/PatricKielty/status/1379898869987807236
In early March, European Council President Charles Michel claimed the UK had “imposed an outright ban on the export of vaccines or vaccine components produced on their territory”. That claim was wrong because doses manufactured in the UK had already been exported to Australia a fortnight earlier.
The UK government swiftly denied Michel’s claim of an “outright ban” and stressed it had not blocked any exports. However it has repeatedly refused to say whether any vaccines had been sent abroad and if so, where.
Rather than stretching and straining to keep it intact it would be better to develop a new solution to achieve its objectives
Rather than stretching and straining to keep it intact it would be better to develop a new solution
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1379412621921812482
https://www.politico.eu/article/australia-coronavirus-vaccines-eu-astrazeneca/
To be blunt, it’s all rather unedifying.
Hong Kong (CNN): China's armed forces conducted simultaneous military exercises to the west and east of Taiwan on Monday in a move analysts said was a warning to the self-ruled island and its supporter, the United States.
Meanwhile, at least 10 People's Liberation Army (PLA) warplanes, including four J-16 and four J-10 fighter jets, a Y-8 anti-submarine warfare aircraft and a KJ-500 early warning aircraft, entered Taiwan's self-declared air defense identification zone (ADIZ), according to Taiwan's Defense Ministry.
https://twitter.com/FraserNelson/status/1379842359458938885
No. The GFA is predicated on the assumption that both the UK and the RoI are members of the EU. That is not the case anymore.
Very, very sad.
I have my second dose (of Pfizer) confirmed for tomorrow - yay!
Edit. Once upon a time of course, female teachers tended to leave as a consequence of pregnancy, and not go back for 5-10 years, if at all. And many years ago female teachers who married had to leave.
He tried to suggest alternative solutions, the EU were not interested as they wanted to solely prioritise their own interests of maintaining the "integrity" of the Single Market. The responsibility for this lies 100% on the EU's refusal to be grown up and compromise.
The entire "spirit of the Good Friday Agreement" was one of compromise - not getting a leg over others and an unwavering adherence to the rules.
The UK Government should in response to the violence invoke Article 16 and say the Protocol will not be enforced until a compromise is reached which makes all communities on the island happy. Until then NI should be 100% part of the UK and if the EU wishes to build border posts then that should be on them, but I doubt they will, they were bluffing all along.
With all due respect to you, and you clearly know considerably more than I do, one cannot help butnotice the national identify question is linked to sectarianism by the nature, that for exaple flagstones are painted red white and blue in Unionists areas and green, orange and white in Nationalist areas, and the areas in question house people from respective religious backgrounds.
I suspect you are right and I should STFU, about stuff I don't know enough about, but surely English politicians with even less understanding than me would be wise to avoid antagonising the vocal minority of "idiots", because they can make life very unpleasant for everyone else.
As it did before.
It was predicted at the time, and ignored by BoZo because he wanted to be World King and throwing NI under the bus (sic) was his route.
Only the permanently deluded continue to deny this.
Even Hoey, who campaigned for Brexit, says the border BoZo imposed is the proximate cause.
And still some people here deny its existence
And no, rejoining the EU is not the solution. That is a prison and undemocratic, any solution needs to recognise the UK being a sovereign state and NI being a part of the UK.
From the 2018 twitter thread linked to below
https://twitter.com/PatricKielty/status/1045782734688272385
1. No border and free movement on the Island of Ireland
2. No status difference between GB and NI
It *can* be done if the UK doesn't diverge heavily from the EU - and so far we have given no signs that we plan to. Similarly, we could do sector deals which take away large chunks of the problem - food as a prime example.
We are categorically not going to diverge downward on food standards - the government repeatedly insist this is the case. A food standards deal should therefore be doable which removes the absurd issues that have knackered both food supply and food / farming industry over there. We don't need checks and paperwork if we guarantee that our standards will never be lower than theirs. Which our government insists is the case.
And yet, we will not enter into any agreement with the EU to set that undertaking into law. I honestly don't believe that the government wants to allow weevil-infested food to be imported from America, which makes the objection political rather than practical.
Even there I don't get the problem. "Our standards will be higher than EU standards" is something they can trumpet surely. Which completely removes all of the hell that the industry is going through. They *could* do it. But won't.
With respect to the Greater Manchester Mayoral election, I don't think this intervention is going to swing the campaign in favour of whomever the Tories have put up as candidate.
The politics makes the sensible things impractical.
More to the point were they the Government who drove a bus through it without any thought of the consequences?
In the end NI, UK, ROI, and the EU need to resolve the issues collectively
The UK voted to leave the EU. Therefore any NI solution must recognise the UK as not being part of the EU. If your "solution" is to have the UK tied to the EU then that's no more a solution than the UK's solution to Nationalists is to say "you're tied to the UK, suck it up".
I've said before that sensible people not deluded by Boris derangement, like myself, felt little I'll to politicians trying their best at the beginning of the crisis and give little but some credit to them for vaccinations. It seems odd to me that Scott and his ilk don't want to give Boris credit for vaccinations but want to hold it against him for any shortfalls - this seems to make no logical sense to me.
A total and utter lie. There is no obligation within the GFA to do so. It may have been an assumption, but that's a flaw in the GFA if so that needs fixing, not a flaw of Brexit.
May's solution was best on this and we need to try and get back there. Once again the loons on both sides who voted that down should hang their heads in shame.
Look at the violence the insistence upon a Protocol have done. This is a direct consequence of the EU's refusal to compromise until now and the dogmatic insistence upon the likes of Scott etc that the EU's integrity must be respected. Any solution winning the support of all communities must treat all communities with respect. There needs to be compromise.
The British tried on many occasions to work a new solution & the Taoiseach before Varadkar was working with them. Varadkar and Connelly then “weaponised” the border because they thought it gave them a negotiating advantage.
They are the only two politicians in the Brexit farrago that I really feel contempt for.
He is unable to make any balanced arguments, or say anything ill, of his religious zeal for the EU and all things EU
The Good Friday Agreement is an international agreement that we have decided to ignore and challenge.
It can’t have been your most idiotic post anyway, the ones when you tried to wriggle out of having a bet with me on Farage and the 2015 debates by not knowing what 9/4 meant can’t be beaten on that front, but who claimed it was? I said Sir Keir’s best hope was something going wrong with the vaccine
What if the EU passes a rule that says “only pigs bred in Denmark or of sufficient quality” and we are forced to adopt that rule
The GFA does not oblige either party to be part of the EU. Had it been Ireland that had voted to leave the EU do you think the UK could or should have been able to prevent them from doing so under the GFA?
If the GFA assumed the UK and Ireland would remain in the EU then that was a mistaken assumption. Both Ireland and the UK legally ratified (Ireland via referendums) the Article 50 provisions in the Lisbon Treaty post-GFA.
It was built on certain assumptions.
When those assumptions are no longer valid isn’t it foolish and counterproductive to try to maintain the GFA unchanged?
Here in Wales we have been locked down since December, with little sign of improvement. When the disaffected of South Wales marched on the Senedd last week to lynch Drakeford they left beer cans and chip wrappers in their wake, not burned out buses.
Once all affected communities agree to a permanent solution then Article 16 can be withdrawn. Or more likely it would be voided by the new solution replacing it anyway.
The last bank I remember trying to do that with a computer system was the TSB - I seem to remember that project not exactly being problem free.
ROI should negotiate on behalf of the EU, not the other way around.
One party had no interest in resolving potential issues, so in those circumstances democracy means you need to get on and do the fundamental changes first and then deal with the fallout afterwards.
I really cannot imagine Ireland had zero interest in the issue - which is your sole basis of your argument unless you are confirming the fact Boris couldn't care less..
1. Hard border in Ireland. No, aside from the international legal agreement preventing such a thing it would bring bombs back to the mainland
2. No border in Ireland or the Irish Sea. No, illegal under WTO rules. There has to be a border somewhere and all importing states treated under the same WTO rules where no other agreement exists
3. An e-border in Ireland. No, the technology doesn't exist. This was the preferred solution amongst some Tory Brexiteers but none of them were prepared to wait for it to be invented before leaving the EEA/CU. Because they know it doesn't exist.
4. Compromise. As we can't just open the border without a UK/EU agreement, we must reach a new agreement. The political hole is deep and dark - we need a new agreement as the existing one we triumphed doesn't work. However the alternative may be worse.
I have to come back to what I keep stating - we have no plans to diverge below EEA standards. It is the EEA standards checks that are crippling, the CU declarations are a pain but can be largely minimised with a VAT agreement. And we're still in soft VAT union with the EU.
With the ruinous impact on trade, it is in the government's interest to make a deal where all this works properly. What fixes NI will fix GB as well. I suspect that any other trade barrier with anyone else would be negotiated to a compromise and paraded as a triumph. Its only politics stopping them from doing the same with the EU.
Varadkar's predecessor was working on practical compromise solutions to the NI border.
Varadkar replaced him a week after Theresa May's disastrous 2017 election failure left her weak and exposed with a minority government in a Remainer dominated Parliament.
It was the combination of May being weak and Varadkar taking over that led to Varadkar and the EU scrapping the practical compromise solutions the UK and NI had been working on and instead weaponising the border.
We are playing silly buggers because of the *theoretical* risks in the future that aren't even risks.
I can only repeat what he says, are you saying his reporting is untrue or just having a go at me
Remember the exit deal which the PM said was awesome and oven ready? Tried to renegotiate within months with the Internal Market Bill.
Now the Free Trade Agreement he and his supporters want to renegotiate that within weeks of praising it and saying it was awesome.
What makes it worse is remember that we held all the cards in these negotiations.
What would help a lot would be to remove some of the friction and to provide some substance to the paper thin deal Boris signed. So if it was accepted that there was regulatory equivalence, which there plainly is at present, then border checks on foodstuffs, for example, could be obviated. We need to accept that the current state of play will not necessarily always be the case so there would have to be arbitration re changes and the right on the part of either party to give notice but this is the way ahead.
I therefore think the opposite of you. What we actually want is an agreement between the UK and the EU that will have the incidental effect of defusing the border there as well as resolving issues elsewhere. The problem is that the EU are still in a huff and their embarrassment re vaccines is not helping that. We may have to wait a bit.