Mr. B, big test now for many countries, especially the US. Go along with it and just accept China's land (sea) grab, or tell them to sod off?
Tell them to sod off? Yes, let's give that a whirl.
Government Ministers and their friends and family could make an absolute killing on the provision of tin hats ( from China?) to protect us from the onslaught.
I seem to remember that the MoD had run down UK productive capability so much that when it started one of the Middle East wars of recent decades, it discovered that its sole supplier of ammunition for one particular artillery equipment (can't recall if land, air or sea) was Swiss/Swedish - ergo neutral and at once stopping the supply. No idea if they have learnt that lesson.
I think the story you are thinking of is Belgium and it wasn’t neutrality and shitheadishness on their part.
Mr. Pete, aye, it was difficult and has been poorly handled by multiple UK governments.
However.
The 2007 referendum on Lisbon should've been held. Integrating endlessly without recourse to the electorate because the main parties all agreed with one another led to the rise of UKIP and then a referendum on the nuclear option rather than binning a referendum (about which we'd been promised a referendum by all major UK parties, a promise subsequently reneged upon by two of the three).
If the UK political class had bothered to either address the concerns of the electorate or make a case for the EU (in addition to not making manifesto pledges then breaking them immediately) we'd be in a better state of affairs.
I don't dispute your final paragraph, but that relates to Brexit as a separate issue. I agree forty years of UK Governments of all stripes blaming the EU for their failures led us to Brexit, but we are where we are with that.
My point was that those promoting the notion of leaving the EU ignored Northern Ireland, and then after the event blamed the inevitable issues Brexit would raise on the GFA. This is a particularly handy device for Johnson apologists.
It is disingenuous of Johnson apologists to blame the GFA in hindsight for the inevitability of a border in the sea, when a UKIP- style Brexit was determined by Johnson over twenty years later.
The issue is that the EU has not shown the thoughtfulness that underpins the GFA
Similarly those who scream “the GFA is sacrosanct” are missing the point
The purpose of the GFA was to navigate between fundamental questions of identity to find a solution that allows different communities to co-exist. It was built on certain assumptions, one of which was that the RoI and the UK were part of a single market.
That is no longer the case.
There are now several options:
1. Amend the GFA to make sure the objective - peace - is achieved. Difficult but may be possible but it needs to EU to butt out and let the UK and RoI figure it out 2. Refuse to adjust the EU rules (which is their right) and insist on a hard land border - unacceptable to the Nationalist community 3. Refuse to adjust the EU rules (which is their right) and insist on a hard sea border - unacceptable to the Unionist community 4. Work collaboratively to find a technical solution to allow the GFA to continue in its current form
1&4 have the potential to be solutions. 2&3 do not.
1 - not preferred by anyone but might be possible with more capable leaders on all sides 2 - rejected by everyone 3 - insisted on by the EU as a matter of principle and tactical advantage 4 - probably the best approach even if it is non trivial
But until the EU grows up and shifts to 4 then we have a problem, Houston
Here we go again. In order to facilitate Johnson's oven ready deal, compromise is required from everyone else.
I remember compromise, it was called Mrs May's deal. Both Johnson and myself tossed it assunder, but for different reasons. With the benefit of hindsight I can confirm I was wrong.
May’s deal wasn’t compromise.
It was staying in the customs Union (a terrible outcome for the UK) until the EU agreed a solution for the border
Mr. Pete, aye, it was difficult and has been poorly handled by multiple UK governments.
However.
The 2007 referendum on Lisbon should've been held. Integrating endlessly without recourse to the electorate because the main parties all agreed with one another led to the rise of UKIP and then a referendum on the nuclear option rather than binning a referendum (about which we'd been promised a referendum by all major UK parties, a promise subsequently reneged upon by two of the three).
If the UK political class had bothered to either address the concerns of the electorate or make a case for the EU (in addition to not making manifesto pledges then breaking them immediately) we'd be in a better state of affairs.
I don't dispute your final paragraph, but that relates to Brexit as a separate issue. I agree forty years of UK Governments of all stripes blaming the EU for their failures led us to Brexit, but we are where we are with that.
My point was that those promoting the notion of leaving the EU ignored Northern Ireland, and then after the event blamed the inevitable issues Brexit would raise on the GFA. This is a particularly handy device for Johnson apologists.
It is disingenuous of Johnson apologists to blame the GFA in hindsight for the inevitability of a border in the sea, when a UKIP- style Brexit was determined by Johnson over twenty years later.
Absolutely right. The Brexiters poohpoohed the idea that the GFA and NI comprised a major issue. Possibly because they still thought Ireland was in the UK and could be ordered around, on at least one occasion witj the threat of An Gorta Mor Mark 2. Some of the comments at the time from Tory MPs did give the impresson some of them were a century or more out in their understanding of the political geography of the Isles of Ireland and Britain.
Not just Tory MPs: Secretary of State as well. Karen Bradley, in 2018 (after Brexit, but before any deal was done):
"I didn't understand things like when elections are fought, for example, in Northern Ireland – people who are nationalists don’t vote for unionist parties and vice versa."
To be fair, Julian Smith did seem to understand the issues. So he was sacked after six months.
It’s poorly expressed but what she is saying is that she didn’t appreciate the overriding salience of the nationalist/unionist issue. Unless you have studied NI that’s not an unreasonable lacuna
Seriously? You think that appointing somebody as Secretary of State for NI who doesn't appreciate the salience of the nationalist/unionist issue is not an unreasonable lacuna? It's not even specialist knowledge that needs to be studied. It's general knowledge. I'd be disappointed if any MP didn't know that. For the SoS not to know it is pretty shocking.
Gavin Williamson ... "I hadn't appreciated the salience of teaching on learning outcomes.." Charles ... "not an unreasonable lacuna..."
While on the subject of nasty pieces of work I came across this charming story of a Brexiteer hero. Sorry it's a couple of days out of date but when even the Mail seem stunned by it's odiousness.....
I don't know why "living strong and free" has to involve being odious and mouthy. Can't you live strong and free in a calm, civilized manner?
There's not much to be cheerful about (politically) these days, but it does seem as if Mr Fox's Reform Party, which campaigns on an extremist anti-woke, neo-racist, anti-vaxx, mendacious platform is not proving to be much of a success among the great British public. Hopefully he and his mates will disappear back to the gutter from whence they came in due course.
Yes, it looks more personal grift for money and attention than any sort of serious political movement. I don't think we're immune to a nasty far right populist group getting traction in the modest space that the Cons are leaving vacant there but it's going to take someone with more nous than Lozza to front it up. Here's not hoping.
This commentator wants Biden to be one term and be replaced by strong conservative leader "with an optimistic vision for a future based on freedom, deep-seated patriotism and a willingness to lead with our allies." A modern day Reagan.
I find HYUFD's posting fascinating, always very factually written and never personal against anyone. Something to learn I think.
If it were factual then the Swedish Academy would have to invent a Nobel Prize for Geography rewarding him for finding new sea routes to Kuwait and Iraq avoiding the Strait of Hormuz. And the American Association of Psephologists an award for discovering the hitherto unknown voting bloc of “English Americans”.
1. The DUP effectively did not have any choice in backing Brexit or facilitating it. It’s clear that pro-Brexit voters would have chosen Brexit over keeping NI in the Union if the NI problem was seen to be blocking Brexit. So allowing the NI tail to wag the England / Wales dog was never going to happen;
2. I’m sceptical of these polls now showing such high support for a United Ireland. Wait until you get into a campaign and NI voters suddenly realise they have to pay for their GP visits and medical treatment if they become part of an United Ireland
Identity overpowers economic considerations as Brexit and Trump demonstrate.
I don't think so. People may not be sensitive to forecasts of declines in GDP per capita, but they are sure as fuck sensitive to buses which say "Let's start paying £50 a pop per GP visit if our gross income exceeds £14,000" which seems to be the case in Ireland. Killer point from @MrEd.
The prospect of a united Ireland is not going founder on the rocks of fucking GP charges. If necessary the HSE will reform (or promise to reform) the system just enough to obfuscate and neutralise the issue.
If anything's going to kill off reunification it'll be the plain fact that Northern Ireland is a very expensive pain in the backside. The voters of the Republic might be delighted to welcome into the fold the (presumably very pissed off) 40% of the Northern populace that identifies as "British only" and have their taxes shoot through the roof to keep them in the style to which they are accustomed, but I doubt it.
The North is heavily subsidised. Yes, the Republic is rich, but OTOH Great Britain is 13 times its size and can more readily shoulder the burden. Follow the money.
Which is precisely why NI should be cut free.
Why is NI a burden? Why have we contributed so much and seen so little return for it?
Why can the Republic be rich, England be rich, but NI is a backwater burden?
The union isn't working.
NI is richer than the North East of England in terms of average house price and as much a part of the UK as it is
Hence the levelling up agenda for the North, though it's worth noting that the North East does not remotely get the same funding as NI has which is money poured permanently down the drain.
There is nothing preventing NI from catching up with the Republic besides the failed union.
There is nothing wrong with the Union and the North East gets plenty of net subsidy from London and the South East too.
The Republic has lower taxes than the UK but also has charges for hospital visits etc unlike the UK
"We don't get fees cos we're part of the Union." - I can see this on the Better Together bus when the Border Poll happens.
More seriously, relative to Sindy, I detect a certain warmth from you towards the idea of Irish Reunification. Would this be fair or have I misread things very badly?
No. I am a staunch Unionist and want to keep both Scotland and NI in the UK.
However there is a point that the Dublin government of FF and FG is economically right of the Johnson government let alone any future Starmer government, while clearly the current SNP and Green Holyrood government is economically left of both Johnson and Starmer.
So on that point alone joining with Dublin would make more sense for rightwingers than joining with Edinburgh
The current complexion of devolved (or Irish) governments shouldn't really be a factor in a forever decision but I suppose it's bound to be to an extent. I often think the most frustrating position to be in would be a Scot Nat who is on the right of the politics. Such a person is getting a double whammy - sitting in what seems like a permanent waiting room for independence whilst at the same time being governed at home by a left of centre party and - the kicker - having to vote for it. I read many of (eg) Malcolm's posts with this thought in mind.
1. The DUP effectively did not have any choice in backing Brexit or facilitating it. It’s clear that pro-Brexit voters would have chosen Brexit over keeping NI in the Union if the NI problem was seen to be blocking Brexit. So allowing the NI tail to wag the England / Wales dog was never going to happen;
2. I’m sceptical of these polls now showing such high support for a United Ireland. Wait until you get into a campaign and NI voters suddenly realise they have to pay for their GP visits and medical treatment if they become part of an United Ireland
Identity overpowers economic considerations as Brexit and Trump demonstrate.
I don't think so. People may not be sensitive to forecasts of declines in GDP per capita, but they are sure as fuck sensitive to buses which say "Let's start paying £50 a pop per GP visit if our gross income exceeds £14,000" which seems to be the case in Ireland. Killer point from @MrEd.
The prospect of a united Ireland is not going founder on the rocks of fucking GP charges. If necessary the HSE will reform (or promise to reform) the system just enough to obfuscate and neutralise the issue.
If anything's going to kill off reunification it'll be the plain fact that Northern Ireland is a very expensive pain in the backside. The voters of the Republic might be delighted to welcome into the fold the (presumably very pissed off) 40% of the Northern populace that identifies as "British only" and have their taxes shoot through the roof to keep them in the style to which they are accustomed, but I doubt it.
The North is heavily subsidised. Yes, the Republic is rich, but OTOH Great Britain is 13 times its size and can more readily shoulder the burden. Follow the money.
Which is precisely why NI should be cut free.
Why is NI a burden? Why have we contributed so much and seen so little return for it?
Why can the Republic be rich, England be rich, but NI is a backwater burden?
The union isn't working.
NI is richer than the North East of England in terms of average house price and as much a part of the UK as it is
Hence the levelling up agenda for the North, though it's worth noting that the North East does not remotely get the same funding as NI has which is money poured permanently down the drain.
There is nothing preventing NI from catching up with the Republic besides the failed union.
There is nothing wrong with the Union and the North East gets plenty of net subsidy from London and the South East too.
The Republic has lower taxes than the UK but also has charges for hospital visits etc unlike the UK
"We don't get fees cos we're part of the Union." - I can see this on the Better Together bus when the Border Poll happens.
More seriously, relative to Sindy, I detect a certain warmth from you towards the idea of Irish Reunification. Would this be fair or have I misread things very badly?
No. I am a staunch Unionist and want to keep both Scotland and NI in the UK.
However there is a point that the Dublin government of FF and FG is economically right of the Johnson government let alone any future Starmer government, while clearly the current SNP and Green Holyrood government is economically left of both Johnson and Starmer.
So on that point alone joining with Dublin would make more sense for rightwingers than joining with Edinburgh
The current complexion of devolved (or Irish) governments shouldn't really be a factor in a forever decision but I suppose it's bound to be to an extent. I often think the most frustrating position to be in would be a Scot Nat who is on the right of the politics. Such a person is getting a double whammy - sitting in what seems like a permanent waiting room for independence whilst at the same time being governed at home by a left of centre party and - the kicker - having to vote for it. I read many of (eg) Malcolm's posts with this thought in mind.
Just never call Malc a Tory unless you’re prepared for death by turnip.
A while back I had a conversation with someone who knows Gove very well.
Said Gove is a million times more of a Unionist than he is a Brexiteer (and he's a staunch Brexiteer.)
Both Gove and Johnson know that if Brexit leads to the breakup of the Union then that will be the first line of their obituaries not Brexit. Unlike Scottish independence they cannot kick the Irish unity referendum into the long grass because of the Good Friday Agreement and the Americans and EU will insist on it being delivered.
Brexit has already come at a heavy price for Gove, his friendship with Dave (pbuh) is well and truly fractured. I know people say Dave and George were close but remember the Goves were godparents to Ivan Cameron.
I find HYUFD's posting fascinating, always very factually written and never personal against anyone. Something to learn I think.
If it were factual then the Swedish Academy would have to invent a Nobel Prize for Geography rewarding him for finding new sea routes to Kuwait and Iraq avoiding the Strait of Hormuz. And the American Association of Psephologists an award for discovering the hitherto unknown voting bloc of “English Americans”.
He knows his polls even if he does extrapolate wildly and can get sucked (or suckered) into extreme positions.
A united Ireland makes sense on a number of points, but occasionally people stumble into arguing for it on the basis that both current entities are in the same island so should be together or words to that effect, which I doubt they hold consistently for other islands like hispaniola, new guinea or Britain, as if islands are required to have unified politics.
The partition of Ireland is a historical anomaly, driven by decisions hundreds of years ago and then a political miscalculation by Carson combined with shameless manipulation and opportunism by Craig. It were better that it had never happened.
Unfortunately we are where we are - unless and until our brothers and sisters in the North chose differently they remain part of the United kingdom (which is why @Philip_Thompson ‘s approach - “good riddance” - is so inappropriate)
Its an anomaly that should have never happened that has been almost criminally devastating to the people of Northern Ireland.
Unless I'm very much mistaken Northern Ireland was the relatively wealthier part of Ireland when partition happened. Now its completely the other way around as quite frankly the Republic has in recent decades much better managed their own business than the United Kingdom has managed Northern Ireland.
Which is hardly a surprise because the people of Northern Ireland are quite frankly a forgotten irrelevance to British politics. They're not even a part of Britain proper and the British parties don't even stand properly in Northern Ireland either.
Median full time salary in Northern Ireland is £28,000 Median full time salary in the Republic of Ireland is €48,946 which converts to £42,000
What possible good reason is there that the people of Northern Ireland should be worth 2/3rds of a person just over the border? Its a disgraceful and shameful situation and I unashamedly will say good riddance to it the day that the people in NI vote to end this ridiculous mess that should have never occurred. That's entirely appropriate in my eyes.
Mr. Pete, aye, it was difficult and has been poorly handled by multiple UK governments.
However.
The 2007 referendum on Lisbon should've been held. Integrating endlessly without recourse to the electorate because the main parties all agreed with one another led to the rise of UKIP and then a referendum on the nuclear option rather than binning a referendum (about which we'd been promised a referendum by all major UK parties, a promise subsequently reneged upon by two of the three).
If the UK political class had bothered to either address the concerns of the electorate or make a case for the EU (in addition to not making manifesto pledges then breaking them immediately) we'd be in a better state of affairs.
I don't dispute your final paragraph, but that relates to Brexit as a separate issue. I agree forty years of UK Governments of all stripes blaming the EU for their failures led us to Brexit, but we are where we are with that.
My point was that those promoting the notion of leaving the EU ignored Northern Ireland, and then after the event blamed the inevitable issues Brexit would raise on the GFA. This is a particularly handy device for Johnson apologists.
It is disingenuous of Johnson apologists to blame the GFA in hindsight for the inevitability of a border in the sea, when a UKIP- style Brexit was determined by Johnson over twenty years later.
The issue is that the EU has not shown the thoughtfulness that underpins the GFA
Similarly those who scream “the GFA is sacrosanct” are missing the point
The purpose of the GFA was to navigate between fundamental questions of identity to find a solution that allows different communities to co-exist. It was built on certain assumptions, one of which was that the RoI and the UK were part of a single market.
That is no longer the case.
There are now several options:
1. Amend the GFA to make sure the objective - peace - is achieved. Difficult but may be possible but it needs to EU to butt out and let the UK and RoI figure it out 2. Refuse to adjust the EU rules (which is their right) and insist on a hard land border - unacceptable to the Nationalist community 3. Refuse to adjust the EU rules (which is their right) and insist on a hard sea border - unacceptable to the Unionist community 4. Work collaboratively to find a technical solution to allow the GFA to continue in its current form
1&4 have the potential to be solutions. 2&3 do not.
1 - not preferred by anyone but might be possible with more capable leaders on all sides 2 - rejected by everyone 3 - insisted on by the EU as a matter of principle and tactical advantage 4 - probably the best approach even if it is non trivial
But until the EU grows up and shifts to 4 then we have a problem, Houston
Here we go again. In order to facilitate Johnson's oven ready deal, compromise is required from everyone else.
I remember compromise, it was called Mrs May's deal. Both Johnson and myself tossed it assunder, but for different reasons. With the benefit of hindsight I can confirm I was wrong.
May’s deal wasn’t compromise.
It was staying in the customs Union (a terrible outcome for the UK) until the EU agreed a solution for the border
We are where we are. The challenge now is how we stop NI from permanently fracturing off. The two zone GB/NI customs areas are not sustainable or even workable. But as we insist that we have to be able to diverge from EEA standards a border has to go somewhere.
It can't go on the island - the "digital border" guff has been laughed away and we refused to wait for it to be invented. It can't go down the Irish Sea. And ROI won't quit the EEA to suit England.
We knew this from the start. So what is our proposed solution? Its all very well telling the EU or ROI to compromise but this is our doing not theirs. Was our entire solution that they would yield to our will?
A while back I had a conversation with someone who knows Gove very well.
Said Gove is a million times more of a Unionist than he is a Brexiteer (and he's a staunch Brexiteer.)
Both Gove and Johnson know that if Brexit leads to the breakup of the Union then that will be the first line of their obituaries not Brexit. Unlike Scottish independence they cannot kick the Irish unity referendum into the long grass because of the Good Friday Agreement and the Americans and EU will insist on it being delivered.
Brexit has already come at a heavy price for Gove, his friendship with Dave (pbuh) is well and truly fractured. I know people say Dave and George were close but remember the Goves were godparents to Ivan Cameron.
Just as well then on the latest poll Unionist parties combined in NI still have a clear lead over Nationalist parties in NI combined. On that grounds the NI Secretary can still refuse a border poll under the GFA.
Technically as far as Scotland goes though the UK government could refuse indyref2 even if the SNP and Greens were on 100% of the Scottish vote combined as union matters are reserved to Westminster under the Scotland Act 1998
Mr. Pete, aye, it was difficult and has been poorly handled by multiple UK governments.
However.
The 2007 referendum on Lisbon should've been held. Integrating endlessly without recourse to the electorate because the main parties all agreed with one another led to the rise of UKIP and then a referendum on the nuclear option rather than binning a referendum (about which we'd been promised a referendum by all major UK parties, a promise subsequently reneged upon by two of the three).
If the UK political class had bothered to either address the concerns of the electorate or make a case for the EU (in addition to not making manifesto pledges then breaking them immediately) we'd be in a better state of affairs.
I don't dispute your final paragraph, but that relates to Brexit as a separate issue. I agree forty years of UK Governments of all stripes blaming the EU for their failures led us to Brexit, but we are where we are with that.
My point was that those promoting the notion of leaving the EU ignored Northern Ireland, and then after the event blamed the inevitable issues Brexit would raise on the GFA. This is a particularly handy device for Johnson apologists.
It is disingenuous of Johnson apologists to blame the GFA in hindsight for the inevitability of a border in the sea, when a UKIP- style Brexit was determined by Johnson over twenty years later.
The issue is that the EU has not shown the thoughtfulness that underpins the GFA
Similarly those who scream “the GFA is sacrosanct” are missing the point
The purpose of the GFA was to navigate between fundamental questions of identity to find a solution that allows different communities to co-exist. It was built on certain assumptions, one of which was that the RoI and the UK were part of a single market.
That is no longer the case.
There are now several options:
1. Amend the GFA to make sure the objective - peace - is achieved. Difficult but may be possible but it needs to EU to butt out and let the UK and RoI figure it out 2. Refuse to adjust the EU rules (which is their right) and insist on a hard land border - unacceptable to the Nationalist community 3. Refuse to adjust the EU rules (which is their right) and insist on a hard sea border - unacceptable to the Unionist community 4. Work collaboratively to find a technical solution to allow the GFA to continue in its current form
1&4 have the potential to be solutions. 2&3 do not.
1 - not preferred by anyone but might be possible with more capable leaders on all sides 2 - rejected by everyone 3 - insisted on by the EU as a matter of principle and tactical advantage 4 - probably the best approach even if it is non trivial
But until the EU grows up and shifts to 4 then we have a problem, Houston
Here we go again. In order to facilitate Johnson's oven ready deal, compromise is required from everyone else.
I remember compromise, it was called Mrs May's deal. Both Johnson and myself tossed it assunder, but for different reasons. With the benefit of hindsight I can confirm I was wrong.
May’s deal wasn’t compromise.
It was staying in the customs Union (a terrible outcome for the UK) until the EU agreed a solution for the border
We are where we are. The challenge now is how we stop NI from permanently fracturing off. The two zone GB/NI customs areas are not sustainable or even workable. But as we insist that we have to be able to diverge from EEA standards a border has to go somewhere.
It can't go on the island - the "digital border" guff has been laughed away and we refused to wait for it to be invented. It can't go down the Irish Sea. And ROI won't quit the EEA to suit England.
We knew this from the start. So what is our proposed solution? Its all very well telling the EU or ROI to compromise but this is our doing not theirs. Was our entire solution that they would yield to our will?
Why should we stop NI from permanently fracturing off?
Why should people in NI be worth 2/3rds of a person in the Republic?
Mr. Eagles, and what if an option wins with less than half the vote? That's the problem with a three answer referendum. Two responses at least has a clear winner.
Mr. Pete, aye, it was difficult and has been poorly handled by multiple UK governments.
However.
The 2007 referendum on Lisbon should've been held. Integrating endlessly without recourse to the electorate because the main parties all agreed with one another led to the rise of UKIP and then a referendum on the nuclear option rather than binning a referendum (about which we'd been promised a referendum by all major UK parties, a promise subsequently reneged upon by two of the three).
If the UK political class had bothered to either address the concerns of the electorate or make a case for the EU (in addition to not making manifesto pledges then breaking them immediately) we'd be in a better state of affairs.
I don't dispute your final paragraph, but that relates to Brexit as a separate issue. I agree forty years of UK Governments of all stripes blaming the EU for their failures led us to Brexit, but we are where we are with that.
My point was that those promoting the notion of leaving the EU ignored Northern Ireland, and then after the event blamed the inevitable issues Brexit would raise on the GFA. This is a particularly handy device for Johnson apologists.
It is disingenuous of Johnson apologists to blame the GFA in hindsight for the inevitability of a border in the sea, when a UKIP- style Brexit was determined by Johnson over twenty years later.
Absolutely right. The Brexiters poohpoohed the idea that the GFA and NI comprised a major issue. Possibly because they still thought Ireland was in the UK and could be ordered around, on at least one occasion witj the threat of An Gorta Mor Mark 2. Some of the comments at the time from Tory MPs did give the impresson some of them were a century or more out in their understanding of the political geography of the Isles of Ireland and Britain.
Not just Tory MPs: Secretary of State as well. Karen Bradley, in 2018 (after Brexit, but before any deal was done):
"I didn't understand things like when elections are fought, for example, in Northern Ireland – people who are nationalists don’t vote for unionist parties and vice versa."
To be fair, Julian Smith did seem to understand the issues. So he was sacked after six months.
Yep he screwed up badly there. Surprised his advisers didn't intervene when he started showing the first signs of integrity and competence. Nip it in the bud.
A united Ireland makes sense on a number of points, but occasionally people stumble into arguing for it on the basis that both current entities are in the same island so should be together or words to that effect, which I doubt they hold consistently for other islands like hispaniola, new guinea or Britain, as if islands are required to have unified politics.
The partition of Ireland is a historical anomaly, driven by decisions hundreds of years ago and then a political miscalculation by Carson combined with shameless manipulation and opportunism by Craig. It were better that it had never happened.
Unfortunately we are where we are - unless and until our brothers and sisters in the North chose differently they remain part of the United kingdom (which is why @Philip_Thompson ‘s approach - “good riddance” - is so inappropriate)
Its an anomaly that should have never happened that has been almost criminally devastating to the people of Northern Ireland.
Unless I'm very much mistaken Northern Ireland was the relatively wealthier part of Ireland when partition happened. Now its completely the other way around as quite frankly the Republic has in recent decades much better managed their own business than the United Kingdom has managed Northern Ireland.
Which is hardly a surprise because the people of Northern Ireland are quite frankly a forgotten irrelevance to British politics. They're not even a part of Britain proper and the British parties don't even stand properly in Northern Ireland either.
Median full time salary in Northern Ireland is £28,000 Median full time salary in the Republic of Ireland is €48,946 which converts to £42,000
What possible good reason is there that the people of Northern Ireland should be worth 2/3rds of a person just over the border? Its a disgraceful and shameful situation and I unashamedly will say good riddance to it the day that the people in NI vote to end this ridiculous mess that should have never occurred. That's entirely appropriate in my eyes.
Yes well we would expect no different from a republican, non Unionist, non conservative as you are.
Some of us proper Conservatives however remain committed to our Unionist brothers across the sea.
The Republic of course has no NHS either unlike the UK, it has hospital charges instead which pay for its very low taxes to boost its median income. It also has investment from the EU you voted to leave
Mr. Eagles, and what if an option wins with less than half the vote? That's the problem with a three answer referendum. Two responses at least has a clear winner.
Obviously said referendum would take place under AV.
A united Ireland makes sense on a number of points, but occasionally people stumble into arguing for it on the basis that both current entities are in the same island so should be together or words to that effect, which I doubt they hold consistently for other islands like hispaniola, new guinea or Britain, as if islands are required to have unified politics.
The partition of Ireland is a historical anomaly, driven by decisions hundreds of years ago and then a political miscalculation by Carson combined with shameless manipulation and opportunism by Craig. It were better that it had never happened.
Unfortunately we are where we are - unless and until our brothers and sisters in the North chose differently they remain part of the United kingdom (which is why @Philip_Thompson ‘s approach - “good riddance” - is so inappropriate)
Its an anomaly that should have never happened that has been almost criminally devastating to the people of Northern Ireland.
Unless I'm very much mistaken Northern Ireland was the relatively wealthier part of Ireland when partition happened. Now its completely the other way around as quite frankly the Republic has in recent decades much better managed their own business than the United Kingdom has managed Northern Ireland.
Which is hardly a surprise because the people of Northern Ireland are quite frankly a forgotten irrelevance to British politics. They're not even a part of Britain proper and the British parties don't even stand properly in Northern Ireland either.
Median full time salary in Northern Ireland is £28,000 Median full time salary in the Republic of Ireland is €48,946 which converts to £42,000
What possible good reason is there that the people of Northern Ireland should be worth 2/3rds of a person just over the border? Its a disgraceful and shameful situation and I unashamedly will say good riddance to it the day that the people in NI vote to end this ridiculous mess that should have never occurred. That's entirely appropriate in my eyes.
Yes well we would expect no different from a republican, non Unionist, non conservative as you are.
Some of us proper Conservatives however remain committed to our Unionist brothers across the sea.
The Republic of course has no NHS either unlike the UK, it has hospital charges instead which pay for its very low taxes to boost its median income. It also has investment from the EU you voted to leave
So committed to the union you want to continue to impoverish your "brothers" [and forgotten sisters no doubt] across the sea?
The union has failed Northern Ireland because the people of Northern Ireland are alternatively either forgotten about, misunderstood or treated as an inconvenience by their "brethren".
Self determination works better than subsidies which is why no amount of "subsidising" NI has made them succeed like the Republics self-determination has allowed them to succeed.
I wonder which is better off for a household's income - avoiding a £50 charge rarely needed, or £14,000 extra in annual salary? 🤔
Mr. B, big test now for many countries, especially the US. Go along with it and just accept China's land (sea) grab, or tell them to sod off?
Tell them to sod off? Yes, let's give that a whirl.
Government Ministers and their friends and family could make an absolute killing on the provision of tin hats ( from China?) to protect us from the onslaught.
I seem to remember that the MoD had run down UK productive capability so much that when it started one of the Middle East wars of recent decades, it discovered that its sole supplier of ammunition for one particular artillery equipment (can't recall if land, air or sea) was Swiss/Swedish - ergo neutral and at once stopping the supply. No idea if they have learnt that lesson.
I think the story you are thinking of is Belgium and it wasn’t neutrality and shitheadishness on their part.
That's it - thank you. Still pretty basic issue not having own capability for the main natures of artillery ammunition.
3) Become an independent nation outside the UK and ROI.
3 could work for Antrim and East Londonderry which could become an independent Protestant state under the leadership of Jeffrey Donaldson and Jim McAlister.
However that would only occur if there was a Nationalist majority in the rest of Northern Ireland for unity with the Republic
A united Ireland makes sense on a number of points, but occasionally people stumble into arguing for it on the basis that both current entities are in the same island so should be together or words to that effect, which I doubt they hold consistently for other islands like hispaniola, new guinea or Britain, as if islands are required to have unified politics.
The partition of Ireland is a historical anomaly, driven by decisions hundreds of years ago and then a political miscalculation by Carson combined with shameless manipulation and opportunism by Craig. It were better that it had never happened.
Unfortunately we are where we are - unless and until our brothers and sisters in the North chose differently they remain part of the United kingdom (which is why @Philip_Thompson ‘s approach - “good riddance” - is so inappropriate)
Its an anomaly that should have never happened that has been almost criminally devastating to the people of Northern Ireland.
Unless I'm very much mistaken Northern Ireland was the relatively wealthier part of Ireland when partition happened. Now its completely the other way around as quite frankly the Republic has in recent decades much better managed their own business than the United Kingdom has managed Northern Ireland.
Which is hardly a surprise because the people of Northern Ireland are quite frankly a forgotten irrelevance to British politics. They're not even a part of Britain proper and the British parties don't even stand properly in Northern Ireland either.
Median full time salary in Northern Ireland is £28,000 Median full time salary in the Republic of Ireland is €48,946 which converts to £42,000
What possible good reason is there that the people of Northern Ireland should be worth 2/3rds of a person just over the border? Its a disgraceful and shameful situation and I unashamedly will say good riddance to it the day that the people in NI vote to end this ridiculous mess that should have never occurred. That's entirely appropriate in my eyes.
Yes well we would expect no different from a republican, non Unionist, non conservative as you are.
Some of us proper Conservatives however remain committed to our Unionist brothers across the sea.
The Republic of course has no NHS either unlike the UK, it has hospital charges instead which pay for its very low taxes to boost its median income. It also has investment from the EU you voted to leave
You are so arrogant
He is every bit as much a conservative as you are, and while I do not agree with @Philip_Thompson on Scots independence, at least there is far more that unites our views as conservatives than anything your strange 'pure' conservative mindset has to offer
1. The DUP effectively did not have any choice in backing Brexit or facilitating it. It’s clear that pro-Brexit voters would have chosen Brexit over keeping NI in the Union if the NI problem was seen to be blocking Brexit. So allowing the NI tail to wag the England / Wales dog was never going to happen;
2. I’m sceptical of these polls now showing such high support for a United Ireland. Wait until you get into a campaign and NI voters suddenly realise they have to pay for their GP visits and medical treatment if they become part of an United Ireland
Identity overpowers economic considerations as Brexit and Trump demonstrate.
I don't think so. People may not be sensitive to forecasts of declines in GDP per capita, but they are sure as fuck sensitive to buses which say "Let's start paying £50 a pop per GP visit if our gross income exceeds £14,000" which seems to be the case in Ireland. Killer point from @MrEd.
The prospect of a united Ireland is not going founder on the rocks of fucking GP charges. If necessary the HSE will reform (or promise to reform) the system just enough to obfuscate and neutralise the issue.
If anything's going to kill off reunification it'll be the plain fact that Northern Ireland is a very expensive pain in the backside. The voters of the Republic might be delighted to welcome into the fold the (presumably very pissed off) 40% of the Northern populace that identifies as "British only" and have their taxes shoot through the roof to keep them in the style to which they are accustomed, but I doubt it.
The North is heavily subsidised. Yes, the Republic is rich, but OTOH Great Britain is 13 times its size and can more readily shoulder the burden. Follow the money.
Which is precisely why NI should be cut free.
Why is NI a burden? Why have we contributed so much and seen so little return for it?
Why can the Republic be rich, England be rich, but NI is a backwater burden?
The union isn't working.
NI is richer than the North East of England in terms of average house price and as much a part of the UK as it is
Hence the levelling up agenda for the North, though it's worth noting that the North East does not remotely get the same funding as NI has which is money poured permanently down the drain.
There is nothing preventing NI from catching up with the Republic besides the failed union.
There is nothing wrong with the Union and the North East gets plenty of net subsidy from London and the South East too.
The Republic has lower taxes than the UK but also has charges for hospital visits etc unlike the UK
"We don't get fees cos we're part of the Union." - I can see this on the Better Together bus when the Border Poll happens.
More seriously, relative to Sindy, I detect a certain warmth from you towards the idea of Irish Reunification. Would this be fair or have I misread things very badly?
No. I am a staunch Unionist and want to keep both Scotland and NI in the UK.
However there is a point that the Dublin government of FF and FG is economically right of the Johnson government let alone any future Starmer government, while clearly the current SNP and Green Holyrood government is economically left of both Johnson and Starmer.
So on that point alone joining with Dublin would make more sense for rightwingers than joining with Edinburgh
The current complexion of devolved (or Irish) governments shouldn't really be a factor in a forever decision but I suppose it's bound to be to an extent. I often think the most frustrating position to be in would be a Scot Nat who is on the right of the politics. Such a person is getting a double whammy - sitting in what seems like a permanent waiting room for independence whilst at the same time being governed at home by a left of centre party and - the kicker - having to vote for it. I read many of (eg) Malcolm's posts with this thought in mind.
Just never call Malc a Tory unless you’re prepared for death by turnip.
Ha, no. I won't be doing that. Stick with the ultra safe "politically right of centre". Any case, my def of a Tory is as discussed (and I think accepted by all of good faith and standing) the other day and Malcolm fails it unless he's secretly voting for them.
A united Ireland makes sense on a number of points, but occasionally people stumble into arguing for it on the basis that both current entities are in the same island so should be together or words to that effect, which I doubt they hold consistently for other islands like hispaniola, new guinea or Britain, as if islands are required to have unified politics.
The partition of Ireland is a historical anomaly, driven by decisions hundreds of years ago and then a political miscalculation by Carson combined with shameless manipulation and opportunism by Craig. It were better that it had never happened.
Unfortunately we are where we are - unless and until our brothers and sisters in the North chose differently they remain part of the United kingdom (which is why @Philip_Thompson ‘s approach - “good riddance” - is so inappropriate)
Its an anomaly that should have never happened that has been almost criminally devastating to the people of Northern Ireland.
Unless I'm very much mistaken Northern Ireland was the relatively wealthier part of Ireland when partition happened. Now its completely the other way around as quite frankly the Republic has in recent decades much better managed their own business than the United Kingdom has managed Northern Ireland.
Which is hardly a surprise because the people of Northern Ireland are quite frankly a forgotten irrelevance to British politics. They're not even a part of Britain proper and the British parties don't even stand properly in Northern Ireland either.
Median full time salary in Northern Ireland is £28,000 Median full time salary in the Republic of Ireland is €48,946 which converts to £42,000
What possible good reason is there that the people of Northern Ireland should be worth 2/3rds of a person just over the border? Its a disgraceful and shameful situation and I unashamedly will say good riddance to it the day that the people in NI vote to end this ridiculous mess that should have never occurred. That's entirely appropriate in my eyes.
Yes well we would expect no different from a republican, non Unionist, non conservative as you are.
Some of us proper Conservatives however remain committed to our Unionist brothers across the sea.
The Republic of course has no NHS either unlike the UK, it has hospital charges instead which pay for its very low taxes to boost its median income. It also has investment from the EU you voted to leave
You are so arrogant
He is every bit as much a conservative as you are, and while I do not agree with @Philip_Thompson on Scots independence, at least there is far more that unites our views as conservatives than anything your strange 'pure' conservative mindset has to offer
He is a republican who wants to break up the UK as even he admits, on no definition are those views compatible with being a Tory.
At most he is a libertarian Brexiteer who happens to back Boris, he is not a Tory.
Though of course given you both voted for Blair in 2001 when I was voting Tory still there is I accept plenty which links you both politically but it is certainly not absolute commitment to Toryism
Dominic Raab will be 'toast' at Boris Johnson's next Cabinet reshuffle because of his handling of the UK's withdrawal from Afghanistan, it was claimed today
...
One senior Government source told The Times: 'I think he is toast in the next reshuffle. It is a poorly led organisation with a control freak in charge who won't delegate anything. Officials are terrified of him.'
Allies of Mr Raab hit back and said it is 'laughable' to try to pin all of the Government's Afghanistan-related failures on the Foreign Secretary.
A united Ireland makes sense on a number of points, but occasionally people stumble into arguing for it on the basis that both current entities are in the same island so should be together or words to that effect, which I doubt they hold consistently for other islands like hispaniola, new guinea or Britain, as if islands are required to have unified politics.
The partition of Ireland is a historical anomaly, driven by decisions hundreds of years ago and then a political miscalculation by Carson combined with shameless manipulation and opportunism by Craig. It were better that it had never happened.
Unfortunately we are where we are - unless and until our brothers and sisters in the North chose differently they remain part of the United kingdom (which is why @Philip_Thompson ‘s approach - “good riddance” - is so inappropriate)
Its an anomaly that should have never happened that has been almost criminally devastating to the people of Northern Ireland.
Unless I'm very much mistaken Northern Ireland was the relatively wealthier part of Ireland when partition happened. Now its completely the other way around as quite frankly the Republic has in recent decades much better managed their own business than the United Kingdom has managed Northern Ireland.
Which is hardly a surprise because the people of Northern Ireland are quite frankly a forgotten irrelevance to British politics. They're not even a part of Britain proper and the British parties don't even stand properly in Northern Ireland either.
Median full time salary in Northern Ireland is £28,000 Median full time salary in the Republic of Ireland is €48,946 which converts to £42,000
What possible good reason is there that the people of Northern Ireland should be worth 2/3rds of a person just over the border? Its a disgraceful and shameful situation and I unashamedly will say good riddance to it the day that the people in NI vote to end this ridiculous mess that should have never occurred. That's entirely appropriate in my eyes.
Yes well we would expect no different from a republican, non Unionist, non conservative as you are.
Some of us proper Conservatives however remain committed to our Unionist brothers across the sea.
The Republic of course has no NHS either unlike the UK, it has hospital charges instead which pay for its very low taxes to boost its median income. It also has investment from the EU you voted to leave
So committed to the union you want to continue to impoverish your "brothers" [and forgotten sisters no doubt] across the sea?
The union has failed Northern Ireland because the people of Northern Ireland are alternatively either forgotten about, misunderstood or treated as an inconvenience by their "brethren".
Self determination works better than subsidies which is why no amount of "subsidising" NI has made them succeed like the Republics self-determination has allowed them to succeed.
I wonder which is better off for a household's income - avoiding a £50 charge rarely needed, or £14,000 extra in annual salary? 🤔
Every region and country of the UK is net subsidised apart from London, the South East and East.
On that basis the only parts of the UK left would be those 3 regions.
Ireland has also had vast subsidy from the EU, as almost every development project there has had EU funding.
It also benefits from very low corporation tax attracting multinational companies which Biden and the G7 want to end
Bringing two topics together, Gove’s —- ?crisis —- is additionally worrying in that he’s about the only sentient member of Cabinet and certainly the only one who is thinking about the Union.
It may even be that the slow failure of Brexit is contributing to his mental health issues.
If Govey wants to go out on the razz fuelled by marching powder to embrace young gentlemen then good for him. He's been stuck in a lie for long enough, let the man live.
I am very much live and let live.
But you and I are both old enough in the tooth though to recognise mental health issues when we see them.
Define mental health. He may well be depressed as so many of us have been. Brown was a heavy user of the happy pills yet functionally seemed OK.
TBH the thing that really made me goggle is that its the early hours and he's off his tits wearing a suit. I'd love to wind the clock back to the previous day - at which point did his politics need to be wearing a suit on a Saturday turn into "lets go to O'Neills" then into "lets line them up" and then "aren't you a lovely pair of young men"
There is freedom. And there is Freedom. He's had too much of the latter.
I think he just popped out, then went out and then went out out.
Bringing two topics together, Gove’s —- ?crisis —- is additionally worrying in that he’s about the only sentient member of Cabinet and certainly the only one who is thinking about the Union.
It may even be that the slow failure of Brexit is contributing to his mental health issues.
If Govey wants to go out on the razz fuelled by marching powder to embrace young gentlemen then good for him. He's been stuck in a lie for long enough, let the man live.
I am very much live and let live.
But you and I are both old enough in the tooth though to recognise mental health issues when we see them.
Define mental health. He may well be depressed as so many of us have been. Brown was a heavy user of the happy pills yet functionally seemed OK.
TBH the thing that really made me goggle is that its the early hours and he's off his tits wearing a suit. I'd love to wind the clock back to the previous day - at which point did his politics need to be wearing a suit on a Saturday turn into "lets go to O'Neills" then into "lets line them up" and then "aren't you a lovely pair of young men"
There is freedom. And there is Freedom. He's had too much of the latter.
I think he just popped out, then went out and then went out out.
Haven't we all done it at some point...admittedly not in my 40s+
Dominic Raab will be 'toast' at Boris Johnson's next Cabinet reshuffle because of his handling of the UK's withdrawal from Afghanistan, it was claimed today
...
One senior Government source told The Times: 'I think he is toast in the next reshuffle. It is a poorly led organisation with a control freak in charge who won't delegate anything. Officials are terrified of him.'
Allies of Mr Raab hit back and said it is 'laughable' to try to pin all of the Government's Afghanistan-related failures on the Foreign Secretary.
Mr. Pete, aye, it was difficult and has been poorly handled by multiple UK governments.
However.
The 2007 referendum on Lisbon should've been held. Integrating endlessly without recourse to the electorate because the main parties all agreed with one another led to the rise of UKIP and then a referendum on the nuclear option rather than binning a referendum (about which we'd been promised a referendum by all major UK parties, a promise subsequently reneged upon by two of the three).
If the UK political class had bothered to either address the concerns of the electorate or make a case for the EU (in addition to not making manifesto pledges then breaking them immediately) we'd be in a better state of affairs.
I don't dispute your final paragraph, but that relates to Brexit as a separate issue. I agree forty years of UK Governments of all stripes blaming the EU for their failures led us to Brexit, but we are where we are with that.
My point was that those promoting the notion of leaving the EU ignored Northern Ireland, and then after the event blamed the inevitable issues Brexit would raise on the GFA. This is a particularly handy device for Johnson apologists.
It is disingenuous of Johnson apologists to blame the GFA in hindsight for the inevitability of a border in the sea, when a UKIP- style Brexit was determined by Johnson over twenty years later.
The issue is that the EU has not shown the thoughtfulness that underpins the GFA
Similarly those who scream “the GFA is sacrosanct” are missing the point
The purpose of the GFA was to navigate between fundamental questions of identity to find a solution that allows different communities to co-exist. It was built on certain assumptions, one of which was that the RoI and the UK were part of a single market.
That is no longer the case.
There are now several options:
1. Amend the GFA to make sure the objective - peace - is achieved. Difficult but may be possible but it needs to EU to butt out and let the UK and RoI figure it out 2. Refuse to adjust the EU rules (which is their right) and insist on a hard land border - unacceptable to the Nationalist community 3. Refuse to adjust the EU rules (which is their right) and insist on a hard sea border - unacceptable to the Unionist community 4. Work collaboratively to find a technical solution to allow the GFA to continue in its current form
1&4 have the potential to be solutions. 2&3 do not.
1 - not preferred by anyone but might be possible with more capable leaders on all sides 2 - rejected by everyone 3 - insisted on by the EU as a matter of principle and tactical advantage 4 - probably the best approach even if it is non trivial
But until the EU grows up and shifts to 4 then we have a problem, Houston
Here we go again. In order to facilitate Johnson's oven ready deal, compromise is required from everyone else.
I remember compromise, it was called Mrs May's deal. Both Johnson and myself tossed it assunder, but for different reasons. With the benefit of hindsight I can confirm I was wrong.
May’s deal wasn’t compromise.
It was staying in the customs Union (a terrible outcome for the UK) until the EU agreed a solution for the border
It didn't put a border in the North Channel though did it?
I detested Mrs May's deal, but as what came next was so considerably worse, kicking the can down the road seems like genius with hindsight.
Dominic Raab will be 'toast' at Boris Johnson's next Cabinet reshuffle because of his handling of the UK's withdrawal from Afghanistan, it was claimed today
...
One senior Government source told The Times: 'I think he is toast in the next reshuffle. It is a poorly led organisation with a control freak in charge who won't delegate anything. Officials are terrified of him.'
Allies of Mr Raab hit back and said it is 'laughable' to try to pin all of the Government's Afghanistan-related failures on the Foreign Secretary.
Bringing two topics together, Gove’s —- ?crisis —- is additionally worrying in that he’s about the only sentient member of Cabinet and certainly the only one who is thinking about the Union.
It may even be that the slow failure of Brexit is contributing to his mental health issues.
If Govey wants to go out on the razz fuelled by marching powder to embrace young gentlemen then good for him. He's been stuck in a lie for long enough, let the man live.
I am very much live and let live.
But you and I are both old enough in the tooth though to recognise mental health issues when we see them.
Define mental health. He may well be depressed as so many of us have been. Brown was a heavy user of the happy pills yet functionally seemed OK.
TBH the thing that really made me goggle is that its the early hours and he's off his tits wearing a suit. I'd love to wind the clock back to the previous day - at which point did his politics need to be wearing a suit on a Saturday turn into "lets go to O'Neills" then into "lets line them up" and then "aren't you a lovely pair of young men"
There is freedom. And there is Freedom. He's had too much of the latter.
I think he just popped out, then went out and then went out out.
Haven't we all done it at some point...admittedly not in my 40s+
I remember a place called "Fusion" off Union Street, in the 70s, wonder if it's still there.
Mr. Pete, aye, it was difficult and has been poorly handled by multiple UK governments.
However.
The 2007 referendum on Lisbon should've been held. Integrating endlessly without recourse to the electorate because the main parties all agreed with one another led to the rise of UKIP and then a referendum on the nuclear option rather than binning a referendum (about which we'd been promised a referendum by all major UK parties, a promise subsequently reneged upon by two of the three).
If the UK political class had bothered to either address the concerns of the electorate or make a case for the EU (in addition to not making manifesto pledges then breaking them immediately) we'd be in a better state of affairs.
I don't dispute your final paragraph, but that relates to Brexit as a separate issue. I agree forty years of UK Governments of all stripes blaming the EU for their failures led us to Brexit, but we are where we are with that.
My point was that those promoting the notion of leaving the EU ignored Northern Ireland, and then after the event blamed the inevitable issues Brexit would raise on the GFA. This is a particularly handy device for Johnson apologists.
It is disingenuous of Johnson apologists to blame the GFA in hindsight for the inevitability of a border in the sea, when a UKIP- style Brexit was determined by Johnson over twenty years later.
The issue is that the EU has not shown the thoughtfulness that underpins the GFA
Similarly those who scream “the GFA is sacrosanct” are missing the point
The purpose of the GFA was to navigate between fundamental questions of identity to find a solution that allows different communities to co-exist. It was built on certain assumptions, one of which was that the RoI and the UK were part of a single market.
That is no longer the case.
There are now several options:
1. Amend the GFA to make sure the objective - peace - is achieved. Difficult but may be possible but it needs to EU to butt out and let the UK and RoI figure it out 2. Refuse to adjust the EU rules (which is their right) and insist on a hard land border - unacceptable to the Nationalist community 3. Refuse to adjust the EU rules (which is their right) and insist on a hard sea border - unacceptable to the Unionist community 4. Work collaboratively to find a technical solution to allow the GFA to continue in its current form
1&4 have the potential to be solutions. 2&3 do not.
1 - not preferred by anyone but might be possible with more capable leaders on all sides 2 - rejected by everyone 3 - insisted on by the EU as a matter of principle and tactical advantage 4 - probably the best approach even if it is non trivial
But until the EU grows up and shifts to 4 then we have a problem, Houston
Here we go again. In order to facilitate Johnson's oven ready deal, compromise is required from everyone else.
I remember compromise, it was called Mrs May's deal. Both Johnson and myself tossed it assunder, but for different reasons. With the benefit of hindsight I can confirm I was wrong.
May’s deal wasn’t compromise.
It was staying in the customs Union (a terrible outcome for the UK) until the EU agreed a solution for the border
We are where we are. The challenge now is how we stop NI from permanently fracturing off. The two zone GB/NI customs areas are not sustainable or even workable. But as we insist that we have to be able to diverge from EEA standards a border has to go somewhere.
It can't go on the island - the "digital border" guff has been laughed away and we refused to wait for it to be invented. It can't go down the Irish Sea. And ROI won't quit the EEA to suit England.
We knew this from the start. So what is our proposed solution? Its all very well telling the EU or ROI to compromise but this is our doing not theirs. Was our entire solution that they would yield to our will?
Why should we stop NI from permanently fracturing off?
Why should people in NI be worth 2/3rds of a person in the Republic?
I am a democrat - if NI votes for reunification then we absolutely let them go. If they vote to stay then we need to fix the border fiasco.
In either case you are absolutely right that their economy needs significant recovery work. Its a beautiful island and they strike me as lovely people as long as you don;t talk nationality...
Dominic Raab will be 'toast' at Boris Johnson's next Cabinet reshuffle because of his handling of the UK's withdrawal from Afghanistan, it was claimed today
...
One senior Government source told The Times: 'I think he is toast in the next reshuffle. It is a poorly led organisation with a control freak in charge who won't delegate anything. Officials are terrified of him.'
Allies of Mr Raab hit back and said it is 'laughable' to try to pin all of the Government's Afghanistan-related failures on the Foreign Secretary.
Also, what does the GFA say about what happens after a referendum? Say the status quo won, is there then a set time period in which another vote couldn’t happen?
And does the GFA end if the referendum was won by the nationalists? Could the people of NI change their minds and reverse the decision?
A united Ireland makes sense on a number of points, but occasionally people stumble into arguing for it on the basis that both current entities are in the same island so should be together or words to that effect, which I doubt they hold consistently for other islands like hispaniola, new guinea or Britain, as if islands are required to have unified politics.
The partition of Ireland is a historical anomaly, driven by decisions hundreds of years ago and then a political miscalculation by Carson combined with shameless manipulation and opportunism by Craig. It were better that it had never happened.
Unfortunately we are where we are - unless and until our brothers and sisters in the North chose differently they remain part of the United kingdom (which is why @Philip_Thompson ‘s approach - “good riddance” - is so inappropriate)
Its an anomaly that should have never happened that has been almost criminally devastating to the people of Northern Ireland.
Unless I'm very much mistaken Northern Ireland was the relatively wealthier part of Ireland when partition happened. Now its completely the other way around as quite frankly the Republic has in recent decades much better managed their own business than the United Kingdom has managed Northern Ireland.
Which is hardly a surprise because the people of Northern Ireland are quite frankly a forgotten irrelevance to British politics. They're not even a part of Britain proper and the British parties don't even stand properly in Northern Ireland either.
Median full time salary in Northern Ireland is £28,000 Median full time salary in the Republic of Ireland is €48,946 which converts to £42,000
What possible good reason is there that the people of Northern Ireland should be worth 2/3rds of a person just over the border? Its a disgraceful and shameful situation and I unashamedly will say good riddance to it the day that the people in NI vote to end this ridiculous mess that should have never occurred. That's entirely appropriate in my eyes.
Yes well we would expect no different from a republican, non Unionist, non conservative as you are.
Some of us proper Conservatives however remain committed to our Unionist brothers across the sea.
The Republic of course has no NHS either unlike the UK, it has hospital charges instead which pay for its very low taxes to boost its median income. It also has investment from the EU you voted to leave
So committed to the union you want to continue to impoverish your "brothers" [and forgotten sisters no doubt] across the sea?
The union has failed Northern Ireland because the people of Northern Ireland are alternatively either forgotten about, misunderstood or treated as an inconvenience by their "brethren".
Self determination works better than subsidies which is why no amount of "subsidising" NI has made them succeed like the Republics self-determination has allowed them to succeed.
I wonder which is better off for a household's income - avoiding a £50 charge rarely needed, or £14,000 extra in annual salary? 🤔
Every region and country of the UK is net subsidised apart from London, the South East and East.
On that basis the only parts of the UK left would be those 3 regions.
Ireland has also had vast subsidy from the EU, as almost every development project there has had EU funding.
It also benefits from very low corporation tax attracting multinational companies which Biden and the G7 want to end
I suspect they are also benefiting from UK companies getting a foothold in Ireland to make trading with the rest of the EU easier. Also just as a matter of interest, Ireland may have benefitted from subsidies, like a lot of EU countries, but in return they joined a free trade area and customs Union etc. It's a shame we never made use of EU subsidies as much when we were in.
Also, what does the GFA say about what happens after a referendum? Say the status quo won, is there then a set time period in which another vote couldn’t happen?
And does the GFA end if the referendum was won by the nationalists? Could the people of NI change their minds and reverse the decision?
Referendums cannot be held for 7 years after the previous one under the GFA.
Even if a border poll was held and Nationalists won hard to see how powersharing at Stormont could be ended and direct rule imposed by Dublin on still Protestant majority Antrim, East Belfast, East Londonderry etc while maintaining the peace
Dominic Raab will be 'toast' at Boris Johnson's next Cabinet reshuffle because of his handling of the UK's withdrawal from Afghanistan, it was claimed today
...
One senior Government source told The Times: 'I think he is toast in the next reshuffle. It is a poorly led organisation with a control freak in charge who won't delegate anything. Officials are terrified of him.'
Allies of Mr Raab hit back and said it is 'laughable' to try to pin all of the Government's Afghanistan-related failures on the Foreign Secretary.
Also, what does the GFA say about what happens after a referendum? Say the status quo won, is there then a set time period in which another vote couldn’t happen?
And does the GFA end if the referendum was won by the nationalists? Could the people of NI change their minds and reverse the decision?
Mr. Pete, it seemed bizarre to me that pro-EU MPs didn't even attempt (they had three shots) to slip in a confirmatory referendum clause and back May's deal.
By what means would they get something better? And, if they opposed her deal, what alternative except a harder departure was on the table?
Also, what does the GFA say about what happens after a referendum? Say the status quo won, is there then a set time period in which another vote couldn’t happen?
And does the GFA end if the referendum was won by the nationalists? Could the people of NI change their minds and reverse the decision?
Minimum seven year gap between plebiscites.
The GFA ends the moment NI joins the republic.
Is geared to stop any pre partition problems.
Seven years isn’t very long, so I guess there’s not much of a disincentive for nationalists to demand a referendum.
EDIT: Whereas in Scotland, the SNP have to win next time, because there won’t be third referendum.
Ha, no. I won't be doing that. Stick with the ultra safe "politically right of centre". Any case, my def of a Tory is as discussed (and I think accepted by all of good faith and standing) the other day and Malcolm fails it unless he's secretly voting for them.
It's an interesting indication of how much the Tory brand has trashed itself in Scotland and how it long predates the current bunch of morally vacant chancers. You'd think anyone right of centre would at least have a look at 'the most successful political party in history' or whatever the self-praising bit of bullshit it is that Tories like to attach to themselves, but no. Instead just to reach a very distant second the SCons have to grub about for some pretty seamy votes, exemplified by the bunch of quasi-fascist goons marching through Glasgow and singing racist songs yesterday.
Mr. Pete, it seemed bizarre to me that pro-EU MPs didn't even attempt (they had three shots) to slip in a confirmatory referendum clause and back May's deal.
By what means would they get something better? And, if they opposed her deal, what alternative except a harder departure was on the table?
If Labour had backed Mrs May’s deal, they’d have torn the government in half, and we’d quite likely have a PM Corbyn by now - but they were more interested in trying to engineer a second referendum without explicitly voting for one, than they were in trying to bring down the government.
(Oh, and I’m very pleased I was working yesterday, and didn’t bet on that farce in Belgium).
F1: as an aside, Ladbrokes considered my bets lost rather than voiding them.
Although it's against me, I agree with the decision. If I'd backed Russell for a podium and they'd counted the result as void, I'd be pretty pissed off.
That said, some punters will be grumpy. But it's the right decision by the bookie.
A united Ireland makes sense on a number of points, but occasionally people stumble into arguing for it on the basis that both current entities are in the same island so should be together or words to that effect, which I doubt they hold consistently for other islands like hispaniola, new guinea or Britain, as if islands are required to have unified politics.
The partition of Ireland is a historical anomaly, driven by decisions hundreds of years ago and then a political miscalculation by Carson combined with shameless manipulation and opportunism by Craig. It were better that it had never happened.
Unfortunately we are where we are - unless and until our brothers and sisters in the North chose differently they remain part of the United kingdom (which is why @Philip_Thompson ‘s approach - “good riddance” - is so inappropriate)
Its an anomaly that should have never happened that has been almost criminally devastating to the people of Northern Ireland.
Unless I'm very much mistaken Northern Ireland was the relatively wealthier part of Ireland when partition happened. Now its completely the other way around as quite frankly the Republic has in recent decades much better managed their own business than the United Kingdom has managed Northern Ireland.
Which is hardly a surprise because the people of Northern Ireland are quite frankly a forgotten irrelevance to British politics. They're not even a part of Britain proper and the British parties don't even stand properly in Northern Ireland either.
Median full time salary in Northern Ireland is £28,000 Median full time salary in the Republic of Ireland is €48,946 which converts to £42,000
What possible good reason is there that the people of Northern Ireland should be worth 2/3rds of a person just over the border? Its a disgraceful and shameful situation and I unashamedly will say good riddance to it the day that the people in NI vote to end this ridiculous mess that should have never occurred. That's entirely appropriate in my eyes.
Yes well we would expect no different from a republican, non Unionist, non conservative as you are.
Some of us proper Conservatives however remain committed to our Unionist brothers across the sea.
The Republic of course has no NHS either unlike the UK, it has hospital charges instead which pay for its very low taxes to boost its median income. It also has investment from the EU you voted to leave
So committed to the union you want to continue to impoverish your "brothers" [and forgotten sisters no doubt] across the sea?
The union has failed Northern Ireland because the people of Northern Ireland are alternatively either forgotten about, misunderstood or treated as an inconvenience by their "brethren".
Self determination works better than subsidies which is why no amount of "subsidising" NI has made them succeed like the Republics self-determination has allowed them to succeed.
I wonder which is better off for a household's income - avoiding a £50 charge rarely needed, or £14,000 extra in annual salary? 🤔
Every region and country of the UK is net subsidised apart from London, the South East and East.
On that basis the only parts of the UK left would be those 3 regions.
Ireland has also had vast subsidy from the EU, as almost every development project there has had EU funding.
It also benefits from very low corporation tax attracting multinational companies which Biden and the G7 want to end
I suspect they are also benefiting from UK companies getting a foothold in Ireland to make trading with the rest of the EU easier. Also just as a matter of interest, Ireland may have benefitted from subsidies, like a lot of EU countries, but in return they joined a free trade area and customs Union etc. It's a shame we never made use of EU subsidies as much when we were in.
The UK would have had to have a significantly lower GDP to receive vast subsidies from the EU. Instead it got its own recycled money back (well, a small fraction of it).
Mr. Pete, it seemed bizarre to me that pro-EU MPs didn't even attempt (they had three shots) to slip in a confirmatory referendum clause and back May's deal.
By what means would they get something better? And, if they opposed her deal, what alternative except a harder departure was on the table?
If Labour had backed Mrs May’s deal, they’d have torn the government in half, and we’d quite likely have a PM Corbyn by now - but they were more interested in trying to engineer a second referendum without explicitly voting for one, than they were in trying to bring down the government.
(Oh, and I’m very pleased I was working yesterday, and didn’t bet on that farce in Belgium).
The irony of course was that Corbyn was not at all interested in a second referendum as is detailed in some detail, in "Get Out".
It was John McDonnell who really pushed it, in the end
Mr. Pete, aye, it was difficult and has been poorly handled by multiple UK governments.
However.
The 2007 referendum on Lisbon should've been held. Integrating endlessly without recourse to the electorate because the main parties all agreed with one another led to the rise of UKIP and then a referendum on the nuclear option rather than binning a referendum (about which we'd been promised a referendum by all major UK parties, a promise subsequently reneged upon by two of the three).
If the UK political class had bothered to either address the concerns of the electorate or make a case for the EU (in addition to not making manifesto pledges then breaking them immediately) we'd be in a better state of affairs.
I don't dispute your final paragraph, but that relates to Brexit as a separate issue. I agree forty years of UK Governments of all stripes blaming the EU for their failures led us to Brexit, but we are where we are with that.
My point was that those promoting the notion of leaving the EU ignored Northern Ireland, and then after the event blamed the inevitable issues Brexit would raise on the GFA. This is a particularly handy device for Johnson apologists.
It is disingenuous of Johnson apologists to blame the GFA in hindsight for the inevitability of a border in the sea, when a UKIP- style Brexit was determined by Johnson over twenty years later.
The issue is that the EU has not shown the thoughtfulness that underpins the GFA
Similarly those who scream “the GFA is sacrosanct” are missing the point
The purpose of the GFA was to navigate between fundamental questions of identity to find a solution that allows different communities to co-exist. It was built on certain assumptions, one of which was that the RoI and the UK were part of a single market.
That is no longer the case.
There are now several options:
1. Amend the GFA to make sure the objective - peace - is achieved. Difficult but may be possible but it needs to EU to butt out and let the UK and RoI figure it out 2. Refuse to adjust the EU rules (which is their right) and insist on a hard land border - unacceptable to the Nationalist community 3. Refuse to adjust the EU rules (which is their right) and insist on a hard sea border - unacceptable to the Unionist community 4. Work collaboratively to find a technical solution to allow the GFA to continue in its current form
1&4 have the potential to be solutions. 2&3 do not.
1 - not preferred by anyone but might be possible with more capable leaders on all sides 2 - rejected by everyone 3 - insisted on by the EU as a matter of principle and tactical advantage 4 - probably the best approach even if it is non trivial
But until the EU grows up and shifts to 4 then we have a problem, Houston
This problem is one of the reasons Brexit won in 2016. Clear away the fog, and what you see is a trade association telling independent states, UK and RoI, what they can and cannot do in relation to issues which touch on peace and civil safety. Once you see this the whole thing is either crackers or part of a project to morph from a trade association into a state.
That just looks like general incompetence as opposed to the whiff of corruption. Getting rid of Ministers for mere incompetence would be a very dangerous precedent.
Does anyone actually want a referendum in NI? The losers would be incredibly bitter and goodness only knows what the consequences might be.
QTWTAIN. Prots don't want it because they might lose. Catholics (and RoI) don't want it because they might win. Alliance don't want it because they would have to have an opinion. Isn't NI politics great.
1. The DUP effectively did not have any choice in backing Brexit or facilitating it. It’s clear that pro-Brexit voters would have chosen Brexit over keeping NI in the Union if the NI problem was seen to be blocking Brexit. So allowing the NI tail to wag the England / Wales dog was never going to happen;
2. I’m sceptical of these polls now showing such high support for a United Ireland. Wait until you get into a campaign and NI voters suddenly realise they have to pay for their GP visits and medical treatment if they become part of an United Ireland
Identity overpowers economic considerations as Brexit and Trump demonstrate.
I don't think so. People may not be sensitive to forecasts of declines in GDP per capita, but they are sure as fuck sensitive to buses which say "Let's start paying £50 a pop per GP visit if our gross income exceeds £14,000" which seems to be the case in Ireland. Killer point from @MrEd.
The prospect of a united Ireland is not going founder on the rocks of fucking GP charges. If necessary the HSE will reform (or promise to reform) the system just enough to obfuscate and neutralise the issue.
If anything's going to kill off reunification it'll be the plain fact that Northern Ireland is a very expensive pain in the backside. The voters of the Republic might be delighted to welcome into the fold the (presumably very pissed off) 40% of the Northern populace that identifies as "British only" and have their taxes shoot through the roof to keep them in the style to which they are accustomed, but I doubt it.
The North is heavily subsidised. Yes, the Republic is rich, but OTOH Great Britain is 13 times its size and can more readily shoulder the burden. Follow the money.
Which is precisely why NI should be cut free.
Why is NI a burden? Why have we contributed so much and seen so little return for it?
Why can the Republic be rich, England be rich, but NI is a backwater burden?
The union isn't working.
NI is richer than the North East of England in terms of average house price and as much a part of the UK as it is
Hence the levelling up agenda for the North, though it's worth noting that the North East does not remotely get the same funding as NI has which is money poured permanently down the drain.
There is nothing preventing NI from catching up with the Republic besides the failed union.
There is nothing wrong with the Union and the North East gets plenty of net subsidy from London and the South East too.
The Republic has lower taxes than the UK but also has charges for hospital visits etc unlike the UK
"We don't get fees cos we're part of the Union." - I can see this on the Better Together bus when the Border Poll happens.
More seriously, relative to Sindy, I detect a certain warmth from you towards the idea of Irish Reunification. Would this be fair or have I misread things very badly?
No. I am a staunch Unionist and want to keep both Scotland and NI in the UK.
However there is a point that the Dublin government of FF and FG is economically right of the Johnson government let alone any future Starmer government, while clearly the current SNP and Green Holyrood government is economically left of both Johnson and Starmer.
So on that point alone joining with Dublin would make more sense for rightwingers than joining with Edinburgh
The current complexion of devolved (or Irish) governments shouldn't really be a factor in a forever decision but I suppose it's bound to be to an extent. I often think the most frustrating position to be in would be a Scot Nat who is on the right of the politics. Such a person is getting a double whammy - sitting in what seems like a permanent waiting room for independence whilst at the same time being governed at home by a left of centre party and - the kicker - having to vote for it. I read many of (eg) Malcolm's posts with this thought in mind.
Just never call Malc a Tory unless you’re prepared for death by turnip.
Ha, no. I won't be doing that. Stick with the ultra safe "politically right of centre". Any case, my def of a Tory is as discussed (and I think accepted by all of good faith and standing) the other day and Malcolm fails it unless he's secretly voting for them.
Dominic Raab will be 'toast' at Boris Johnson's next Cabinet reshuffle because of his handling of the UK's withdrawal from Afghanistan, it was claimed today
...
One senior Government source told The Times: 'I think he is toast in the next reshuffle. It is a poorly led organisation with a control freak in charge who won't delegate anything. Officials are terrified of him.'
Allies of Mr Raab hit back and said it is 'laughable' to try to pin all of the Government's Afghanistan-related failures on the Foreign Secretary.
Dominic Raab will be 'toast' at Boris Johnson's next Cabinet reshuffle because of his handling of the UK's withdrawal from Afghanistan, it was claimed today
...
One senior Government source told The Times: 'I think he is toast in the next reshuffle. It is a poorly led organisation with a control freak in charge who won't delegate anything. Officials are terrified of him.'
Allies of Mr Raab hit back and said it is 'laughable' to try to pin all of the Government's Afghanistan-related failures on the Foreign Secretary.
F1: as an aside, Ladbrokes considered my bets lost rather than voiding them.
Although it's against me, I agree with the decision. If I'd backed Russell for a podium and they'd counted the result as void, I'd be pretty pissed off.
That said, some punters will be grumpy. But it's the right decision by the bookie.
Can't really argue with the bookies. All ire should be directed at those who decided that we would have two laps behind a safety car - to ensure they had a result (and nothing to do with not having to give the visiting punters their money back).
Dominic Raab will be 'toast' at Boris Johnson's next Cabinet reshuffle because of his handling of the UK's withdrawal from Afghanistan, it was claimed today
...
One senior Government source told The Times: 'I think he is toast in the next reshuffle. It is a poorly led organisation with a control freak in charge who won't delegate anything. Officials are terrified of him.'
Allies of Mr Raab hit back and said it is 'laughable' to try to pin all of the Government's Afghanistan-related failures on the Foreign Secretary.
Does anyone actually want a referendum in NI? The losers would be incredibly bitter and goodness only knows what the consequences might be.
No political goal worth having can be obtained through democracy but I'd welcome a referendum from a Marxist accelerationist perspective.
Well there was the minimum wage and banning fox hunting. But I know what you mean. The trouble is to get elected from the Left you have to make an offering that doesn't scare floating voters. And anything that doesn't scare floating voters is by definition not going to change very much. Swords remain in their scabbards. Heads remain on shoulders. Sap remains unrisen. The only way around this that I can see is to first win at the ballot box and then ditch that milk and water manifesto you ran on. The very first day in office Starmer speaks to the nation from number 10. He literally tears up his pathetic little pledge cards, looks straight into the camera and goes, "Right. To business. Step one ..."
Mr. Pete, aye, it was difficult and has been poorly handled by multiple UK governments.
However.
The 2007 referendum on Lisbon should've been held. Integrating endlessly without recourse to the electorate because the main parties all agreed with one another led to the rise of UKIP and then a referendum on the nuclear option rather than binning a referendum (about which we'd been promised a referendum by all major UK parties, a promise subsequently reneged upon by two of the three).
If the UK political class had bothered to either address the concerns of the electorate or make a case for the EU (in addition to not making manifesto pledges then breaking them immediately) we'd be in a better state of affairs.
I don't dispute your final paragraph, but that relates to Brexit as a separate issue. I agree forty years of UK Governments of all stripes blaming the EU for their failures led us to Brexit, but we are where we are with that.
My point was that those promoting the notion of leaving the EU ignored Northern Ireland, and then after the event blamed the inevitable issues Brexit would raise on the GFA. This is a particularly handy device for Johnson apologists.
It is disingenuous of Johnson apologists to blame the GFA in hindsight for the inevitability of a border in the sea, when a UKIP- style Brexit was determined by Johnson over twenty years later.
The issue is that the EU has not shown the thoughtfulness that underpins the GFA
Similarly those who scream “the GFA is sacrosanct” are missing the point
The purpose of the GFA was to navigate between fundamental questions of identity to find a solution that allows different communities to co-exist. It was built on certain assumptions, one of which was that the RoI and the UK were part of a single market.
That is no longer the case.
There are now several options:
1. Amend the GFA to make sure the objective - peace - is achieved. Difficult but may be possible but it needs to EU to butt out and let the UK and RoI figure it out 2. Refuse to adjust the EU rules (which is their right) and insist on a hard land border - unacceptable to the Nationalist community 3. Refuse to adjust the EU rules (which is their right) and insist on a hard sea border - unacceptable to the Unionist community 4. Work collaboratively to find a technical solution to allow the GFA to continue in its current form
1&4 have the potential to be solutions. 2&3 do not.
1 - not preferred by anyone but might be possible with more capable leaders on all sides 2 - rejected by everyone 3 - insisted on by the EU as a matter of principle and tactical advantage 4 - probably the best approach even if it is non trivial
But until the EU grows up and shifts to 4 then we have a problem, Houston
Here we go again. In order to facilitate Johnson's oven ready deal, compromise is required from everyone else.
I remember compromise, it was called Mrs May's deal. Both Johnson and myself tossed it assunder, but for different reasons. With the benefit of hindsight I can confirm I was wrong.
May’s deal wasn’t compromise.
It was staying in the customs Union (a terrible outcome for the UK) until the EU agreed a solution for the border
We are where we are. The challenge now is how we stop NI from permanently fracturing off. The two zone GB/NI customs areas are not sustainable or even workable. But as we insist that we have to be able to diverge from EEA standards a border has to go somewhere.
It can't go on the island - the "digital border" guff has been laughed away and we refused to wait for it to be invented. It can't go down the Irish Sea. And ROI won't quit the EEA to suit England.
We knew this from the start. So what is our proposed solution? Its all very well telling the EU or ROI to compromise but this is our doing not theirs. Was our entire solution that they would yield to our will?
Why should we stop NI from permanently fracturing off?
Why should people in NI be worth 2/3rds of a person in the Republic?
I am a democrat - if NI votes for reunification then we absolutely let them go. If they vote to stay then we need to fix the border fiasco.
In either case you are absolutely right that their economy needs significant recovery work. Its a beautiful island and they strike me as lovely people as long as you don;t talk nationality...
I'm a democrat too, I only want NI to go if they vote for reunification, but that doesn't stop me wanting them to vote for reunification and to support a Yes vote if such a referendum were to occur.
Anyway, the only solution is as it always has been a digital border compromise which needs to be invented. No waiting for it to be invented as you want, if you wait for it to be invented it never will be. Necessity is the mother of invention, once you realise all other solutions are impossible then whatever remains however improbable (or imperfect) is all that remains.
A united Ireland makes sense on a number of points, but occasionally people stumble into arguing for it on the basis that both current entities are in the same island so should be together or words to that effect, which I doubt they hold consistently for other islands like hispaniola, new guinea or Britain, as if islands are required to have unified politics.
The partition of Ireland is a historical anomaly, driven by decisions hundreds of years ago and then a political miscalculation by Carson combined with shameless manipulation and opportunism by Craig. It were better that it had never happened.
Unfortunately we are where we are - unless and until our brothers and sisters in the North chose differently they remain part of the United kingdom (which is why @Philip_Thompson ‘s approach - “good riddance” - is so inappropriate)
Its an anomaly that should have never happened that has been almost criminally devastating to the people of Northern Ireland.
Unless I'm very much mistaken Northern Ireland was the relatively wealthier part of Ireland when partition happened. Now its completely the other way around as quite frankly the Republic has in recent decades much better managed their own business than the United Kingdom has managed Northern Ireland.
Which is hardly a surprise because the people of Northern Ireland are quite frankly a forgotten irrelevance to British politics. They're not even a part of Britain proper and the British parties don't even stand properly in Northern Ireland either.
Median full time salary in Northern Ireland is £28,000 Median full time salary in the Republic of Ireland is €48,946 which converts to £42,000
What possible good reason is there that the people of Northern Ireland should be worth 2/3rds of a person just over the border? Its a disgraceful and shameful situation and I unashamedly will say good riddance to it the day that the people in NI vote to end this ridiculous mess that should have never occurred. That's entirely appropriate in my eyes.
Yes well we would expect no different from a republican, non Unionist, non conservative as you are.
Some of us proper Conservatives however remain committed to our Unionist brothers across the sea.
The Republic of course has no NHS either unlike the UK, it has hospital charges instead which pay for its very low taxes to boost its median income. It also has investment from the EU you voted to leave
So committed to the union you want to continue to impoverish your "brothers" [and forgotten sisters no doubt] across the sea?
The union has failed Northern Ireland because the people of Northern Ireland are alternatively either forgotten about, misunderstood or treated as an inconvenience by their "brethren".
Self determination works better than subsidies which is why no amount of "subsidising" NI has made them succeed like the Republics self-determination has allowed them to succeed.
I wonder which is better off for a household's income - avoiding a £50 charge rarely needed, or £14,000 extra in annual salary? 🤔
Every region and country of the UK is net subsidised apart from London, the South East and East.
On that basis the only parts of the UK left would be those 3 regions.
Ireland has also had vast subsidy from the EU, as almost every development project there has had EU funding.
It also benefits from very low corporation tax attracting multinational companies which Biden and the G7 want to end
I suspect they are also benefiting from UK companies getting a foothold in Ireland to make trading with the rest of the EU easier. Also just as a matter of interest, Ireland may have benefitted from subsidies, like a lot of EU countries, but in return they joined a free trade area and customs Union etc. It's a shame we never made use of EU subsidies as much when we were in.
The UK would have had to have a significantly lower GDP to receive vast subsidies from the EU. Instead it got its own recycled money back (well, a small fraction of it).
We used to receive a lot of subsidies based on a like for like basis I think. I remember a large number of local charities and organisations also received funding from the EU, (CADW etc), in Pembrokeshire. It's a shame the local populace threw it away by putting their cross in the wrong box.
A united Ireland makes sense on a number of points, but occasionally people stumble into arguing for it on the basis that both current entities are in the same island so should be together or words to that effect, which I doubt they hold consistently for other islands like hispaniola, new guinea or Britain, as if islands are required to have unified politics.
The partition of Ireland is a historical anomaly, driven by decisions hundreds of years ago and then a political miscalculation by Carson combined with shameless manipulation and opportunism by Craig. It were better that it had never happened.
Unfortunately we are where we are - unless and until our brothers and sisters in the North chose differently they remain part of the United kingdom (which is why @Philip_Thompson ‘s approach - “good riddance” - is so inappropriate)
Its an anomaly that should have never happened that has been almost criminally devastating to the people of Northern Ireland.
Unless I'm very much mistaken Northern Ireland was the relatively wealthier part of Ireland when partition happened. Now its completely the other way around as quite frankly the Republic has in recent decades much better managed their own business than the United Kingdom has managed Northern Ireland.
Which is hardly a surprise because the people of Northern Ireland are quite frankly a forgotten irrelevance to British politics. They're not even a part of Britain proper and the British parties don't even stand properly in Northern Ireland either.
Median full time salary in Northern Ireland is £28,000 Median full time salary in the Republic of Ireland is €48,946 which converts to £42,000
What possible good reason is there that the people of Northern Ireland should be worth 2/3rds of a person just over the border? Its a disgraceful and shameful situation and I unashamedly will say good riddance to it the day that the people in NI vote to end this ridiculous mess that should have never occurred. That's entirely appropriate in my eyes.
Yes well we would expect no different from a republican, non Unionist, non conservative as you are.
Some of us proper Conservatives however remain committed to our Unionist brothers across the sea.
The Republic of course has no NHS either unlike the UK, it has hospital charges instead which pay for its very low taxes to boost its median income. It also has investment from the EU you voted to leave
So committed to the union you want to continue to impoverish your "brothers" [and forgotten sisters no doubt] across the sea?
The union has failed Northern Ireland because the people of Northern Ireland are alternatively either forgotten about, misunderstood or treated as an inconvenience by their "brethren".
Self determination works better than subsidies which is why no amount of "subsidising" NI has made them succeed like the Republics self-determination has allowed them to succeed.
I wonder which is better off for a household's income - avoiding a £50 charge rarely needed, or £14,000 extra in annual salary? 🤔
Every region and country of the UK is net subsidised apart from London, the South East and East.
On that basis the only parts of the UK left would be those 3 regions.
Ireland has also had vast subsidy from the EU, as almost every development project there has had EU funding.
It also benefits from very low corporation tax attracting multinational companies which Biden and the G7 want to end
I suspect they are also benefiting from UK companies getting a foothold in Ireland to make trading with the rest of the EU easier. Also just as a matter of interest, Ireland may have benefitted from subsidies, like a lot of EU countries, but in return they joined a free trade area and customs Union etc. It's a shame we never made use of EU subsidies as much when we were in.
The UK would have had to have a significantly lower GDP to receive vast subsidies from the EU. Instead it got its own recycled money back (well, a small fraction of it).
We used to receive a lot of subsidies based on a like for like basis I think. I remember a large number of local charities and organisations also received funding from the EU, (CADW etc), in Pembrokeshire. It's a shame the local populace threw it away by putting their cross in the wrong box.
No you didn't get any subsidies from the EU. You got a fraction of the UK's own money back.
If you give me a £20 note, then I give you back a £10 note along with a letter saying "this £10 note has been given to you by Philip Thompson", then is that a good arrangement for you or not?
A united Ireland makes sense on a number of points, but occasionally people stumble into arguing for it on the basis that both current entities are in the same island so should be together or words to that effect, which I doubt they hold consistently for other islands like hispaniola, new guinea or Britain, as if islands are required to have unified politics.
The partition of Ireland is a historical anomaly, driven by decisions hundreds of years ago and then a political miscalculation by Carson combined with shameless manipulation and opportunism by Craig. It were better that it had never happened.
Unfortunately we are where we are - unless and until our brothers and sisters in the North chose differently they remain part of the United kingdom (which is why @Philip_Thompson ‘s approach - “good riddance” - is so inappropriate)
Its an anomaly that should have never happened that has been almost criminally devastating to the people of Northern Ireland.
Unless I'm very much mistaken Northern Ireland was the relatively wealthier part of Ireland when partition happened. Now its completely the other way around as quite frankly the Republic has in recent decades much better managed their own business than the United Kingdom has managed Northern Ireland.
Which is hardly a surprise because the people of Northern Ireland are quite frankly a forgotten irrelevance to British politics. They're not even a part of Britain proper and the British parties don't even stand properly in Northern Ireland either.
Median full time salary in Northern Ireland is £28,000 Median full time salary in the Republic of Ireland is €48,946 which converts to £42,000
What possible good reason is there that the people of Northern Ireland should be worth 2/3rds of a person just over the border? Its a disgraceful and shameful situation and I unashamedly will say good riddance to it the day that the people in NI vote to end this ridiculous mess that should have never occurred. That's entirely appropriate in my eyes.
Yes well we would expect no different from a republican, non Unionist, non conservative as you are.
Some of us proper Conservatives however remain committed to our Unionist brothers across the sea.
The Republic of course has no NHS either unlike the UK, it has hospital charges instead which pay for its very low taxes to boost its median income. It also has investment from the EU you voted to leave
So committed to the union you want to continue to impoverish your "brothers" [and forgotten sisters no doubt] across the sea?
The union has failed Northern Ireland because the people of Northern Ireland are alternatively either forgotten about, misunderstood or treated as an inconvenience by their "brethren".
Self determination works better than subsidies which is why no amount of "subsidising" NI has made them succeed like the Republics self-determination has allowed them to succeed.
I wonder which is better off for a household's income - avoiding a £50 charge rarely needed, or £14,000 extra in annual salary? 🤔
Every region and country of the UK is net subsidised apart from London, the South East and East.
On that basis the only parts of the UK left would be those 3 regions.
Ireland has also had vast subsidy from the EU, as almost every development project there has had EU funding.
It also benefits from very low corporation tax attracting multinational companies which Biden and the G7 want to end
I suspect they are also benefiting from UK companies getting a foothold in Ireland to make trading with the rest of the EU easier. Also just as a matter of interest, Ireland may have benefitted from subsidies, like a lot of EU countries, but in return they joined a free trade area and customs Union etc. It's a shame we never made use of EU subsidies as much when we were in.
The UK would have had to have a significantly lower GDP to receive vast subsidies from the EU. Instead it got its own recycled money back (well, a small fraction of it).
We used to receive a lot of subsidies based on a like for like basis I think. I remember a large number of local charities and organisations also received funding from the EU, (CADW etc), in Pembrokeshire. It's a shame the local populace threw it away by putting their cross in the wrong box.
That's just the UK's money recycled back, it isn't a subsidy.
Mr. Pete, it seemed bizarre to me that pro-EU MPs didn't even attempt (they had three shots) to slip in a confirmatory referendum clause and back May's deal.
By what means would they get something better? And, if they opposed her deal, what alternative except a harder departure was on the table?
If Labour had backed Mrs May’s deal, they’d have torn the government in half, and we’d quite likely have a PM Corbyn by now - but they were more interested in trying to engineer a second referendum without explicitly voting for one, than they were in trying to bring down the government.
(Oh, and I’m very pleased I was working yesterday, and didn’t bet on that farce in Belgium).
The irony of course was that Corbyn was not at all interested in a second referendum as is detailed in some detail, in "Get Out".
It was John McDonnell who really pushed it, in the end
Yes, left to his own devices Corbyn would have voted May's deal through, but there was no way the party would have allowed that. The counterfactuals in this regard are for fun only.
Does anyone actually want a referendum in NI? The losers would be incredibly bitter and goodness only knows what the consequences might be.
No political goal worth having can be obtained through democracy but I'd welcome a referendum from a Marxist accelerationist perspective.
Interesting. Don’t you think accelerationism is remarkably dangerous? The main historical examples of accelerationism I can think of would be the tactics promoted by the Comintern during the “Third Period” and the CPUSA's line during the early 30's ("It has to get worse before it can get better."). The former led to the German Communist Party proclaiming things like "After Hitler, us!" (which was true to an extent I guess - but not in the way hoped for).
Mr. Pete, it seemed bizarre to me that pro-EU MPs didn't even attempt (they had three shots) to slip in a confirmatory referendum clause and back May's deal.
By what means would they get something better? And, if they opposed her deal, what alternative except a harder departure was on the table?
If Labour had backed Mrs May’s deal, they’d have torn the government in half, and we’d quite likely have a PM Corbyn by now - but they were more interested in trying to engineer a second referendum without explicitly voting for one, than they were in trying to bring down the government.
(Oh, and I’m very pleased I was working yesterday, and didn’t bet on that farce in Belgium).
The irony of course was that Corbyn was not at all interested in a second referendum as is detailed in some detail, in "Get Out".
It was John McDonnell who really pushed it, in the end
Yes, left to his own devices Corbyn would have voted May's deal through, but there was no way the party would have allowed that. The counterfactuals in this regard are for fun only.
He was leader of the party and won two leadership elections. Who would have stopped him from allowing that?
Do you mean his Shadow Brexit Secretary perhaps who was behind the failed scheming to get a second referendum? Whatever happened to him I wonder?
Does anyone actually want a referendum in NI? The losers would be incredibly bitter and goodness only knows what the consequences might be.
No political goal worth having can be obtained through democracy but I'd welcome a referendum from a Marxist accelerationist perspective.
Interesting. Don’t you think accelerationism is remarkably dangerous? The main historical examples of accelerationism I can think of would be the tactics promoted by the Comintern during the “Third Period” and the CPUSA's line during the early 30's ("It has to get worse before it can get better."). The former led to the German Communist Party proclaiming things like "After Hitler, us!" (which was true to an extent I guess - but not in the way hoped for).
What about John Major’s “If it’s not hurting, it’s not working”? That led to Tony Blair.
Does anyone actually want a referendum in NI? The losers would be incredibly bitter and goodness only knows what the consequences might be.
No political goal worth having can be obtained through democracy but I'd welcome a referendum from a Marxist accelerationist perspective.
Interesting. Don’t you think accelerationism is remarkably dangerous? The main historical examples of accelerationism I can think of would be the tactics promoted by the Comintern during the “Third Period” and the CPUSA's line during the early 30's ("It has to get worse before it can get better."). The former led to the German Communist Party proclaiming things like "After Hitler, us!" (which was true to an extent I guess - but not in the way hoped for).
What about John Major’s “If it’s not hurting, it’s not working”? That led to Tony Blair.
Never had Back to Basics or Cones Hotlines down as Marxist Accelerationism TBH.
A united Ireland makes sense on a number of points, but occasionally people stumble into arguing for it on the basis that both current entities are in the same island so should be together or words to that effect, which I doubt they hold consistently for other islands like hispaniola, new guinea or Britain, as if islands are required to have unified politics.
The partition of Ireland is a historical anomaly, driven by decisions hundreds of years ago and then a political miscalculation by Carson combined with shameless manipulation and opportunism by Craig. It were better that it had never happened.
Unfortunately we are where we are - unless and until our brothers and sisters in the North chose differently they remain part of the United kingdom (which is why @Philip_Thompson ‘s approach - “good riddance” - is so inappropriate)
Its an anomaly that should have never happened that has been almost criminally devastating to the people of Northern Ireland.
Unless I'm very much mistaken Northern Ireland was the relatively wealthier part of Ireland when partition happened. Now its completely the other way around as quite frankly the Republic has in recent decades much better managed their own business than the United Kingdom has managed Northern Ireland.
Which is hardly a surprise because the people of Northern Ireland are quite frankly a forgotten irrelevance to British politics. They're not even a part of Britain proper and the British parties don't even stand properly in Northern Ireland either.
Median full time salary in Northern Ireland is £28,000 Median full time salary in the Republic of Ireland is €48,946 which converts to £42,000
What possible good reason is there that the people of Northern Ireland should be worth 2/3rds of a person just over the border? Its a disgraceful and shameful situation and I unashamedly will say good riddance to it the day that the people in NI vote to end this ridiculous mess that should have never occurred. That's entirely appropriate in my eyes.
Yes well we would expect no different from a republican, non Unionist, non conservative as you are.
Some of us proper Conservatives however remain committed to our Unionist brothers across the sea.
The Republic of course has no NHS either unlike the UK, it has hospital charges instead which pay for its very low taxes to boost its median income. It also has investment from the EU you voted to leave
So committed to the union you want to continue to impoverish your "brothers" [and forgotten sisters no doubt] across the sea?
The union has failed Northern Ireland because the people of Northern Ireland are alternatively either forgotten about, misunderstood or treated as an inconvenience by their "brethren".
Self determination works better than subsidies which is why no amount of "subsidising" NI has made them succeed like the Republics self-determination has allowed them to succeed.
I wonder which is better off for a household's income - avoiding a £50 charge rarely needed, or £14,000 extra in annual salary? 🤔
Every region and country of the UK is net subsidised apart from London, the South East and East.
On that basis the only parts of the UK left would be those 3 regions.
Ireland has also had vast subsidy from the EU, as almost every development project there has had EU funding.
It also benefits from very low corporation tax attracting multinational companies which Biden and the G7 want to end
I suspect they are also benefiting from UK companies getting a foothold in Ireland to make trading with the rest of the EU easier. Also just as a matter of interest, Ireland may have benefitted from subsidies, like a lot of EU countries, but in return they joined a free trade area and customs Union etc. It's a shame we never made use of EU subsidies as much when we were in.
The UK would have had to have a significantly lower GDP to receive vast subsidies from the EU. Instead it got its own recycled money back (well, a small fraction of it).
We used to receive a lot of subsidies based on a like for like basis I think. I remember a large number of local charities and organisations also received funding from the EU, (CADW etc), in Pembrokeshire. It's a shame the local populace threw it away by putting their cross in the wrong box.
No you didn't get any subsidies from the EU. You got a fraction of the UK's own money back.
If you give me a £20 note, then I give you back a £10 note along with a letter saying "this £10 note has been given to you by Philip Thompson", then is that a good arrangement for you or not?
It depends what the other £10 was for, such as access to free trade markets helping to grow our trade? You Tories are all the same, never telling the whole story.
It reminds me of the old joke about a Bed+Breakfast.
"The morning bill was larger than usual, and when queried the proprietor says there is an extra charge of £1 for the cruet set. The customer said that he didn't use it, yet the proprietor said it was there anyway. In retaliation the customer gave back a bill for £10, for sleeping with his wife. The proprietor said no way, it wasn't me. The customer replied 'but she was there anyway'.
Also, what does the GFA say about what happens after a referendum? Say the status quo won, is there then a set time period in which another vote couldn’t happen?
And does the GFA end if the referendum was won by the nationalists? Could the people of NI change their minds and reverse the decision?
Referendums cannot be held for 7 years after the previous one under the GFA.
Even if a border poll was held and Nationalists won hard to see how powersharing at Stormont could be ended and direct rule imposed by Dublin on still Protestant majority Antrim, East Belfast, East Londonderry etc while maintaining the peace
Because it's a democracy? I say that as a suck-it-up, I lost former Remainer.
This thread is ridiculous even for Eric Feigl-Ding's standards. There have been 101 C.1.2 strains detected globally to date (89 in South Africa). It shows no evidence of increasing in frequency, and it may be extinct by now.....
....The C.1.2 lineage is not considered as a Variant of Concern (VoC) or a variant under Investigation (VuI).
A united Ireland makes sense on a number of points, but occasionally people stumble into arguing for it on the basis that both current entities are in the same island so should be together or words to that effect, which I doubt they hold consistently for other islands like hispaniola, new guinea or Britain, as if islands are required to have unified politics.
The partition of Ireland is a historical anomaly, driven by decisions hundreds of years ago and then a political miscalculation by Carson combined with shameless manipulation and opportunism by Craig. It were better that it had never happened.
Unfortunately we are where we are - unless and until our brothers and sisters in the North chose differently they remain part of the United kingdom (which is why @Philip_Thompson ‘s approach - “good riddance” - is so inappropriate)
Its an anomaly that should have never happened that has been almost criminally devastating to the people of Northern Ireland.
Unless I'm very much mistaken Northern Ireland was the relatively wealthier part of Ireland when partition happened. Now its completely the other way around as quite frankly the Republic has in recent decades much better managed their own business than the United Kingdom has managed Northern Ireland.
Which is hardly a surprise because the people of Northern Ireland are quite frankly a forgotten irrelevance to British politics. They're not even a part of Britain proper and the British parties don't even stand properly in Northern Ireland either.
Median full time salary in Northern Ireland is £28,000 Median full time salary in the Republic of Ireland is €48,946 which converts to £42,000
What possible good reason is there that the people of Northern Ireland should be worth 2/3rds of a person just over the border? Its a disgraceful and shameful situation and I unashamedly will say good riddance to it the day that the people in NI vote to end this ridiculous mess that should have never occurred. That's entirely appropriate in my eyes.
Yes well we would expect no different from a republican, non Unionist, non conservative as you are.
Some of us proper Conservatives however remain committed to our Unionist brothers across the sea.
The Republic of course has no NHS either unlike the UK, it has hospital charges instead which pay for its very low taxes to boost its median income. It also has investment from the EU you voted to leave
So committed to the union you want to continue to impoverish your "brothers" [and forgotten sisters no doubt] across the sea?
The union has failed Northern Ireland because the people of Northern Ireland are alternatively either forgotten about, misunderstood or treated as an inconvenience by their "brethren".
Self determination works better than subsidies which is why no amount of "subsidising" NI has made them succeed like the Republics self-determination has allowed them to succeed.
I wonder which is better off for a household's income - avoiding a £50 charge rarely needed, or £14,000 extra in annual salary? 🤔
Every region and country of the UK is net subsidised apart from London, the South East and East.
On that basis the only parts of the UK left would be those 3 regions.
Ireland has also had vast subsidy from the EU, as almost every development project there has had EU funding.
It also benefits from very low corporation tax attracting multinational companies which Biden and the G7 want to end
I suspect they are also benefiting from UK companies getting a foothold in Ireland to make trading with the rest of the EU easier. Also just as a matter of interest, Ireland may have benefitted from subsidies, like a lot of EU countries, but in return they joined a free trade area and customs Union etc. It's a shame we never made use of EU subsidies as much when we were in.
The UK would have had to have a significantly lower GDP to receive vast subsidies from the EU. Instead it got its own recycled money back (well, a small fraction of it).
We used to receive a lot of subsidies based on a like for like basis I think. I remember a large number of local charities and organisations also received funding from the EU, (CADW etc), in Pembrokeshire. It's a shame the local populace threw it away by putting their cross in the wrong box.
No you didn't get any subsidies from the EU. You got a fraction of the UK's own money back.
If you give me a £20 note, then I give you back a £10 note along with a letter saying "this £10 note has been given to you by Philip Thompson", then is that a good arrangement for you or not?
It depends what the other £10 was for, such as access to free trade markets helping to grow our trade? You Tories are all the same, never telling the whole story.
It reminds me of the old joke about a Bed+Breakfast.
"The morning bill was larger than usual, and when queried the proprietor says there is an extra charge of £1 for the cruet set. The customer said that he didn't use it, yet the proprietor said it was there anyway. In retaliation the customer gave back a bill for £10, for sleeping with his wife. The proprietor said no way, it wasn't me. The customer replied 'but she was there anyway'.
You're the one being dishonest and not saying the whole story, claiming that charities and organisations received funding from the EU in Pembrokeshire but the local populace "threw it away". They didn't, there was no such thing as EU money. People in Pembrokeshire got a fraction of their own taxes back recycled to them.
Now you may claim that being net contributors was worthwhile in order to get access to trade markets, in which case make that argument. You're wrong IMHO, but at least that is a credible argument to be had. But to claim people got money from the EU when that was just a tiny fraction of the UK's own money returned back to us having had a massive haircut? That's preposterous.
In Afghan over the past 12 or 18 months the UK should have been winding down operations, getting the people out who we wanted to get out and ensuring that come the deadline it was just the ambassador left ceremoniously getting on board a C30 hold on that's a cassette tape C130 and that should have been it.
Mr. Pete, it seemed bizarre to me that pro-EU MPs didn't even attempt (they had three shots) to slip in a confirmatory referendum clause and back May's deal.
By what means would they get something better? And, if they opposed her deal, what alternative except a harder departure was on the table?
I would have opposed on all three occasions. I was outraged Mrs May brought the same deal back on a one more heave basis.
However, knowing what I know now, I would have voted it through on the first time of asking, such is Johnson's thin gruel deal.
Ha, no. I won't be doing that. Stick with the ultra safe "politically right of centre". Any case, my def of a Tory is as discussed (and I think accepted by all of good faith and standing) the other day and Malcolm fails it unless he's secretly voting for them.
It's an interesting indication of how much the Tory brand has trashed itself in Scotland and how it long predates the current bunch of morally vacant chancers. You'd think anyone right of centre would at least have a look at 'the most successful political party in history' or whatever the self-praising bit of bullshit it is that Tories like to attach to themselves, but no. Instead just to reach a very distant second the SCons have to grub about for some pretty seamy votes, exemplified by the bunch of quasi-fascist goons marching through Glasgow and singing racist songs yesterday.
Yes, saw your Black Shorts clip. Not much of a cuddly Better Together vibe there. To (english) channel Dim Dom Raab, I hadn't really appreciated how much green v orange sectarianism there was in Scotland. There was a quick but memorable scene in Trainspotting 2, come to think of it.
Comments
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-58341916
Similar to what we mentioned on the last thread with the horseracing game finding it harder to attract stable staff.
The latest from our poll tracker:
CON: 40.8% (-0.4)
LAB: 33.8% (+0.2)
LDEM: 10.3% (+0.8)
GRN: 5.6% (+0.1)
via @BritainElects, 24 Aug
Chgs. w/ 23 Jul
All quiet on the polling front...
More:
newstatesman.com/politics/polli…
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1432283467757330432?s=21
It was staying in the customs Union (a terrible outcome for the UK) until the EU agreed a solution for the border
Charles ... "not an unreasonable lacuna..."
Presumably Gove thinks he’s such a hot date that that the lucky lad(y) will have to be paying out if they want some steamy Duchy of Lancaster action.
Said Gove is a million times more of a Unionist than he is a Brexiteer (and he's a staunch Brexiteer.)
Both Gove and Johnson know that if Brexit leads to the breakup of the Union then that will be the first line of their obituaries not Brexit. Unlike Scottish independence they cannot kick the Irish unity referendum into the long grass because of the Good Friday Agreement and the Americans and EU will insist on it being delivered.
Brexit has already come at a heavy price for Gove, his friendship with Dave (pbuh) is well and truly fractured. I know people say Dave and George were close but remember the Goves were godparents to Ivan Cameron.
Though some of his facts are deeply contestable, and some plain wrong, he's well worth reading.
Unless I'm very much mistaken Northern Ireland was the relatively wealthier part of Ireland when partition happened. Now its completely the other way around as quite frankly the Republic has in recent decades much better managed their own business than the United Kingdom has managed Northern Ireland.
Which is hardly a surprise because the people of Northern Ireland are quite frankly a forgotten irrelevance to British politics. They're not even a part of Britain proper and the British parties don't even stand properly in Northern Ireland either.
Median full time salary in Northern Ireland is £28,000
Median full time salary in the Republic of Ireland is €48,946 which converts to £42,000
What possible good reason is there that the people of Northern Ireland should be worth 2/3rds of a person just over the border? Its a disgraceful and shameful situation and I unashamedly will say good riddance to it the day that the people in NI vote to end this ridiculous mess that should have never occurred. That's entirely appropriate in my eyes.
It can't go on the island - the "digital border" guff has been laughed away and we refused to wait for it to be invented. It can't go down the Irish Sea. And ROI won't quit the EEA to suit England.
We knew this from the start. So what is our proposed solution? Its all very well telling the EU or ROI to compromise but this is our doing not theirs. Was our entire solution that they would yield to our will?
Technically as far as Scotland goes though the UK government could refuse indyref2 even if the SNP and Greens were on 100% of the Scottish vote combined as union matters are reserved to Westminster under the Scotland Act 1998
Why should people in NI be worth 2/3rds of a person in the Republic?
Three choice referendum.
1) Remain a part of the UK
2) Unify with the Republic of Ireland
or
3) Become an independent nation outside the UK and ROI.
Some of us proper Conservatives however remain committed to our Unionist brothers across the sea.
The Republic of course has no NHS either unlike the UK, it has hospital charges instead which pay for its very low taxes to boost its median income. It also has investment from the EU you voted to leave
The union has failed Northern Ireland because the people of Northern Ireland are alternatively either forgotten about, misunderstood or treated as an inconvenience by their "brethren".
Self determination works better than subsidies which is why no amount of "subsidising" NI has made them succeed like the Republics self-determination has allowed them to succeed.
I wonder which is better off for a household's income - avoiding a £50 charge rarely needed, or £14,000 extra in annual salary? 🤔
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200102/cmhansrd/vo020410/halltext/20410h02.htm
However that would only occur if there was a Nationalist majority in the rest of Northern Ireland for unity with the Republic
He is every bit as much a conservative as you are, and while I do not agree with @Philip_Thompson on Scots independence, at least there is far more that unites our views as conservatives than anything your strange 'pure' conservative mindset has to offer
At most he is a libertarian Brexiteer who happens to back Boris, he is not a Tory.
Though of course given you both voted for Blair in 2001 when I was voting Tory still there is I accept plenty which links you both politically but it is certainly not absolute commitment to Toryism
...
One senior Government source told The Times: 'I think he is toast in the next reshuffle. It is a poorly led organisation with a control freak in charge who won't delegate anything. Officials are terrified of him.'
Allies of Mr Raab hit back and said it is 'laughable' to try to pin all of the Government's Afghanistan-related failures on the Foreign Secretary.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9939419/amp/Dominic-Raab-toast-reshuffle.html
Ferrets in a sack
On that basis the only parts of the UK left would be those 3 regions.
Ireland has also had vast subsidy from the EU, as almost every development project there has had EU funding.
It also benefits from very low corporation tax attracting multinational companies which Biden and the G7 want to end
They amended their constitution.
That's funny, as he attempted to delegate that infamous crucial telephone call when he was on the beach.
I detested Mrs May's deal, but as what came next was so considerably worse, kicking the can down the road seems like genius with hindsight.
https://twitter.com/PoliticsForAlI/status/1432293564403404801?s=20
In either case you are absolutely right that their economy needs significant recovery work. Its a beautiful island and they strike me as lovely people as long as you don;t talk nationality...
And does the GFA end if the referendum was won by the nationalists? Could the people of NI change their minds and reverse the decision?
Even if a border poll was held and Nationalists won hard to see how powersharing at Stormont could be ended and direct rule imposed by Dublin on still Protestant majority Antrim, East Belfast, East Londonderry etc while maintaining the peace
The GFA ends the moment NI joins the republic.
Is geared to stop any pre partition problems.
By what means would they get something better? And, if they opposed her deal, what alternative except a harder departure was on the table?
EDIT: Whereas in Scotland, the SNP have to win next time, because there won’t be third referendum.
(Oh, and I’m very pleased I was working yesterday, and didn’t bet on that farce in Belgium).
Although it's against me, I agree with the decision. If I'd backed Russell for a podium and they'd counted the result as void, I'd be pretty pissed off.
That said, some punters will be grumpy. But it's the right decision by the bookie.
It was John McDonnell who really pushed it, in the end
One attendee said Jenrick agreed to “engage with our industry” on a matter raised in Q&A.
Govt claim admin error.
https://www.businessinsider.com/robert-jenrick-failed-disclose-meeting-conservative-lobbying-forum-breached-rules-2021-8?r=US&IR=T
Public opinion towards...
Boris Johnson (Con)
Positive: 36.5% (-1.5)
Negative: 49.0% (+4.7)
Keir Starmer (Lab)
Positive: 25.8% (-1.2)
Negative: 44.4% (+5.3)
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1432283467757330432?s=21
Anyway, the only solution is as it always has been a digital border compromise which needs to be invented. No waiting for it to be invented as you want, if you wait for it to be invented it never will be. Necessity is the mother of invention, once you realise all other solutions are impossible then whatever remains however improbable (or imperfect) is all that remains.
We used to receive a lot of subsidies based on a like for like basis I think. I remember a large number of local charities and organisations also received funding from the EU, (CADW etc), in Pembrokeshire. It's a shame the local populace threw it away by putting their cross in the wrong box.
If you give me a £20 note, then I give you back a £10 note along with a letter saying "this £10 note has been given to you by Philip Thompson", then is that a good arrangement for you or not?
Do you mean his Shadow Brexit Secretary perhaps who was behind the failed scheming to get a second referendum? Whatever happened to him I wonder?
It reminds me of the old joke about a Bed+Breakfast.
"The morning bill was larger than usual, and when queried the proprietor says there is an extra charge of £1 for the cruet set. The customer said that he didn't use it, yet the proprietor said it was there anyway. In retaliation the customer gave back a bill for £10, for sleeping with his wife. The proprietor said no way, it wasn't me. The customer replied 'but she was there anyway'.
....The C.1.2 lineage is not considered as a Variant of Concern (VoC) or a variant under Investigation (VuI).
https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1432254613454004224?s=20
Now you may claim that being net contributors was worthwhile in order to get access to trade markets, in which case make that argument. You're wrong IMHO, but at least that is a credible argument to be had. But to claim people got money from the EU when that was just a tiny fraction of the UK's own money returned back to us having had a massive haircut? That's preposterous.
That is why the FCO is culpable.
However, knowing what I know now, I would have voted it through on the first time of asking, such is Johnson's thin gruel deal.
https://www.flightradar24.com/NAG99/28f71cb1
Love Brexit if you must but don't deny that it has completely fucked the ROI/NI situation.