28% of current Tory voters would vote Remain in a second referendum.
23% of Labour voters would vote Leave and 19% of LDs.
Which are smaller numbers. Labour and Lib Dem voters are more united against Brexit than Tory voters are united in favour of it.
Almost identical but the fact there are more Labour Leave seats than Tory Remain seats is more relevant under FPTP
Rerun the seat calculation assuming a 2-3% swing to Remain and the map will look very different. It's not very meaningful to call a seat where 49% of people voted Remain in 2016 a "Leave seat".
With great respect you are underestimating the sensible Leave case. There is a difference between being a state in a federal union & being a nation state co-operating on matters with other nation states.
]...]
Or take law. In most of the EU there is civil law, no trial by jury, no concept of reasonable doubt or burden of proof or rules against the use of hearsay evidence. If you are going to have ever closer union & one effective state which law will be used in an EU-wide criminal law system? Would you be happy with the abolition of trial by jury or the burden of proof?
We have already seen what happens with the EAW where bureaucratic convenience has been allowed to trump the claims of justice (a requesting state does not even have to prove a prima facie case, which is utterly offensive when you are dealing with the liberty of individuals).
The EU’s path to ever closer union has sought to ignore the fact that this inevitably means the loss of the traditional nation state or its change to something very different. It has not honestly addressed what this means : for law, political representation, control over politicians & many other factors. It has sought to justify it on the basis of economic benefits. But those economic benefits are also achievable by nation states co-operating without the necessity for political union. Remainers have, in part, failed because they have not properly addressed these very real concerns about where the EU is heading & what this means for the very idea of the nation-state as Britain understands it. (I accept that other nations may have a very different idea of nationhood, its costs & benefits.) The EU was not the status quo because - & this was key for some Leavers I know - it was where it was going to they did not like not where it was. If they thought it was going to remain where it was they could have lived with that.
There is in the UK a widespread misunderstanding about the European Union. It is a multilateral framework. It isn't an actor in the same way as nation states. There is little political union because member states don't allow it. Instead it's very much a legal framework. Countries don't have to produce a justification to the other country for.an EAW because it is assumed the law also works in the other country. Incidentally you are wrong to say there is no concept of burden of proof or reasonable doubt under the Napoleonic code.
Also the benefits really aren't the same under ad hoc unenforced bilateral arrangements as under.a rules based system enforced by the same law.
I don’t agree that the era of the nation-state is coming to an end. Co-operation, close co-operation: absolutely. But the ability to vote on who makes our laws and to vote them out is essential, more essential than ever. I think the abolition of the nation-state risks abolishing the conditions which make democracy possible.
I can accept that, but that merely feeds a position that I U-turned on shortly after the referendum - namely, maybe "More Europe" is the only way left. Full Federalism. Before the vote I would have said (in my best Ulster accent) "Never! Never! Never!".
I grew up in a divided society were people killed each other and were carbombs were part of the everyday normality and you were taught to vilify and hate "them" on the "other side".
The EU worked as a mechanism to allow two sovereign countries to pretend no border existed and that there was no threat of being subsumed or divided one way or the other.
I cannot forget that. Division is not success.
I understand your PoV. I come at it differently even though my earliest political memories were watching the Troubles with my nationalist Irish father who remembered the Civil War. Ireland would have been richer if it had stayed part of Britain. But it wanted to govern itself.
I fear that federalism imposed from above by bureaucrats and politicians without peoples’ consent undermines democracy and leads to re-emergence of dark, illiberal and potentially undemocratic forces, as we have seen in France, Greece, Austria, Italy, Hungary, Poland, Germany. A federal EU thinks it is the solution. It may be part of the problem. A bit more self-reflection is needed not this arrogant belief that it is the only true and right way to go. That way lies hubris.
Anyway. Must go. Thanks for the debate. Glad you’re back.
28% of current Tory voters would vote Remain in a second referendum.
23% of Labour voters would vote Leave and 19% of LDs.
Which are smaller numbers. Labour and Lib Dem voters are more united against Brexit than Tory voters are united in favour of it.
Almost identical but the fact there are more Labour Leave seats than Tory Remain seats is more relevant under FPTP
Rerun the seat calculation assuming a 2-3% swing to Remain and the map will look very different. It's not very meaningful to call a seat where 49% of people voted Remain in 2016 a "Leave seat".
You can assume a 2-3% swing to Remain (based on current polls, presumably), but it's a courageous prediction for an EURef2 outcome. Current polling is much in line with EURef1 polling several weeks before polling day. A renewed Leave campaign, focussed on 'the people vs the politicians' and so on could easily win again.
I agree with your last sentence. I don’t agree that the era of the nation-state is coming to an end. Co-operation, close co-operation: absolutely. But the ability to vote on who makes our laws and to vote them out is essential, more essential than ever. I think the abolition of the nation-state risks abolishing the conditions which make democracy possible. Law is fundamental to a nation’s sense of itself, far more than you seem to think. The EU has a very different concept of law and it is not one I particularly admire. More to the point, the English common law is something worthwhile and something I very much want to keep. I am not at all certain that in the one state where the European project seems to be heading that would happen.
Europhiles and their kindred think abolishing the nation state will make us all like Sweden. I suspect we would end up with something more like China. There's damn little evidence that the EU puts the wishes of the people ahead of the goals of the project.
What is a nation state to you? If that state is not capable of strategic independence is it still meaningful to call it a nation state?
In some ways I think people eulogising the nation state have become the new utopianists who complacently assume that their vision of an optimal national society can be created regardless of the realities of the world and without considering the likely threats.
But the ability to vote on who makes our laws and to vote them out is essential, more essential than ever. I think the abolition of the nation-state risks abolishing the conditions which make democracy possible.
Suppose that an EU Treasury is created, and the post of a directly-elected Chancellor to go with it. Could that be democratic?
If the EPP put up a German Conservative as their candidate, and the S&D put up an Italian Socialist as their candidate do we think that voting in Italy and Germany would mainly break along national or ideological lines?
How could you have a sensible election when people don’t even speak the same language let alone understand what terms mean? Would anyone here understand what German and Italian Christian democracy even mean? Let alone their implications for policies?
28% of current Tory voters would vote Remain in a second referendum.
23% of Labour voters would vote Leave and 19% of LDs.
Which are smaller numbers. Labour and Lib Dem voters are more united against Brexit than Tory voters are united in favour of it.
Almost identical but the fact there are more Labour Leave seats than Tory Remain seats is more relevant under FPTP
Rerun the seat calculation assuming a 2-3% swing to Remain and the map will look very different. It's not very meaningful to call a seat where 49% of people voted Remain in 2016 a "Leave seat".
You can assume a 2-3% swing to Remain (based on current polls, presumably), but it's a courageous prediction for an EURef2 outcome. Current polling is much in line with EURef1 polling several weeks before polling day. A renewed Leave campaign, focussed on 'the people vs the politicians' and so on could easily win again.
Who's going to lead it? Tired, discredited re-treads from the 2016 campaign? The likes of Gerard Batten and Steve Bannon? Such a campaign would implode on contact with the electorate.
There won't be a deal - Cabinet can't agree what we want, Parliament didn't pass it, Barnier can't accept it, and should all 3 of those hoops pass it'll get vetoed by the Irish/French. This shouldn't be news - its be clear there wouldn't be a deal for a while.
The game changer will be in September, as the endless summer starts to cool off and people go back to work, and the government releases details of what no deal crash brexit means in practice. Yes, the hard core loons will insist its all project fear, but most people will read Protect and Survive 2018 and think "I didn't vote for this".
Politicians keep going on about a late deal, as if the EU will cave at the last. The only late deal will be the UK begging for an extension and Barnier making us dance for it.
Do you understand that no deal will be as big a difficulty for large parts of Europe as it will be for us. You speak as if Barnier would have won if there is a no-deal. He will have failed completely.
Crash Brexit won't be good for anyone. France, Belgium, Netherlands have already been identified as having issues. But the scale of their issues are nothing compared to the scale of our issues - and they will have the weight and power of the EU to support them.
On the customs border thing, maybe the minds of pb.com can help my confusion. The problem seems to be:
1 - If we leave the Single Market and Customs Union, we will need a customs border with the EU. This seems unavoidable - the former means we won't have similar regulations governing what things are and their treatment; the latter that we'll have different customs rates. Given WTO rules, abandoning all customs checks by stating we won't put any tariffs on them means that: a - We won't have any right to put tariffs on anyone else's stuff, either, thanks to MFN rules b - If the EU were to follow suit, they also will give up the right to put tariffs on anything else from anyone else. This is therefore not going to happen.
2 - This necessitates a border, with checks. Technology can help, but won't plausibly remove the need in any short-term timescale.
3 - The Good Friday Agreement in Ireland means there must not be such a border between the Republic and Northern Ireland.
All of this taken together seems to imply that either: 1 - We break the Good Friday Agreement 2 - We accept that NI has a different status to the rest of the UK and put the border between NI and the mainland 3 - We stay in the SM and CU after all.
It doesn't seem down to intransigence by anyone, but simply that we simultaneously need a border between NI and the Republic of Ireland and yet cannot have one.
What am I missing?
There isn't actually anything specific in the GFA that rules out a hard border.
However, in practice, neither London nor Dublin will be keen to erect hardware and time may resolve the initial anomaly should a more comprehensive EU-UK deal be signed.
I always assumed that the men of violence in the paramiltaries were bought off - they transitioned away from violence in return for blind eyes being cast over the ongoing criminal activities that underpinned their wealth. I also assumed that the reluctance to place monitoring systems on the border after BREXIT was to avoid the risk of restarting violence.
28% of current Tory voters would vote Remain in a second referendum.
23% of Labour voters would vote Leave and 19% of LDs.
Which are smaller numbers. Labour and Lib Dem voters are more united against Brexit than Tory voters are united in favour of it.
Almost identical but the fact there are more Labour Leave seats than Tory Remain seats is more relevant under FPTP
Rerun the seat calculation assuming a 2-3% swing to Remain and the map will look very different. It's not very meaningful to call a seat where 49% of people voted Remain in 2016 a "Leave seat".
You can assume a 2-3% swing to Remain (based on current polls, presumably), but it's a courageous prediction for an EURef2 outcome. Current polling is much in line with EURef1 polling several weeks before polling day. A renewed Leave campaign, focussed on 'the people vs the politicians' and so on could easily win again.
Voting intention is only half of a second referendum and, I agree, is not much different from first time round (maybe a slight swing to Remain).
Turnout is the big differentiator. A second referendum would be an almighty GOTV exercise. The key is whether young wouldn't-usually-vote, Corbyn-friendly Remainers would outnumber working class wouldn't-usually-vote, UKIP-leaning Leavers. My suspicion is that they would, but it would be close.
(For extra fun, add 16-/17- year olds into the mix...)
There won't be a deal - Cabinet can't agree what we want, Parliament didn't pass it, Barnier can't accept it, and should all 3 of those hoops pass it'll get vetoed by the Irish/French. This shouldn't be news - its be clear there wouldn't be a deal for a while.
The game changer will be in September, as the endless summer starts to cool off and people go back to work, and the government releases details of what no deal crash brexit means in practice. Yes, the hard core loons will insist its all project fear, but most people will read Protect and Survive 2018 and think "I didn't vote for this".
Politicians keep going on about a late deal, as if the EU will cave at the last. The only late deal will be the UK begging for an extension and Barnier making us dance for it.
Do you understand that no deal will be as big a difficulty for large parts of Europe as it will be for us. You speak as if Barnier would have won if there is a no-deal. He will have failed completely.
(For extra fun, add 16-/17- year olds into the mix...)
Personally I think it would be a mistake to tinker with the franchise for the second referendum. The key is to gain legitimacy for the outcome, and however flawed the 2016 franchise was, changing it now would be seen as gerrymandering by Leavers.
But the ability to vote on who makes our laws and to vote them out is essential, more essential than ever. I think the abolition of the nation-state risks abolishing the conditions which make democracy possible.
Suppose that an EU Treasury is created, and the post of a directly-elected Chancellor to go with it. Could that be democratic?
If the EPP put up a German Conservative as their candidate, and the S&D put up an Italian Socialist as their candidate do we think that voting in Italy and Germany would mainly break along national or ideological lines?
I think the most likely scenario is abysmal turnout, even lower than current EU elections.
(For extra fun, add 16-/17- year olds into the mix...)
Personally I think it would be a mistake to tinker with the franchise for the second referendum. The key is to gain legitimacy for the outcome, and however flawed the 2016 franchise was, changing it now would be seen as gerrymandering by Leavers.
Exactly. And to be fair to Cameron, the objective was to close down the debate which I guess was why he was so compliant in making the rules of the game leave-friendly. He wanted to pre-empt carping that the referendum was in some way stitched up to favour the remain side.
But the ability to vote on who makes our laws and to vote them out is essential, more essential than ever. I think the abolition of the nation-state risks abolishing the conditions which make democracy possible.
Suppose that an EU Treasury is created, and the post of a directly-elected Chancellor to go with it. Could that be democratic?
If the EPP put up a German Conservative as their candidate, and the S&D put up an Italian Socialist as their candidate do we think that voting in Italy and Germany would mainly break along national or ideological lines?
I think the most likely scenario is abysmal turnout, even lower than current EU elections.
Imagine if there's a directly elected president of Europe though.
That'd be rad.
I suspect that's probably part of a federalist end game, will be part of the next round of treaty revisions, whenever that occurs.
But the ability to vote on who makes our laws and to vote them out is essential, more essential than ever. I think the abolition of the nation-state risks abolishing the conditions which make democracy possible.
Suppose that an EU Treasury is created, and the post of a directly-elected Chancellor to go with it. Could that be democratic?
If the EPP put up a German Conservative as their candidate, and the S&D put up an Italian Socialist as their candidate do we think that voting in Italy and Germany would mainly break along national or ideological lines?
I think the most likely scenario is abysmal turnout, even lower than current EU elections.
Imagine if there's a directly elected president of Europe though.
That'd be rad.
I suspect that's probably part of a federalist end game, will be part of the next round of treaty revisions, whenever that occurs.
28% of current Tory voters would vote Remain in a second referendum.
23% of Labour voters would vote Leave and 19% of LDs.
Which are smaller numbers. Labour and Lib Dem voters are more united against Brexit than Tory voters are united in favour of it.
Almost identical but the fact there are more Labour Leave seats than Tory Remain seats is more relevant under FPTP
Rerun the seat calculation assuming a 2-3% swing to Remain and the map will look very different. It's not very meaningful to call a seat where 49% of people voted Remain in 2016 a "Leave seat".
You can assume a 2-3% swing to Remain (based on current polls, presumably), but it's a courageous prediction for an EURef2 outcome. Current polling is much in line with EURef1 polling several weeks before polling day. A renewed Leave campaign, focussed on 'the people vs the politicians' and so on could easily win again.
Who's going to lead it? Tired, discredited re-treads from the 2016 campaign? The likes of Gerard Batten and Steve Bannon? Such a campaign would implode on contact with the electorate.
Remain might scrape a win, but it would be no more than that. And, they might suffer a big defeat, if the Winchester by-election effect came into play.
I think you're falling into the same trap as Remain did in 2015/16, believing that nobody would want to vote with Farage. Galloway etc, and that people will identify with the moderate centrists.
But the ability to vote on who makes our laws and to vote them out is essential, more essential than ever. I think the abolition of the nation-state risks abolishing the conditions which make democracy possible.
Suppose that an EU Treasury is created, and the post of a directly-elected Chancellor to go with it. Could that be democratic?
If the EPP put up a German Conservative as their candidate, and the S&D put up an Italian Socialist as their candidate do we think that voting in Italy and Germany would mainly break along national or ideological lines?
How could you have a sensible election when people don’t even speak the same language let alone understand what terms mean? Would anyone here understand what German and Italian Christian democracy even mean? Let alone their implications for policies?
To a similar extent that people understand what "Conservative" and "Labour" means (i.e. "not much, because they don't really agree among themselves, but a general idea"), yes, once we'd had a campaign. In fact I suspect there are quite a few people in Britain with a rather clear idea of Merkel right now (something like "dull but durable centrist consensus-builder who is liberal on migration") and have a corresponding positive or negative view.
I think European democracy does depend on that sort of common consciousness developing, and direct elections to the Commission would be a good start. I reckon most people who voted (initially there'd be more abstentions than usual, of course) would go for the politically similar candidates in the end - how many Conservatives here would vote for Corbyn over Macron 'cos he's British?
I don’t agree that the era of the nation-state is coming to an end. Co-operation, close co-operation: absolutely. But the ability to vote on who makes our laws and to vote them out is essential, more essential than ever. I think the abolition of the nation-state risks abolishing the conditions which make democracy possible.
I can accept that, but that merely feeds a position that I U-turned on shortly after the referendum - namely, maybe "More Europe" is the only way left. Full Federalism. Before the vote I would have said (in my best Ulster accent) "Never! Never! Never!".
I grew up in a divided society were people killed each other and were carbombs were part of the everyday normality and you were taught to vilify and hate "them" on the "other side".
The EU worked as a mechanism to allow two sovereign countries to pretend no border existed and that there was no threat of being subsumed or divided one way or the other.
I cannot forget that. Division is not success.
Hmm
well my background is no different from yours but I interpret what I see differently.
If the EU genuinely wanted to let things settle in Ireland it would never have weaponised the Irish border, but put it in a backroom with a joint committee to sort the issues out, knowing everyone has the excuse it's Ulster, it's different.
Instead it has chosen to open a healing wound for its own short term objectives and a naïve Irish Govt consisting of people too young to remember the shit has let it do so.
In March next year the EU will just walk away assuming a settlement is reached and Varadkar will still be left holding a potato he threw in the oven.
Overall this is neither Irelands nor the EUs greatest moment, they have put politics before the people they are meant to represent.
I think we can (mercifully) say that the threat of President Blair has receded somewhat.
Have you learned nothing from the example of Corbyn?
All it takes is a small sect, a band of true believers inhabiting some godforsaken corner of the backbenches, dedicated to keeping the flame alive for that long-hoped-for moment when the Overton window of fate once more aligns with the Parliamentary shutters of destiny.
Overall this is neither Irelands nor the EUs greatest moment, they have put politics before the people they are meant to represent.
I think you're forgetting that Ireland is part of the EU27 and made it quite clear from the outset that a solution to the Northern Ireland question is the sine qua non of *any* deal.
Since the Brexiteers seem to have completely forgotten that Northern Ireland existed until a fortnight ago, perhaps it's for the best that somebody is standing up for their interests.
In any case, having nixed the backstop idea, the UK needs to come back with new proposals for the Northern Ireland question. So we're back to where we were before last December.
But the ability to vote on who makes our laws and to vote them out is essential, more essential than ever. I think the abolition of the nation-state risks abolishing the conditions which make democracy possible.
Suppose that an EU Treasury is created, and the post of a directly-elected Chancellor to go with it. Could that be democratic?
If the EPP put up a German Conservative as their candidate, and the S&D put up an Italian Socialist as their candidate do we think that voting in Italy and Germany would mainly break along national or ideological lines?
I think the most likely scenario is abysmal turnout, even lower than current EU elections.
Imagine if there's a directly elected president of Europe though.
That'd be rad.
I suspect that's probably part of a federalist end game, will be part of the next round of treaty revisions, whenever that occurs.
Still probably one of the best post war moments in the HoC. I always find it interesting how much D Miliband is laughing along. I doubt that his brother would have.
I think we can (mercifully) say that the threat of President Blair has receded somewhat.
Have you learned nothing from the example of Corbyn?
All it takes is a small sect, a band of true believers inhabiting some godforsaken corner of the backbenches, dedicated to keeping the flame alive for that long-hoped-for moment when the Overton window of fate once more aligns with the Parliamentary shutters of destiny.
Well, now I'm going to be having nightmares. Thanks fam.
Overall this is neither Irelands nor the EUs greatest moment, they have put politics before the people they are meant to represent.
I think you're forgetting that Ireland is part of the EU27 and made it quite clear from the outset that a solution to the Northern Ireland question is the sine qua non of *any* deal.
Since the Brexiteers seem to have completely forgotten that Northern Ireland existed until a fortnight ago, perhaps it's for the best that somebody is standing up for their best interests.
In any case, having nixed the backstop idea, the UK needs to come back with new proposals for the Northern Ireland question. So we're back to where we were before last December.
What bollocks
if you had grown up in Ulster in the 70s and 80s you might just get why weaponizing Ulster is so contemptible.
If the EU isn't for the benefit of its citizens then who is it for ?
if you had grown up in Ulster in the 70s and 80s you might just get why weaponizing Ulster is so contemptible.
If the EU isn't for the benefit of its citizens then who is it for ?
You're missing the point. The EU is focusing hard on Northern Ireland because Ireland, an EU27 country, insisted. There can be no deal without Ireland's support, and Ireland will support no deal that leads to a hard border.
The EU simply realised that gravity of the problem NI posed right from the start. I guess it's good that the Mogglodytes have caught up, finally. A little slow, but whatever.
Much as I'm sure everyone would like to pretend that if we ignore Northern Ireland it will just go away, I don't think it will.
Overall this is neither Irelands nor the EUs greatest moment, they have put politics before the people they are meant to represent.
I think you're forgetting that Ireland is part of the EU27 and made it quite clear from the outset that a solution to the Northern Ireland question is the sine qua non of *any* deal.
Since the Brexiteers seem to have completely forgotten that Northern Ireland existed until a fortnight ago, perhaps it's for the best that somebody is standing up for their interests.
In any case, having nixed the backstop idea, the UK needs to come back with new proposals for the Northern Ireland question. So we're back to where we were before last December.
What has been proposed does not seem to be in Northern Ireland's interests.
Overall this is neither Irelands nor the EUs greatest moment, they have put politics before the people they are meant to represent.
I think you're forgetting that Ireland is part of the EU27 and made it quite clear from the outset that a solution to the Northern Ireland question is the sine qua non of *any* deal.
Since the Brexiteers seem to have completely forgotten that Northern Ireland existed until a fortnight ago, perhaps it's for the best that somebody is standing up for their best interests.
In any case, having nixed the backstop idea, the UK needs to come back with new proposals for the Northern Ireland question. So we're back to where we were before last December.
What bollocks
if you had grown up in Ulster in the 70s and 80s you might just get why weaponizing Ulster is so contemptible.
If the EU isn't for the benefit of its citizens then who is it for ?
It’s own. The model of established religions applies. The greater good I think they call it. Whether covering up kiddie fiddling by a priest or corruption by EU bureaucrats the institution is more important than those it is meant to serve.
Overall this is neither Irelands nor the EUs greatest moment, they have put politics before the people they are meant to represent.
I think you're forgetting that Ireland is part of the EU27 and made it quite clear from the outset that a solution to the Northern Ireland question is the sine qua non of *any* deal.
Since the Brexiteers seem to have completely forgotten that Northern Ireland existed until a fortnight ago, perhaps it's for the best that somebody is standing up for their interests.
In any case, having nixed the backstop idea, the UK needs to come back with new proposals for the Northern Ireland question. So we're back to where we were before last December.
What has been proposed does not seem to be in Northern Ireland's interests.
Or Eire’s either. They do far, far more trade with the mainland than with NI.
Overall this is neither Irelands nor the EUs greatest moment, they have put politics before the people they are meant to represent.
I think you're forgetting that Ireland is part of the EU27 and made it quite clear from the outset that a solution to the Northern Ireland question is the sine qua non of *any* deal.
Since the Brexiteers seem to have completely forgotten that Northern Ireland existed until a fortnight ago, perhaps it's for the best that somebody is standing up for their best interests.
In any case, having nixed the backstop idea, the UK needs to come back with new proposals for the Northern Ireland question. So we're back to where we were before last December.
What bollocks
if you had grown up in Ulster in the 70s and 80s you might just get why weaponizing Ulster is so contemptible.
If the EU isn't for the benefit of its citizens then who is it for ?
While it does not apply to all Brexit supporters, there has been some very unfortunate "weaponising" of various sensitive subjects by its leading exponents since Cameron called this unnecessary disaster of a referendum. Namely hatred of foreigners, intolerance of immigrants and the distortion of the positions of other democratically elected leaders.
The far right are on the rise, and it wouldn't surprise me if they thought that the breakdown of the Good Friday Agreement to be a good thing. However, I don't think anyone has deliberately weaponised Ulster, it is just another unsavoury side-affect of a disaster called Brexit.
Overall this is neither Irelands nor the EUs greatest moment, they have put politics before the people they are meant to represent.
I think you're forgetting that Ireland is part of the EU27 and made it quite clear from the outset that a solution to the Northern Ireland question is the sine qua non of *any* deal.
Since the Brexiteers seem to have completely forgotten that Northern Ireland existed until a fortnight ago, perhaps it's for the best that somebody is standing up for their interests.
In any case, having nixed the backstop idea, the UK needs to come back with new proposals for the Northern Ireland question. So we're back to where we were before last December.
What has been proposed does not seem to be in Northern Ireland's interests.
Not Northern Ireland's interests. Ireland's interests.
Ireland is part of the EU27, therefore its interests are being protected. Northern Ireland is part of the departing third country so its interests are mostly irrelevant
Ireland is insisting on no hard border with Ireland, so that's the interest they're focusing on.
Brexiteers seem constantly innervated by how unfair it is the EU27 insists on defending its own interests in a very unsporting way.
if you had grown up in Ulster in the 70s and 80s you might just get why weaponizing Ulster is so contemptible.
If the EU isn't for the benefit of its citizens then who is it for ?
You're missing the point. The EU is focusing hard on Northern Ireland because Ireland, an EU27 country, insisted. There can be no deal without Ireland's support, and Ireland will support no deal that leads to a hard border.
The EU simply realised that gravity of the problem NI posed right from the start. I guess it's good that the Mogglodytes have caught up, finally. A little slow, but whatever.
Much as I'm sure everyone would like to pretend that if we ignore Northern Ireland it will just go away, I don't think it will.
Guff. the people crying crocodile tears are the same ones who despise the place and its inhabitants. NI is simply a political football for a bunch self interested politicians.
Enda Kenny before he resigned had already started a quiet foray in to how to deal with issue. Varadkar and Coveney are just numpties who like grandstanding on graves.
As I have said before stirring up hornets nests rarely works out well. This will come and bite them in the arse at some stage.
Overall this is neither Irelands nor the EUs greatest moment, they have put politics before the people they are meant to represent.
I think you're forgetting that Ireland is part of the EU27 and made it quite clear from the outset that a solution to the Northern Ireland question is the sine qua non of *any* deal.
Since the Brexiteers seem to have completely forgotten that Northern Ireland existed until a fortnight ago, perhaps it's for the best that somebody is standing up for their interests.
In any case, having nixed the backstop idea, the UK needs to come back with new proposals for the Northern Ireland question. So we're back to where we were before last December.
What has been proposed does not seem to be in Northern Ireland's interests.
Not Northern Ireland's interests. Ireland's interests.
Ireland is part of the EU27, therefore its interests are being protected. Northern Ireland is part of the departing third country so its interests are mostly irrelevant
Guff. the people crying crocodile tears are the same ones who despise the place and its inhabitants. NI is simply a political football for a bunch self interested politicians.
Enda Kenny before he resigned had already started a quiet foray in to how to deal with issue. Varadkar and Coveney are just numpties who like grandstanding on graves.
As I have said before stirring up hornets nests rarely works out well. This will come and bite them in the arse at some stage.
Well, yeah. Northern Ireland is a nasty little 1950s backwater full of religious bigots and retired terrorists.
It's not a place worth caring about except insofar as if we don't then sooner or later people and places we care about start exploding.
You should read Hodges letter in reply.. oh boy....
*grabs popcorn *
I'm deeply envious of Mishcon de Reya having the opportunity to write that letter of reply. A bit hammy about "Rule 2.1.8" but every lawyer wants to wake up in the morning knowing they've got that kind of drafting job ahead of them.
Guff. the people crying crocodile tears are the same ones who despise the place and its inhabitants. NI is simply a political football for a bunch self interested politicians.
Enda Kenny before he resigned had already started a quiet foray in to how to deal with issue. Varadkar and Coveney are just numpties who like grandstanding on graves.
As I have said before stirring up hornets nests rarely works out well. This will come and bite them in the arse at some stage.
Well, yeah. Northern Ireland is a nasty little 1950s backwater full of religious bigots and retired terrorists.
It's not a place worth caring about except insofar as if we don't then sooner or later people and places we care about start exploding.
28% of current Tory voters would vote Remain in a second referendum.
23% of Labour voters would vote Leave and 19% of LDs.
Which are smaller numbers. Labour and Lib Dem voters are more united against Brexit than Tory voters are united in favour of it.
Almost identical but the fact there are more Labour Leave seats than Tory Remain seats is more relevant under FPTP
Rerun the seat calculation assuming a 2-3% swing to Remain and the map will look very different. It's not very meaningful to call a seat where 49% of people voted Remain in 2016 a "Leave seat".
You can assume a 2-3% swing to Remain (based on current polls, presumably), but it's a courageous prediction for an EURef2 outcome. Current polling is much in line with EURef1 polling several weeks before polling day. A renewed Leave campaign, focussed on 'the people vs the politicians' and so on could easily win again.
Who's going to lead it? Tired, discredited re-treads from the 2016 campaign? The likes of Gerard Batten and Steve Bannon? Such a campaign would implode on contact with the electorate.
The crucial different is that in an EURef2, the Tory Party as a party would be behind Leave. That would affect both the funding available and the campaigning infrastructure. Meanwhile, Labour would still be hamstrung by its leadership's ambivalence to the EU.
If there was a new referendum, with Remain as an option, Farage would be back at the head of UKIP within days, whether formally or not, and the likelihood of a twin pronged Leave pincer - a noisy unofficial UKIPpy one and a 'respectable' Tory one - would be quite effective.
But I could turn the question around: who would lead the Remain campaign? Vince Cable?
Ireland is part of the EU27, therefore its interests are being protected. Northern Ireland is part of the departing third country so its interests are mostly irrelevant
But, not to us.
We are not Barnier. Barnier has one primary objective in Northern Ireland: prevent a hard border.
Well just maybe he should be asking Barnier how he proposes to avoid that outcome.
I have long believed that those who support Brexit who are not in the pay of the Kremlin are the Useful Idiots of the modern era. They are advancing the foreign policy agenda of a hostile foreign power. The Useful Idiot in chief is Mr Boris Johnson.
Guff. the people crying crocodile tears are the same ones who despise the place and its inhabitants. NI is simply a political football for a bunch self interested politicians.
Enda Kenny before he resigned had already started a quiet foray in to how to deal with issue. Varadkar and Coveney are just numpties who like grandstanding on graves.
As I have said before stirring up hornets nests rarely works out well. This will come and bite them in the arse at some stage.
Well, yeah. Northern Ireland is a nasty little 1950s backwater full of religious bigots and retired terrorists.
It's not a place worth caring about except insofar as if we don't then sooner or later people and places we care about start exploding.
Overall this is neither Irelands nor the EUs greatest moment, they have put politics before the people they are meant to represent.
I think you're forgetting that Ireland is part of the EU27 and made it quite clear from the outset that a solution to the Northern Ireland question is the sine qua non of *any* deal.
Since the Brexiteers seem to have completely forgotten that Northern Ireland existed until a fortnight ago, perhaps it's for the best that somebody is standing up for their best interests.
In any case, having nixed the backstop idea, the UK needs to come back with new proposals for the Northern Ireland question. So we're back to where we were before last December.
What bollocks
if you had grown up in Ulster in the 70s and 80s you might just get why weaponizing Ulster is so contemptible.
If the EU isn't for the benefit of its citizens then who is it for ?
While it does not apply to all Brexit supporters, there has been some very unfortunate "weaponising" of various sensitive subjects by its leading exponents since Cameron called this unnecessary disaster of a referendum. Namely hatred of foreigners, intolerance of immigrants and the distortion of the positions of other democratically elected leaders.
The far right are on the rise, and it wouldn't surprise me if they thought that the breakdown of the Good Friday Agreement to be a good thing. However, I don't think anyone has deliberately weaponised Ulster, it is just another unsavoury side-affect of a disaster called Brexit.
Don't be silly, of course it has been weaponised how else do you think you chose a pressure point on the opposition. Inter Irish trade is less about 1 day of total UK EU trade you don't base a trade deal round something at the margins. Instead you invent issues you will eventually concede on because it costs you very little.
It has little to do with the well being of NI citizens and everything to do with money
Guff. the people crying crocodile tears are the same ones who despise the place and its inhabitants. NI is simply a political football for a bunch self interested politicians.
Enda Kenny before he resigned had already started a quiet foray in to how to deal with issue. Varadkar and Coveney are just numpties who like grandstanding on graves.
As I have said before stirring up hornets nests rarely works out well. This will come and bite them in the arse at some stage.
Well, yeah. Northern Ireland is a nasty little 1950s backwater full of religious bigots and retired terrorists.
It's not a place worth caring about except insofar as if we don't then sooner or later people and places we care about start exploding.
If you cared about it you'd leave it alone not ask for a 70s revival
You should read Hodges letter in reply.. oh boy....
*grabs popcorn *
I'm deeply envious of Mishcon de Reya having the opportunity to write that letter of reply. A bit hammy about "Rule 2.1.8" but every lawyer wants to wake up in the morning knowing they've got that kind of drafting job ahead of them.
I wouldn't want to have been on the receiving end of that letter.
You should read Hodges letter in reply.. oh boy....
*grabs popcorn *
I'm deeply envious of Mishcon de Reya having the opportunity to write that letter of reply. A bit hammy about "Rule 2.1.8" but every lawyer wants to wake up in the morning knowing they've got that kind of drafting job ahead of them.
Guff. the people crying crocodile tears are the same ones who despise the place and its inhabitants. NI is simply a political football for a bunch self interested politicians.
Enda Kenny before he resigned had already started a quiet foray in to how to deal with issue. Varadkar and Coveney are just numpties who like grandstanding on graves.
As I have said before stirring up hornets nests rarely works out well. This will come and bite them in the arse at some stage.
Well, yeah. Northern Ireland is a nasty little 1950s backwater full of religious bigots and retired terrorists.
It's not a place worth caring about except insofar as if we don't then sooner or later people and places we care about start exploding.
Ireland is part of the EU27, therefore its interests are being protected. Northern Ireland is part of the departing third country so its interests are mostly irrelevant
But, not to us.
We are not Barnier. Barnier has one primary objective in Northern Ireland: prevent a hard border.
Hard border = Ireland veto
Barnier's primary objective is to get money, Ireland is simply a mechanism for doing so
28% of current Tory voters would vote Remain in a second referendum.
23% of Labour voters would vote Leave and 19% of LDs.
Which are smaller numbers. Labour and Lib Dem voters are more united against Brexit than Tory voters are united in favour of it.
Almost identical but the fact there are more Labour Leave seats than Tory Remain seats is more relevant under FPTP
Rerun the seat calculation assuming a 2-3% swing to Remain and the map will look very different. It's not very meaningful to call a seat where 49% of people voted Remain in 2016 a "Leave seat".
You can assume a 2-3% swing to Remain (based on current polls, presumably), but it's a courageous prediction for an EURef2 outcome. Current polling is much in line with EURef1 polling several weeks before polling day. A renewed Leave campaign, focussed on 'the people vs the politicians' and so on could easily win again.
Who's going to lead it? Tired, discredited re-treads from the 2016 campaign? The likes of Gerard Batten and Steve Bannon? Such a campaign would implode on contact with the electorate.
The crucial different is that in an EURef2, the Tory Party as a party would be behind Leave. That would affect both the funding available and the campaigning infrastructure. Meanwhile, Labour would still be hamstrung by its leadership's ambivalence to the EU.
If there was a new referendum, with Remain as an option, Farage would be back at the head of UKIP within days, whether formally or not, and the likelihood of a twin pronged Leave pincer - a noisy unofficial UKIPpy one and a 'respectable' Tory one - would be quite effective.
But I could turn the question around: who would lead the Remain campaign? Vince Cable?
We will only have a second Referendum with Remain on the ballot paper if the PM of the day is asking the electorate to change their mind on the first referendum. That means either we have already had a general election, or a Conservative PM is advocating Remain.
This is one reason why I do not expect a second referendum.
Overall this is neither Irelands nor the EUs greatest moment, they have put politics before the people they are meant to represent.
Probably true, but neither Ireland nor the EU would be in this position without Brexit.
Brexit destroys all it touches.
I think you've been touched by Brexitmania Mrs C.
Outside PB most people don't give a toss about the details, they just want us to get on with it and are perfectly able to lead their lives without obsessing.
Will people in the NW be chatting at the coffee machine about Dominc Raab or the fact they cant use their hoses ? My money's on the latter.
At the end of the day the world will continue, and the ultras of both sides and their scaremongering will be seen to be so much bollocks.
28% of current Tory voters would vote Remain in a second referendum.
23% of Labour voters would vote Leave and 19% of LDs.
Which are smaller numbers. Labour and Lib Dem voters are more united against Brexit than Tory voters are united in favour of it.
Almost identical but the fact there are more Labour Leave seats than Tory Remain seats is more relevant under FPTP
Rerun the seat calculation assuming a 2-3% swing to Remain and the map will look very different. It's not very meaningful to call a seat where 49% of people voted Remain in 2016 a "Leave seat".
You can assume a 2-3% swing to Remain (based on current polls, presumably), but it's a courageous prediction for an EURef2 outcome. Current polling is much in line with EURef1 polling several weeks before polling day. A renewed Leave campaign, focussed on 'the people vs the politicians' and so on could easily win again.
Who's going to lead it? Tired, discredited re-treads from the 2016 campaign? The likes of Gerard Batten and Steve Bannon? Such a campaign would implode on contact with the electorate.
The crucial different is that in an EURef2, the Tory Party as a party would be behind Leave. That would affect both the funding available and the campaigning infrastructure. Meanwhile, Labour would still be hamstrung by its leadership's ambivalence to the EU.
If there was a new referendum, with Remain as an option, Farage would be back at the head of UKIP within days, whether formally or not, and the likelihood of a twin pronged Leave pincer - a noisy unofficial UKIPpy one and a 'respectable' Tory one - would be quite effective.
But I could turn the question around: who would lead the Remain campaign? Vince Cable?
We will only have a second Referendum with Remain on the ballot paper if the PM of the day is asking the electorate to change their mind on the first referendum. That means either we have already had a general election, or a Conservative PM is advocating Remain.
This is one reason why I do not expect a second referendum.
The PM can simply take the Harold Wilson approach and say:
- We have a deal for a smooth and orderly Brexit - It's your choice whether to accept the deal or remain in the EU - I will be neutral and will remain PM whatever you decide
I'm sure I speak for everyone when I say we are all happier when we can pretend Northern Ireland doesn't exist.
Northern Ireland is a great place with great problems. It is particularly poorly represented by its political leaders (as you find in most places where voting is tribal). It has the added problem that it has an easy source of money - the UK government - that distracts it from seeking solutions to its long term problems.
But until two years ago, the basic story of Northern Ireland in the last generation was an optimistic one.
Outside PB most people don't give a toss about the details, they just want us to get on with it and are perfectly able to lead their lives without obsessing.
They will care more about when it starts to mess with their lives
At the end of the day the world will continue, and the ultras of both sides and their scaremongering will be seen to be so much bollocks.
We shall see. I really have only one last thing to sort out and then I really do not give a monkeys about what happens because it will not affect me and mine in the slightest.
Well just maybe he should be asking Barnier how he proposes to avoid that outcome.
I have long believed that those who support Brexit who are not in the pay of the Kremlin are the Useful Idiots of the modern era. They are advancing the foreign policy agenda of a hostile foreign power. The Useful Idiot in chief is Mr Boris Johnson.
We are all entitled to our beliefs, no matter how irrational and yours are no dafter than the Flying Spaghetti Monster, for example.
To be fair I am more confident that our discussions will have got further and been more productive with Hunt than with Boris.
Outside PB most people don't give a toss about the details, they just want us to get on with it and are perfectly able to lead their lives without obsessing.
They will care more about when it starts to mess with their lives
At the end of the day the world will continue, and the ultras of both sides and their scaremongering will be seen to be so much bollocks.
We shall see. I really have only one last thing to sort out and then I really do not give a monkeys about what happens because it will not affect me and mine in the slightest.
Things mess your life all the time, usually after you've voted. Mostly we're just not aware of it or don't make a fuss.
The biggest things to mess with my life have been pension changes and the was bugger all I could do about it.
Comments
Also the benefits really aren't the same under ad hoc unenforced bilateral arrangements as under.a rules based system enforced by the same law.
I fear that federalism imposed from above by bureaucrats and politicians without peoples’ consent undermines democracy and leads to re-emergence of dark, illiberal and potentially undemocratic forces, as we have seen in France, Greece, Austria, Italy, Hungary, Poland, Germany. A federal EU thinks it is the solution. It may be part of the problem. A bit more self-reflection is needed not this arrogant belief that it is the only true and right way to go. That way lies hubris.
Anyway. Must go. Thanks for the debate. Glad you’re back.
In some ways I think people eulogising the nation state have become the new utopianists who complacently assume that their vision of an optimal national society can be created regardless of the realities of the world and without considering the likely threats.
Turnout is the big differentiator. A second referendum would be an almighty GOTV exercise. The key is whether young wouldn't-usually-vote, Corbyn-friendly Remainers would outnumber working class wouldn't-usually-vote, UKIP-leaning Leavers. My suspicion is that they would, but it would be close.
(For extra fun, add 16-/17- year olds into the mix...)
How would the UK have differently managed that part of Britain to make it more prosperous than the other regions?
"Full-fibre broadband pledge for new homes"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44921764
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iv0UZGJzVQY
That'd be rad.
I suspect that's probably part of a federalist end game, will be part of the next round of treaty revisions, whenever that occurs.
I think you're falling into the same trap as Remain did in 2015/16, believing that nobody would want to vote with Farage. Galloway etc, and that people will identify with the moderate centrists.
I think European democracy does depend on that sort of common consciousness developing, and direct elections to the Commission would be a good start. I reckon most people who voted (initially there'd be more abstentions than usual, of course) would go for the politically similar candidates in the end - how many Conservatives here would vote for Corbyn over Macron 'cos he's British?
well my background is no different from yours but I interpret what I see differently.
If the EU genuinely wanted to let things settle in Ireland it would never have weaponised the Irish border, but put it in a backroom with a joint committee to sort the issues out, knowing everyone has the excuse it's Ulster, it's different.
Instead it has chosen to open a healing wound for its own short term objectives and a naïve Irish Govt consisting of people too young to remember the shit has let it do so.
In March next year the EU will just walk away assuming a settlement is reached and Varadkar will still be left holding a potato he threw in the oven.
Overall this is neither Irelands nor the EUs greatest moment, they have put politics before the people they are meant to represent.
All it takes is a small sect, a band of true believers inhabiting some godforsaken corner of the backbenches, dedicated to keeping the flame alive for that long-hoped-for moment when the Overton window of fate once more aligns with the Parliamentary shutters of destiny.
Since the Brexiteers seem to have completely forgotten that Northern Ireland existed until a fortnight ago, perhaps it's for the best that somebody is standing up for their interests.
In any case, having nixed the backstop idea, the UK needs to come back with new proposals for the Northern Ireland question. So we're back to where we were before last December.
if you had grown up in Ulster in the 70s and 80s you might just get why weaponizing Ulster is so contemptible.
If the EU isn't for the benefit of its citizens then who is it for ?
The EU simply realised that gravity of the problem NI posed right from the start. I guess it's good that the Mogglodytes have caught up, finally. A little slow, but whatever.
Much as I'm sure everyone would like to pretend that if we ignore Northern Ireland it will just go away, I don't think it will.
The far right are on the rise, and it wouldn't surprise me if they thought that the breakdown of the Good Friday Agreement to be a good thing. However, I don't think anyone has deliberately weaponised Ulster, it is just another unsavoury side-affect of a disaster called Brexit.
Ireland is part of the EU27, therefore its interests are being protected.
Northern Ireland is part of the departing third country so its interests are mostly irrelevant
Ireland is insisting on no hard border with Ireland, so that's the interest they're focusing on.
Brexiteers seem constantly innervated by how unfair it is the EU27 insists on defending its own interests in a very unsporting way.
Enda Kenny before he resigned had already started a quiet foray in to how to deal with issue. Varadkar and Coveney are just numpties who like grandstanding on graves.
As I have said before stirring up hornets nests rarely works out well. This will come and bite them in the arse at some stage.
*grabs popcorn *
It's not a place worth caring about except insofar as if we don't then sooner or later people and places we care about start exploding.
If there was a new referendum, with Remain as an option, Farage would be back at the head of UKIP within days, whether formally or not, and the likelihood of a twin pronged Leave pincer - a noisy unofficial UKIPpy one and a 'respectable' Tory one - would be quite effective.
But I could turn the question around: who would lead the Remain campaign? Vince Cable?
We are not Barnier. Barnier has one primary objective in Northern Ireland: prevent a hard border.
Hard border = Ireland veto
It has little to do with the well being of NI citizens and everything to do with money
Hard border = Ireland veto
Barnier's primary objective is to get money, Ireland is simply a mechanism for doing so
Brexit destroys all it touches.
This is one reason why I do not expect a second referendum.
Outside PB most people don't give a toss about the details, they just want us to get on with it and are perfectly able to lead their lives without obsessing.
Will people in the NW be chatting at the coffee machine about Dominc Raab or the fact they cant use their hoses ? My money's on the latter.
At the end of the day the world will continue, and the ultras of both sides and their scaremongering will be seen to be so much bollocks.
Only in Glennland.
- We have a deal for a smooth and orderly Brexit
- It's your choice whether to accept the deal or remain in the EU
- I will be neutral and will remain PM whatever you decide
But until two years ago, the basic story of Northern Ireland in the last generation was an optimistic one.
NEW THREAD
They will care more about when it starts to mess with their lives Dominic who???? We shall see. I really have only one last thing to sort out and then I really do not give a monkeys about what happens because it will not affect me and mine in the slightest.
To be fair I am more confident that our discussions will have got further and been more productive with Hunt than with Boris.
The biggest things to mess with my life have been pension changes and the was bugger all I could do about it.