[Politics] Brexit

[Triggaaar]

So Britain and the EU negotiated (and agreed) a deal that everyone knew Britain wouldn't then pass ? And that's somehow the EU's fault ?

That's not what I said is it

 

[WATFORD zero]

The HoC vote wasn't asking for 'completely free, borderless access to the whole of the EU via NI whilst not being in the EU' It was asking for alternative solutions which all conveniantly seem unachievable despite Barnier suggesting they would be found to avoid a border if a no deal occured.

Well, since no one else seems to be able to, how about you give us an idea of some of these 'alternative solutions', because in the absence of any, that is exactly what the HoC was asking for.

My best guess would be Pixies and Unicorns.

I distinctly remember having this conversation with you immediately after phase 1 was signed off in Dec 2017.

Talk about Deja f***ing vu

 

[JC Footy Genius]

Hi. Ignore the Brexit twats for a moment, fellow remainer here. I still - still - can't really get my head round the backstop. Its just kicking the can down the road isn't it? Its just saying 'we can't work out how to have an open border (GFA) and a closed border (different customs arrangements, right to enter etc to the EU) at the same time. So if we have a 'backstop' its basically saying we're just delaying coming to a conclusion for 2 years.

But in two years - what? What is so miraculously going to happen that means we can have the dual open / closed border that is required?

Indeed can I throw this out to anyone (or at least anyone who doesn't use the words 'technological solution'). There is no answer is there?

So if we hard Brexit we will leave the border open, and the EU will leave the border open, and we'll argue forever about it, and because of that we won't get any benefits of the Withdrawal agreement, and they won't get their £39m

And if we leave with the Withdrawal agreement, we'll leave the border open, and they will leave the border open, for the short backstop period, but that will never end or change ever because no-one can come up with a solution.

With that in mind, it would seem completely foolish for our MP's to prevent the Withdrawal agreement on the basis of the backstop, because whether we have a backstop or don't have a backstop or don't have a deal, the actual result in terms of the border will be identical. No?

And therefore the ultimate question I suppose, will Brexit debates will go on FOR THE REST OF MY LIFE ?

Hi Remoaner twunt, Brexit **** here ... guess who has made the following comments over the last few months.

"We will have to find an operational way of carrying out checks and controls without putting back in place a border."

"We would be obliged to carry out controls on goods arriving in the Republic of Ireland. My team have worked hard to study how controls can be made paperless or decentralised, which will be useful in all circumstances,"

“We are ready to simplify these checks, to have them carried out at a number of different places and have checks, thanks to technical means, which could take different forms,”

“They could be dispersed. They could take place in different places, on board vessels, in ports outside Ireland, they could be done using technological means, they could be dispersed, as I said, or simplified in technological terms.”

 

[nicko31]

It's a fair summary.

You're right we are trying to kick the can down the road and say to the EU 'trust us to find something' in the next 21 months. Not surprisingly, the EU don't want to trust us, hence the backstop meaning NI will stay in the customs union if no solution is found.

One thing you missed - WTO won't let us trade without borders, so any 'no deal' scenario means a hard border as there has to be a means to collect WTO default tariffs.

All of this has all been known since before the referendum but unfortunately some people had their fingers in their ears shouting 'project fear' and couldn't hear (or maybe understand)

The EU doesn't trust us, oh come on.....

The back stop exists just in case the we decide to pull out of the withdrawal agreement without having a plan in place. We'd never do anything like that would we?

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

Hi Remoaner twunt, Brexit **** here ... guess who has made the following comments over the last few months.

"We will have to find an operational way of carrying out checks and controls without putting back in place a border."

"We would be obliged to carry out controls on goods arriving in the Republic of Ireland. My team have worked hard to study how controls can be made paperless or decentralised, which will be useful in all circumstances,"

“We are ready to simplify these checks, to have them carried out at a number of different places and have checks, thanks to technical means, which could take different forms,”

“They could be dispersed. They could take place in different places, on board vessels, in ports outside Ireland, they could be done using technological means, they could be dispersed, as I said, or simplified in technological terms.”

Barnier. But its a load of balls isn't it

 

[WATFORD zero]

The EU doesn't trust us, oh come on.....

The back stop exists just in case the we decide to pull out of the withdrawal agreement without having a plan in place. We'd never do anything like that would we?

Pull out of the EU without a plan for NI/Ireland in place ? No definitely not, No Siree

 

[JC Footy Genius]

Barnier. But its a load of balls isn't it

The UK side says other solutions can be found the EU chief negotiator says other solutions can be found but no one on NSC believes them ... sheesh, tough crowd!

 

[WATFORD zero]

The UK side says other solutions can be found the EU chief negotiator says other solutions can be found but no one on NSC believes them ... sheesh, tough crowd!

I thought I had explained this to you last night, but you obviously didn't understand, so I'll try again. Maybe it will help if you read it s..l..o..w..l..y

Now I hope you're sitting down as I don't want this to come as too much of a shock, but sometimes (for all sorts of reasons) senior politicians don't always tell the complete absolute and utter truth

 

[JC Footy Genius]

I thought I had explained this to you last night, but you obviously didn't understand, so I'll try again. Maybe it will help if you read it s..l..o..w..l..y

"sometimes (for all sorts of reasons) senior politicians don't always tell the complete absolute and utter truth" .. You mean the ones who pretend there is only one possible solution to the NI border issue?

 

[ManOfSussex]

The UK side says other solutions can be found the EU chief negotiator says other solutions can be found but no one on NSC believes them ... sheesh, tough crowd!

I'm sure once the technology is invented and actually exists other solutions could be found. Until then -



A nice all weather one or 'Davis proof' as Barnier once wisely said.

 

[Worried Man Blues]

Barnier out

 

[WATFORD zero]

"sometimes (for all sorts of reasons) senior politicians don't always tell the complete absolute and utter truth" .. You mean the ones who pretend there is only one possible solution to the NI border issue?

As Kalimantan Gull explained above, the backstop is not a solution to the border issue , it's simply a method of kicking the issue down the road for another 21 months

 

[Bold Seagull]

I see Gerard Batten is putting his thoughts on rolling back 400 years to give our Monarch outright power over Parliament.

Apparently the Queen herself was a traitor for allowing the Maastricht treaty to go through. Is there no end to this man's lunacy!?

I give Farage one bit of credit, at least he managed to keep a lid on these lunatics.

 

[beorhthelm]

And therefore the ultimate question I suppose, will Brexit debates will go on FOR THE REST OF MY LIFE ?

a valid and scary conclusion. i think the detail missing is that this issue is the terms of the backstop. if can be altered seems the deal can get a majority. then we move into next phase, negotiating the future relationship including customs and how to deal with the Irish trade.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

The UK side says other solutions can be found the EU chief negotiator says other solutions can be found but no one on NSC believes them ... sheesh, tough crowd!

Alright, fair enough. Yes, there will be this kind of fudge solution to an open-closed border, but it will never satisfy anyone - too much will come in that we don't want, too much will get out that they don't want - we will argue it forever. But OK, assuming that this unicorny tech-solution happens, I go back to the rest of my post with slight edit:


So if we hard Brexit we will leave the border open, and the EU will leave the border open, and a 'technological solution' will be forced in place, and we'll argue forever about it, and because of that we won't get any benefits of the Withdrawal agreement, and they won't get their £39m

And if we leave with the Withdrawal agreement, we'll leave the border open, and they will leave the border open, for the short backstop period, during which time a 'technological solution' will be put in place, but that won't make anyone happy and we'll argue forever about it

With that in mind, it would seem completely foolish for our MP's to prevent the Withdrawal agreement on the basis of the backstop, because whether we have a backstop or don't have a backstop or don't have a deal, the actual result in terms of the border will be identical. No?

And therefore the ultimate question I suppose, will Brexit debates will go on FOR THE REST OF MY LIFE ?

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

May’s next trick is to bribe MPs to vote for her deal.

Plan A - Unicorns
Plan B - Bribes

 

[ManOfSussex]

May’s next trick is to bribe MPs to vote for her deal.

Plan A - Unicorns
Plan B - Bribes

The Withdrawal Agreement and backstop are not going to be altered, so plan B's calculation is: Bribed Labour MP's + Tory MP's who'll now say 'okay, she tried with Brussels' and grudgingly vote for it + MP's fearful of no deal who'll now vote for it + MP's fearful of no Brexit who'll now vote for it + abstentions = maybe the Withdrawal Agreement gets through.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

The Withdrawal Agreement and backstop are not going to be altered, so plan B's calculation is: Bribed Labour MP's + Tory MP's who'll now say 'okay, she tried with Brussels' and grudgingly vote for it + MP's fearful of no deal who'll now vote for it + MP's fearful of no Brexit who'll now vote for it + abstentions = maybe the Withdrawal Agreement gets through.

The meltdown from the ERG of the deal going through will be quite a sight

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Do you think The Good Friday Agreement was really possible in the first place without Maastricht? How does every other border in the world work outside a customs union, including The EU's other external borders? The Swedish/Norwegian border closes at night for example. How does that work on a 310 mile border with 270 odd crossing points? How will enforcing that go down with the border communities? Why did Varadkar show photos of dead HMRC and Revenue officers in the past to other EU leaders in regards to why a backstop was needed?

This should have been thought of a long time back. Brexit is a British created problem exacerbated by May's red lines.

Well yes. It should have been explicit in the referendum that the Good Friday Agreement would be honoured and as such while we would leave the EU we would stay in the EEA with a level of customs union as necessary.

Job done, no one would have minded as Farage and co were praising Norway and Switzerland then.

But Cameron didn't think it through.

 

[vegster]

I see Gerard Batten is putting his thoughts on rolling back 400 years to give our Monarch outright power over Parliament.

Apparently the Queen herself was a traitor for allowing the Maastricht treaty to go through. Is there no end to this man's lunacy!?

I give Farage one bit of credit, at least he managed to keep a lid on these lunatics.

In the land of the Blind, The One Eyed man is King .