[Politics] Brexit

[Triggaaar]

I know that our situation would not change significantly unless there was a referendum agreeing to it.

Ok, I disagree.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

I'm going to lay off the positive manufacturing news for a few days now. Plenty more to come. You won't hear about these companies in the MSM.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Twelve reasons why the Irish backstop makes no sense at all

The Sunday Telegraph 3 Feb 2019, HENRY NEWMAN

1. It is intended to prevent a hard Irish border if there’s no deal. But the backstop is now the obstacle blocking a deal, and so risks a hardening of that border.

If there's no deal the WTO insists on there being a border with customs on both sides to implement the WTO rules and default tariffs. It's nothing to do with the EU or Britain

Given the first point, I guessed it probably wasn't worth wasting my time reading any further.

Your desperation is becoming palpable. Don't forget, patience is a virtue

 

[WATFORD zero]

I'm going to lay off the positive manufacturing news for a few days now. Plenty more to come. You won't hear about these companies in the MSM.

Keep posting them, i was being serious.

Given the incoming shitstorm, I think we would all be grateful for any good news at all.

 

[Dave the OAP]

Just seen this on twitter aimed at



Does anyone find this unacceptable?

In a No Deal your life will be worth very little to a lot of people. You should already be behind bars and you will wish you were by the end of it.

Tweet by someone Muralista - Dom Ramos FBPE to steve baker MP

 

[ManOfSussex]

Good luck getting a majority for that in the HoC ...

It'd be better for you if the Withdrawal Agreement with the backstop The UK formulated passed in the commons - it's the Brexit you voted for.

It'd be better for you too if that happened before an unsustainable no deal situation occurred, because we might rush to agree a Norwegian arrangement with customs union very quickly afterwards, rather than pass the Withdrawal Agreement with UK formulated backstop, as well as heaping a lot of damage and ill feeling abroad on ourselves before we do.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

If there's no deal the WTO insists on there being a border with customs on both sides to implement the WTO rules and default tariffs. It's nothing to do with the EU or Britain

Given the first point, I guessed it probably wasn't worth wasting my time reading any further.

Your desperation is becoming palpable. Don't forget, patience is a virtue

WTO says its rules would not force EU or UK to erect hard Irish border

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ire...eu-or-uk-to-erect-hard-irish-border-1.3710136

 

[ManOfSussex]

I'm going to lay off the positive manufacturing news for a few days now. Plenty more to come. You won't hear about these companies in the MSM.

I know exactly what you mean. When people talk about The Titanic, you won't hear about the delicious Filet Mignon and French ice cream they had for dinner - it wasn't all bad. I hear the 1898 Moet & Chandon Champagne was an absolute gem of a vintage too. Moan, moan, moan, iceberg, iceberg, iceberg - it's all you get.

 

[Baldseagull]

Twelve reasons why the Irish backstop makes no sense at all

The Sunday Telegraph 3 Feb 2019, HENRY NEWMAN

1. It is intended to prevent a hard Irish border if there’s no deal. But the backstop is now the obstacle blocking a deal, and so risks a hardening of that border.

2. Ireland’s Europe minister, Helen McEntee, recently suggested that the UK would have to apply parts of the backstop even if there’s no deal. If that’s true, why do we need a backstop in the deal?

3. The EU’s Brexit negotiator, Michel Barnier, said if there’s no deal, the EU will “find … an operational way” of avoiding a hard border by carrying out checks away from the frontier. If so, what’s the point of the backstop?

4. The deal commits Brussels to using “best endeavours” to find “alternate solutions” to the backstop. But Barnier’s deputy has said “no such alternatives exist”. In that case, can the UK be sure the EU made those promises in good faith, and that the backstop won’t trap us permanently?

5. In the Brexit deal, the “intention” is only to have a temporary backstop because the EU argues that, under its laws, the divorce deal cannot create permanent structures. If it’s supposed to be temporary, why not have a backstop time limit?

6. Ireland insists the deal can’t be changed because it was signed off by EU leaders in December. But in 2009 Ireland itself had a protocol added to the Lisbon Treaty because it couldn’t complete domestic ratification, even though EU leaders had approved the Treaty in 2007.

7. When Parliament rejected the deal in December, Brussels declared it didn’t know what the UK’s objection was – nor how a parliamentary majority could be found. On Tuesday, MPs spelt that out, backing the deal if the backstop’s issues were addressed. But Donald Tusk, president of the European Council, then claimed that they “still don’t know what the UK does want”.

8. Barnier’s team say they are “open” to alternatives to the backstop including technology, yet they can’t consider those until after the deal is agreed. But it was Brussels that insisted on phasing Brexit negotiations, forcing the UK to agree a backstop without clarity on future relations.

9. Ireland insists the backstop is needed to protect the Good Friday Agreement, but some constitutional experts* argue that the backstop itself undermines that agreement.

10. The EU are furious that the UK wants to change a deal that has been signed off. But what did they expect after the biggest defeat in parliamentary history? Unless and until MPs back a deal, there can be no agreement.

11. We keep hearing that the deal “is not open for renegotiation”. But last Saturday, Brussels suggested they could soften the backstop if the UK moved towards a customs union. Is the deal locked down or not?

12. The EU now suggests we could avoid the backstop by staying in the customs union and single market. How does this not make a mockery of the right to leave under Article 50?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/02/02/twelve-reasons-irish-backstop-makes-no-sense/

* https://policyexchange.org.uk/publication/the-backstop-paralysis-a-way-out/

Insisting a deal that has been defeated in the HoC by 230 votes is the only option for a way forward seems rather absurd. Time for the EU/Irish government to get back round the table .... tick tock.

1. Yes, mad isn't it.
2. One is parts of as we see fit, the other is all of and legally binding.
3. Barnier is saying they will do as much as they can, but it isn't a full answer to the problem
4. No, we can't be sure we would not be stuck in permanently, unless you believe Mogg and Johnson when they insisted a technological solution exists, but I wouldn't, they are proven liars.
5. Temporary does not mean that a time limit can be put on it, it needs to be there until a permanent alternative is, like a jack holding your car up whilst the wheel is off, you have to have a wheel on before you take the jack away, you can't just take it away after an hour regardless.
6. Irelands Protocol only affected Ireland, it did not change anything for the other 27, if we change the withdrawal agreement it is a change between us and the 27.
7. "Alternative arrangements" is a bit vague.
8.
9. Only if the Northern Ireland Assembly objects.
10. Furious because the Parliament says it wants to leave, and this is what leaving looks like with Mays red lines, Parliament should not allow her to negotiate on these lines if they are just going to reject the obvious results.
11. That would be a removal of a red line, and would open other avenues of negotiation.
12. It is a suggestion of an alternative route that would negate the backstop, how is that stopping us leaving?

 

[WATFORD zero]

WTO says its rules would not force EU or UK to erect hard Irish border

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ire...eu-or-uk-to-erect-hard-irish-border-1.3710136

Well you do have a point that we could choose to have no border controls, but as I'm sure you know, under preferred trader rules of WTO, that means we have open borders with the world.

Taking back control, eh?

Giving the world free access is an interesting starting point for trade negotiations.

(And if I'm still on this phone when Mrs Wz gets back from the loo, I am dead.......

 

[Baldseagull]

The French and Dutch electorates probably thought that when they voted against the EU constitution ....

Well, if you think ignoring referendum results is what would happen in the UK, we can stop this nonsense now can't we?

 

[JC Footy Genius]

Well you do have a point that we could choose to have no border controls, but as I'm sure you know, under preferred trader rules of WTO, that means we have open borders with the world.

Taking back control, eh?

Giving the world free access is an interesting starting point for trade negotiations.

(And if I'm still on this phone when Mrs Wz gets back from the loo, I am dead.......

As you know I wasn't saying we would have no border controls just pointing out that your previous claim about the WTO was untrue.

Speaking of border controls I see HMG has announced Lorries will be able to drive straight off ferries and Channel Tunnel trains without making customs declarations in the event of a no-deal Brexit. Simplified declarations will be carried out away from the choke points registering arrival within 24 hours. Seems eminently sensible.

 

[Baldseagull]

Ok, I disagree.

Why?

 

[JC Footy Genius]

Well, if you think ignoring referendum results is what would happen in the UK, we can stop this nonsense now can't we?

So much for democracy! .....also very EU.

 

[cunning fergus]

The article that you linked to https://www.theguardian.com/busines...blocked-eu-curbs-on-tax-avoidance-cables-show included this, "Juncker conceded the scandal had damaged his reputation. While not illegal, he admitted Luxembourg’s tax system was also “not always in line with fiscal fairness” and may have breached “ethical and moral standards”.

Since then, Juncker has made a point of supporting the EU’s competition commissioner, Margrethe Vestager, as she pursues high-profile investigations into specific tax rulings, including deals Luxembourg granted separately to McDonalds and Amazon.

If you want to make comparisons I would suggest the poacher turned Gamekeeper is close enough, no need to invoke a serial child murderer.
I know you don't want to talk about your work, but I think you might find it a rich source of ethically and morally questionable acts, and I would not be surprised if you were aware of some criminality within it, without suggesting you yourself are anything other than a paragon of virtue.

Your input on this is quite straightforward, you don’t have an axe to grind with Juncker and his conduct while Pres of Luxembourg.

I do, because he is an enabler of tax avoidance and more likely money laundering.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxembourg_Freeport

There is no point in the knock-a-bout we know where we stand.

What I do is no business of yours and your supposition that I am somehow aware of criminality in my role is mind boggling........I don’t know where you get this stuff from?

 

[cunning fergus]

The only way Brexit promotes Socialism is on the rebound of hard right policy that is coming. You utter fool. ****ing Bankers made us poorer not the EU, the Tories imposed austerity, not the EU, and just as those years of austerity are bringing us to a surplus instead of a defecit, we end up having to borrow more again because of ****ing Brexit.
It would be nice if I worked in that world to delude myself and blame the EU, is that is what is going on here?

You think banks in the EU are any different to the UK or US?

http://www.cadtm.org/Banks-are-responsible-for-the

Capitalists are not defined by nationality you complete cretin.......how much more austerity should the poor bear in this country and the EU because of bankers and their Tory chums.

Brexit means change, it can mean positive change, it’s ehy the banks support remain......like you, you dunce.

 

[cunning fergus]

Calm down petal.

I don't do assumptions. I do years and years of working in the Technology sector and recognising personality traits. That's what I do.

And I certainly don't think socialist views are somehow incompatible with a certain type of occupation. I'm sure that a man as principled and passionate as yourself, regales everyone at your chosen workplace with your socialist views constantly

(I don't do pathetic insults either )

Oh yes you do.

You assumed you knew what I did due to a post I made.......not true was it?

You also bought the cheap insults to, not me.

I know you are act first think later kind of guy........we all do.

The number of posts you edit after posting is incredible, evidently reactionary assumptions are made first, then the 2 or 3 working synapses gradually kick in and then you are back to do a quick edit to cover up your mistakes.

You leave a trail though.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

It'd be better for you if the Withdrawal Agreement with the backstop The UK formulated passed in the commons - it's the Brexit you voted for.

It'd be better for you too if that happened before an unsustainable no deal situation occurred, because we might rush to agree a Norwegian arrangement with customs union very quickly afterwards, rather than pass the Withdrawal Agreement with UK formulated backstop, as well as heaping a lot of damage and ill feeling abroad on ourselves before we do.

Not according to the man who played a major role and won a Nobel Peace prize for helping to negotiate the GFA ...

Lord Trimble has announced he and fellow instrumental negotiators of the Good Friday Agreement will initiate judicial review proceedings aimed at removing the backstop from Theresa May’s Withdrawal Agreement.

The Prime Minister has said her focus is on coming up with an alternative arrangement to take to Brussels in an effort to get a deal without a backstop.

Lord Trimble, who served as First Minister of Northern Ireland from 1998-2002 while he was leader of the Ulster Unionist Party, won the Nobel Peace Prize for his part in negotiating the Good Friday Agreement.

His spokesman said the veteran pro-UK politcian "plans to initiate judicial review proceedings to ensure that the Protocol is removed from the Withdrawal Agreement".

... forgive me if I value his opinions on what is best for Northern Ireland and the GFA more than yours.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Not according to the man who played a major role and won a Nobel Peace prize for helping to negotiate the GFA ...

Lord Trimble has announced he and fellow instrumental negotiators of the Good Friday Agreement will initiate judicial review proceedings aimed at removing the backstop from Theresa May’s Withdrawal Agreement.

The Prime Minister has said her focus is on coming up with an alternative arrangement to take to Brussels in an effort to get a deal without a backstop.

Lord Trimble, who served as First Minister of Northern Ireland from 1998-2002 while he was leader of the Ulster Unionist Party, won the Nobel Peace Prize for his part in negotiating the Good Friday Agreement.

His spokesman said the veteran pro-UK politcian "plans to initiate judicial review proceedings to ensure that the Protocol is removed from the Withdrawal Agreement".

... forgive me if I value his opinions on what is best for Northern Ireland and the GFA more than yours.

You value his opinions simply because it suits your agenda. It's just more, rather desperate, straw clutching on your part as well as desperation on his. It's unedifying to watch you frankly now Footy Genius. At least 2 years ago on this thread you did occasionally give the impression that you might sometimes know what you were talking about. Look at you now. It's just pitiful.

Do what some of the others have done on this thread in regards to Northern Ireland and become a Brexit voting, lifelong advocate for a united Ireland after-timer. You'll save face and thank me one day for suggesting it.

 

[Triggaaar]

Why?

You're saying things wouldn't change much without a referendum, but I think things have changed a lot over the last 40 years, due to being in the EU, without us having a referendum. We originally joined the common market without getting the chance to vote on it. We were later given the chance to leave, but the evidence is clear that big decisions get made without us getting a say.

How many of the countries that use the Euro let the people choose via a referendum? Countries like ours don't always consult us before making these decisions. I don't see how you can know that our situation wouldn't change.