Presumably because that might be an issue with Britain, when it comes to the CTA. Just another example of the special considerations so often made for Britain within the EU.
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
Presumably because that might be an issue with Britain, when it comes to the CTA. Just another example of the special considerations so often made for Britain within the EU.
The common travel area (between UK and Ireland and British islands) has existed for nearly 100 years. It predates the EU and will exist long after it.
Ireland won't join Schengen because there is little to no benefit and they'd have to leave the CTA
I could be wrong but isn't the main benefit of the Schengen travel via road between countries? So it wouldn't really make sense for an island to abandon the CTA, which pre-existed the Schengen by nearly 100 years, to join it. In terms of air travel, Irish airports pretty much abide to Schengen rules anyway (any EU ID accepted, only one ID check etc).
Well, the historically contentious land border they share with the anti-Schengen UK would be the big issue there I'd have thought.
Ireland aren't in Schengen. Ireland and the UK have their own free movement that predates Schengen.
I know that I have been to Spain and Portugal this summer and have had to go through customs and show my passport when landing at every airport including back at Birmingham.
They take the Good Friday Agreement seriously. With the UK choosing to remain outside Schengen they had to do the same to continue the previsions made in the GFA.
51% of people are stupid.
No deal, by nature, is the worst deal.
No deal, by nature, is the worst deal.
Flying yes
Driving no. Though the cops have been known to do the odd spot check
There are no border checkpoints or anything to really indicate that you’ve driven over the border
Think the majority of people in this country have below average intelligence.
I am weak.
Thought you might not be happy with that poll.
Under what circumstances do we consider a deal, a bad deal?
People keep saying no deal is better than a bad deal but what do hell is a bad deal?
I'm just sick of everything right now.
Well it is a stupid question to be fair. People are going to be put off when you use the word 'bad'
What even is a bad deal
Worth remembering that a lot believed May when she said she was the strong and stable option in the campaign. I have hope that they'll believe her when she claims her deal is a good deal, and that a good deal is better than no deal.
I think people assume if no deal is made we stop paying EU contributions and everything else continues as normal. No thought to the actual consequences.
Stupid people are stupid.
Also somehow if no deal happens the EU will be desperate to deal because of a drop in trade. Somehow we would have the upper hand despite having limited food, gridlocked ports, grounded planes and no medicine, paying tarrifs on everything and massively devaluing our currency. They must have been all the cards David Davis was talking about.
Just watching the news with my proudly Leave voting Mother-in-Law. "It's all Cameron's fault! He didn't have a plan!"
She didn't take it well when I pointed out despite the fact that there was no plan, she voted for it, and the country would probably go down the toilet as a result.
She didn't take it well when I pointed out despite the fact that there was no plan, she voted for it, and the country would probably go down the toilet as a result.
At least we now know what the common market is going to be renamed - the common rule book. Not what I would have chosen but there you go.
I fully agree - I think that they see “no deal” as basically status quo and are even less willing to listen to warnings after “Project Fear” failed to materialise (because we haven’t left yet but logic is not their strong point).
It’s a stupid loaded question isn’t it. Even the pollsters are being obtuse now. Alongside the bbc they’re in good company
Public opinion is influenced by the level of the debate and you have one party tearing itself apart competing over who can deliver the most damaging Brexit and meanwhile Labour think it's fine to do a UKIP and shit on immigrants and be a bit racist because "...look at the Lib Dems". It's all a bit fecking horrible.
Looking inevitable. PM has no allies.
I hope everything goes to shit worldwide so i can laugh at your posts blaming labour forever. You're like an angry wasp round a pont glass.
Guardian:
Yeah but she's proposing a three-way vote.
1. No Deal (WTO Rules)
2. TM's Deal (whatever that is)
3. Remain in the EU
All trade deals have a common rule book - or there wouldn't be a deal. It's just that in this case most of the rules are already there. I really can't see the problem with it.
Well #2 isn't an option because they're going to reject the deal.
I'd be really wary of a referendum with three options. Say #2 is labelled as a "soft brexit" in some fashion. I don't think many leaver's would go for that whereas I think there are probably people who were on the fence/voted remain who will opt for #2 over #3. Essentially it's given remain voters 2 options which keep Britain EU tied and giving leaver's the same option as before. #1 would win comfortably imo
Nothing's changed since the referendum in June 2016
Either the UK are in or out of the EU.
All the ridiculous proposals the government have made since the referendum are all non-starters.
There is very little time left to arrange and hold a referendum so what happens in between, negotiations continue, stop, put on hold, cancelled?
The EU want to get on with life and not hang around for the UK to decide what it wants and then keep changing its mind.
The Uk are leaving in March 2019 and unless something happens very quickly that's not going to change.
Either the UK are in or out of the EU.
All the ridiculous proposals the government have made since the referendum are all non-starters.
There is very little time left to arrange and hold a referendum so what happens in between, negotiations continue, stop, put on hold, cancelled?
The EU want to get on with life and not hang around for the UK to decide what it wants and then keep changing its mind.
The Uk are leaving in March 2019 and unless something happens very quickly that's not going to change.
The issue is people thinking leave means one thing. It's why we still get sub-intellect radio hosts and newspaper columnists yelling "just get on with it". The sad truth is the people championing Brexit and perhaps many of the people who voted for it, are too thick to actually know what it is. It's never been as simple as deciding to walk out of a room yet whenever anyone who supports Brexit speaks they refer to it in terms as if they genuinely think it's as straight forward as leaving a room, and that's gone from being comical at the beginning, annoying in the middle and is now bloody dangerous as we approach the end.
This is what "Brexit means Brexit" gets you. The nutters lapped that up because it gave them an excuse not to think. Who cares what type of trade deal we want or are likely to get, Brexit means Brexit, right? And if that doesn't work shout "Just get on with it" a few times.
The only positive is that the EU do want us to stay so they would be willing to extend/defer the Article 50 leaving date. Everything we know about what the EU wants, what they've said and what their likely neogitation strategy to be is keeping the UK practically in the EU. Because there will be an economic impact on them too if we crash out. The idea they'll get to March 29th and decide they'd happily take that hit because they're 'bored' of the process is every bit as ridiculous as the analysis that the hardline Brexit nutcases are pumping out.
This is what "Brexit means Brexit" gets you. The nutters lapped that up because it gave them an excuse not to think. Who cares what type of trade deal we want or are likely to get, Brexit means Brexit, right? And if that doesn't work shout "Just get on with it" a few times.
The only positive is that the EU do want us to stay so they would be willing to extend/defer the Article 50 leaving date. Everything we know about what the EU wants, what they've said and what their likely neogitation strategy to be is keeping the UK practically in the EU. Because there will be an economic impact on them too if we crash out. The idea they'll get to March 29th and decide they'd happily take that hit because they're 'bored' of the process is every bit as ridiculous as the analysis that the hardline Brexit nutcases are pumping out.
The EU consider that the UK are leaving next March and are working in that direction only. The date will not be prolonged because the EU may take a hit. This is the biggest problem in the UK. They still think the EU will beg the UK to stay. People need to wake up quickly.
See small thread:
It's still the same pile of rubbish. Wanting the benefits of the EU without being in it. It is not possible.
Yep, no way EU will except the current proposal.
I really do not know what game she's trying to play.
I really do not know what game she's trying to play.
One event I've noted that I think has been given less significance than it deserves is May's meeting with Merkel shortly before she revealed her plans at Chequers. I suspect she must have received some positive encouragement from Merkel then for her to carry on. I'm not suggesting this amounts to actual agreement, or that Merkel and the EU won't want shedloads of alterations and concessions to it, perhaps unacceptably so, but I do think it hints that a deal may be possible, which I thought not before. The subsequent government resignations back this up as well, I don't think Boris and the others would have been so quick to go if they thought her plans were definitely doomed from the start.
Whether she can carry parliament or stay as leader is a whole different matter though. The Tory brexiteers have always struck me as a particularly self-serving bunch, but the way they are now dripping out resignations indicates they may actually have some degree of organisation at last, surprising to me at any rate.
Whether she can carry parliament or stay as leader is a whole different matter though. The Tory brexiteers have always struck me as a particularly self-serving bunch, but the way they are now dripping out resignations indicates they may actually have some degree of organisation at last, surprising to me at any rate.
I think Merkel will push hard for any deal that allows the economies to continue to be interwoven and at the same time respects the EU's positions (To an extent that is acceptable). But Merkel still isn't the EU, it will need agreement from the other 26 too and Merkel won't burn any political capital trying to convince them (there's too many other problems).
The real problem is that when the current situation is changed to whatever it is in the future there will be countries that benefit more from the new situation than others (or experience less pain), how do you convince the ones getting the shorter stick to agree? (Usually you'd give them something else in exchange, but there's 28 parties to this, and no one even knows which stick they're getting)