Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?


  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
Shipping - for example Southern Ireland to Europe for long loads is shocking - not enough direct capacity so most of the time we have to ship into the uk to ship onwards (same to get holland to southern ireland - transits through uk)
I suspect if nothing else Brexit will lead to a fair bit of port works and some new ferry routes
A new Ferry corridor is mentioned in the EU proposal. Planning for everything.

*seeing southern ireland written down breaks my heart a little bit. We're just Ireland...
 
Shipping - for example Southern Ireland to Europe for long loads is shocking - not enough direct capacity so most of the time we have to ship into the uk to ship onwards (same to get holland to southern ireland - transits through uk)
I suspect if nothing else Brexit will lead to a fair bit of port works and some new ferry routes

That's the key here and the point of my question. The new ferry corridor is a better idea from the EU standpoint.
 
A new Ferry corridor is mentioned in the EU proposal. Planning for everything.

*seeing southern ireland written down breaks my heart a little bit. We're just Ireland...

perhaps thats actually one solution... (though I suspect enough people would literally fight against that... wee jimmy krankie would also throw her tartan toys out of the pram)
 
If the EU don't want a hard-right government in the UK I think they will prefer us to leave with no-deal. Any compromise now will just lead to morons like Farage and Rees-Ihni binni dimi diniwiny anitaime whipping up a 'betrayal' and the whole issue will begin again with the UK looking for further concessions.

I think the EU will just let us eat the shit sandwhich we've been knocking up for the past few years so that we can decide for ourselves that we don't like the aftertaste so much.
 
If the EU don't want a hard-right government in the UK I think they will prefer us to leave with no-deal. Any comprimise now will just lead to morons like Farage and Rees-Ihni binni dimi diniwiny anitaime whipping up a 'betrayal' and the whole issue will begin again with the UK looking for further concessions.

I think the EU will just let us eat the shit sandwhich we've been knocking up for the past few years so that we can decide for ourselves that we don't like the aftertaste so much.

Could be - my own personal feel is that both sides are talking up no deal so that the shitty deal they serve up will be more palatable in comparison...

I suppose the big question is suppose the UK simply said we wont pay a penny towards a boarder in Ireland and we wont enforce it... what would happen then - would the EU impose it with the likley reprocussions - would the government in Dublin sanction such a move?

hopefully it does not come to that and we can all hold our nose and eat our shit sandwich and give it a decade or so before holding a vote to rejoin...
 
Looks like Barnier has told May and her White Paper to feck off.
Also, Brexiteers have launched another conspiracy. Remainders are intentionally slowing down the economy.

This country is in trouble. I'm just happy I'm young enough to emigrate. I don't have a family, very open to learning a new language. I can assimilate pretty quickly.
 
Could be - my own personal feel is that both sides are talking up no deal so that the shitty deal they serve up will be more palatable in comparison...

I suppose the big question is suppose the UK simply said we wont pay a penny towards a boarder in Ireland and we wont enforce it... what would happen then - would the EU impose it with the likley reprocussions - would the government in Dublin sanction such a move?

hopefully it does not come to that and we can all hold our nose and eat our shit sandwich and give it a decade or so before holding a vote to rejoin...

If the UK don't enforce the border they will be violating WTO rules so not only would they have left the EU but have WTO sanctions as well, difficult to trade with anyone.
 
Could be - my own personal feel is that both sides are talking up no deal so that the shitty deal they serve up will be more palatable in comparison...

I suppose the big question is suppose the UK simply said we wont pay a penny towards a boarder in Ireland and we wont enforce it... what would happen then - would the EU impose it with the likley reprocussions - would the government in Dublin sanction such a move?

hopefully it does not come to that and we can all hold our nose and eat our shit sandwich and give it a decade or so before holding a vote to rejoin...
I think the EU are being generous even offering us a few options. It might hurt them in the short term but imo, it would be best for them for us to crash out without a deal.
I've been saying this for a few years, brexit could end up being one of the best things that happens to the EU.
 
I think the EU are being generous even offering us a few options. It might hurt them in the short term but imo, it would be best for them for us to crash out without a deal.
I've been saying this for a few years, brexit could end up being one of the best things that happens to the EU.
I run the UK arm of a dutch company... within that I utilise UK government funding to export worldwide... we have similar set ups in 6 EU countries and continental bases in Africa Asia and the Americas
I know from our point of view being a dutch based company that the best thing is not for the UK to crash out due to the potential uncertainty in ongoing agreed contracts and pricing future works.
Politically neither side may be prepared to back down but if they took the polititians and civil servants away and let a bunch of pragmatic business people have a couple of weeks at it I suspect we would have something far more workable
My own view was that the best thing for both parties would have been to stay - but being a pragmatist I think both sides could make a success of brexit - sadly its being approached as a zero sum political game and its frankly a mess
 
If we do a soft brexit does that mean we'd have to adhere to the EU's new tax regulations next year? Can't see it being anything other than hard brexit if that was the case.
 
Oh look we're back to square one on Irish border issue with time ticking fast...Who could have predicted this...This should have been the first thing on their list to sort out right after the referendum (beforehand actually) as it was clear for anyone with half a brain that it will be legally and technically most difficult one to figure and implement given the red lines. Yet they fecked around on secondary matters and now are going to blame the EU for not agreeing to their fantasy proposals - blame game has began already. Clowns.
 
Last edited:
Oh look we're back to square one on Irish border issue with time ticking fast...Who could have predicted this...This should have been the first thing on their list to sort out right after the referendum (beforehand actually) as it was clear for anyone with half a brain that it will be legally and technically most difficult one to figure and implement given the red lines. Yet they fecked around on secondary matters and now are going to blame the EU for not agreeing to their fantasy proposals. Clowns.
I think the whole of Brexit should have been sorted out before there was a referendum and the facts spelled out honestly so that people would know what they were voting for. Here we are 2 years later and people still don't know what we actually voted for.

Not only that but the fact that our politicians can't agree on what Brexit means is ripping our parliament to shreds. The whole thing is a massive clusterfeck that could have been avoided.
 
May rejected the backstop plan but offered no solution on preventing a hard border.
 
If we do a soft brexit does that mean we'd have to adhere to the EU's new tax regulations next year? Can't see it being anything other than hard brexit if that was the case.

Yep...

It is possible that Britain would not be subject to these rules if a hard Brexit’ is pushed through Parliament, but were we to remain as a part of the single market, we would be subject to these laws and would be forced to be more transparent in our harboring of shell companies and intermediaries.

https://medium.com/the-jist/was-eu-...reason-for-the-brexit-referendum-980ba88a8077
 
Oh look we're back to square one on Irish border issue with time ticking fast...Who could have predicted this...This should have been the first thing on their list to sort out right after the referendum (beforehand actually) as it was clear for anyone with half a brain that it will be legally and technically most difficult one to figure and implement given the red lines. Yet they fecked around on secondary matters and now are going to blame the EU for not agreeing to their fantasy proposals - blame game has began already. Clowns.

It was never considered before the referendum. If they blame the EU they have to blame the WTO as well and international law, it has always been an impossibility - if the UK (including NI) leaves the EU , they break the GFA. No-one to blame but the gullibles.
 
I think the whole of Brexit should have been sorted out before there was a referendum and the facts spelled out honestly so that people would know what they were voting for. Here we are 2 years later and people still don't know what we actually voted for.

Not only that but the fact that our politicians can't agree on what Brexit means is ripping our parliament to shreds. The whole thing is a massive clusterfeck that could have been avoided.

They should of held a 2 stage ref. Step one, see if the people want it, go away and determine what the deal would look like. Step 2, yes or no based on the deal agreed.
 
They should of held a 2 stage ref. Step one, see if the people want it, go away and determine what the deal would look like. Step 2, yes or no based on the deal agreed.
They could have done that but I still think they should have ironed out the basics of what Brexit would mean before any referendum.
 
I think the whole of Brexit should have been sorted out before there was a referendum and the facts spelled out honestly so that people would know what they were voting for. Here we are 2 years later and people still don't know what we actually voted for.

Not only that but the fact that our politicians can't agree on what Brexit means is ripping our parliament to shreds. The whole thing is a massive clusterfeck that could have been avoided.

They should of held a 2 stage ref. Step one, see if the people want it, go away and determine what the deal would look like. Step 2, yes or no based on the deal agreed.

You're both making the massive presumption that the EU would have been happy to carry out serious negotiation for a year or two and then sit back and say, 'but don't worry lads, only if you agree to it'. Every other country in the EU would have wanted to do the same thing, with nothing to lose.

As it happens things are turning to such utter shit for all concerned that we may, if the EU indicate they would respond, get a second chance to vote, but what they'll ask for in return is as yet unknown. If they consider it at all.
 
From the start, the referendum should've been Remain vs either leave the single market and customs union, or instead just to leave the EU with things mostly remaining the same. That would've been clearer, but Leavers would've never opted for that because then they'd have had to be deliberately clear in their vision for departure, instead of being able to put out a vague campaign in which nothing was ever properly clarified and Brexit voters could impose their own version of Brexit onto the vote.
 
They could have done that but I still think they should have ironed out the basics of what Brexit would mean before any referendum.

Over three years since the referendum became a probability and over two and a half years since serious debates started and still not one Brexiter has any idea what they actually voted for.
 
I don't get why everyone on Labour side who speaks out against Brexit is attacked from the left. It isn't just Blair which given his profile and past is maybe understandable but it generally seems those who support the current leader only really take an interest in Brexit if they notice anyone of the left/Labour criticising the Tory Brexit then they attack them for doing so.

As if the only acceptable opposition is what the Labour front bench present, which is having the exact same policy.
 
I don't get why everyone on Labour side who speaks out against Brexit is attacked from the left. It isn't just Blair which given his profile and past is maybe understandable but it generally seems those who support the current leader only really take an interest in Brexit if they notice anyone of the left/Labour criticising the Tory Brexit then they attack them for doing so.

As if the only acceptable opposition is what the Labour front bench present, which is having the exact same policy.

Because Corbyn is infallible... Momentum etc... It's shambolic from both parties.
 
You're both making the massive presumption that the EU would have been happy to carry out serious negotiation for a year or two and then sit back and say, 'but don't worry lads, only if you agree to it'. Every other country in the EU would have wanted to do the same thing, with nothing to lose.

As it happens things are turning to such utter shit for all concerned that we may, if the EU indicate they would respond, get a second chance to vote, but what they'll ask for in return is as yet unknown. If they consider it at all.

I'm not even on about that. I don't mean the exact wording of the article that we end up agreeing with the EU but rather a proposal that the government could get consensus on from it's own MP's. A written set of goals and a realistic list of privileges that we would expect to give up in order to get these goals.

The idea that we don't want to contribute to the EU either financially, through free movement or through regulation but wanted to keep a tariff free market is just a pipe dream.

If the government had at least canvased it's own MP's and realised that there is no way that they could get them to sit down together as adults and hash out a Brexit that would even get the EU to the negotiating table then maybe the referendum was a bad idea in the first place.
 
Because Corbyn is infallible... Momentum etc... It's shambolic from both parties.

Agreed, it is a particular problem with the left though. Just look at when people were praising Anna Soubry and retweeting the video where she laid into her colleagues on Brexit. People like Owen Jones, and others, were incandescent practically. Arguing that because she had supported Tory cuts and past Tory policy (which shouldn't really be unexpected for an actual Tory) people were wrong to point out that they agreed with her on Brexit. The mentality on the left really seems to be 'either we agree on everything or you're the enemy and we can't agree on anything.'

If a passing Tory MP is going to push you out of the way of an ongoing bus with '£350m a week to NHS' written on the side, the smart thing to do is to allow them to help, not insist on getting hit by the bus because you'll somehow feel besmirched because: 'he voted for benefit cuts'. Seeing everybody as the enemy is a massive problem some on the left really has to overcome. What's needed is cross-party/ideology unification against Brexit, not trying to find examples of where we've disagreed on other unrelated matters to excuse why we can't even recognise when we agree on this.