What? If we remain in the single market and go for a soft Brexit we cannot reduce EU immigration because our relationship with them will be similar in that respect. You can't be in the single market without abiding by its rules, but if we leave if fecks Northern Ireland. What's wrong about that?
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
What? If we remain in the single market and go for a soft Brexit we cannot reduce EU immigration because our relationship with them will be similar in that respect. You can't be in the single market without abiding by its rules, but if we leave if fecks Northern Ireland. What's wrong about that?
Why would anyone in the Republic even consider agreeing to this? Are SF and co going to be okay with it? The point of an agreement like the GFA is that it stands on both sides - if it's up for negotiation every time the UK's unhappy then it falls apart because it's evidently worthless.
Fair point...
But if the British government honoured the GFA then what would the issue be, in or out of the EU? Surely peace in NI didn't hinge on EU membership.
It was Blair and Aherne. Major was involved during the Albert Reynolds era, but never involved in the GFA.
Not membership, but arguably being in the SM/CU since we willingly made the agreement to have part of the UK have an open border with another EU member state.
Yes you're right about Major but I mentioned him as a key factor in convincing the loyalists that they would not be sold down the river by the British government. He's also the last tory Prime minister to stand upto the lunatic fringe in his own party rather than capitulate like Cameron and May have done.
Yes in an ideal world EU membership should not matter but in the febrile world of NI Politics GFA achieved a degree of balance between republican and Loyalist, Ireland and UK governments that everyone could put some trust in.
Loyalists always suspected the British government was going to leave them high and dry and walk away from the troubles, and viewed UK and Irish governments increasing collaboration and agreement with suspicion. The fact that the Brexiteers knew this would be an issue and carried on regardless just emphasises this point to the DUP and the Loyalist thugs that sit behind them.
Now there are thugs still around on both sides, masking their criminality under the guise of a political cause, but breaking the GFA will give one side an excuse to escalate the violence from the current underground level to being overt and expressive, risking drawing everyone back into violence again.
Growing up in the 70's I thought that Northern Ireland, the eastern Bloc and apartheid in South Africa were just permanent issues of horror that would always be with us. The fact that the British government is risking re-igniting a conflict over jingoism, banana's and blue passports is to their eternal shame.
If we actually go ahead with this and suffer a no-deal brexit / destroy the GFA I will actually be leaving the country I think. I don't want my child to grow up in a country run by a government like that.
As much as I abhor everything about Brexit, the CTA existed long before the EU (I know people can say it's because we're both in the EU that we have open borders now and I won't dispute that, although technically those open borders also existed long before the EU) so I do think that as a result the EU should be making special allowances for it. We can't have a hard border here, it would be absolute chaos on so many levels and probably ruin the Irish economy (a net contributor to the EU now) in the interim. They need to accept that the UK government is a shambles and come up with something themselves.
Yes it always amazed me that even at the height of the troubles you could cross between UK and Ireland with a gas bill as a form of ID. I couldn't believe it when I first travelled to Ireland given all that the British media talked about "security clampdowns" against the threat of republican terrorists at the time. It made me realise that it was all just rubbish. The clampdowns were all about suppression within Northern Ireland and offered no protection to the UK at all.
May needs to stop with the bullshit about red lines around immigration and accept being part of the customs union. It would resolve the NI issue but leave the brexiteers jumping up and down about immigration. I think this would be fair as it's her own failings as Home secretary coming back to haunt her. She could have used the special powers available to her to restrict the immigration of labour from new EU members but she lacked the wit and guile to use them properly.
She setup an inferior "hostile environment" system within the Home office that targeted long standing windrush generation era people as an easy win rather than grasping the nettle of dealing with people from eastern Europe.
I'm not advocating for draconian immigration policy by the way, just highlighting more could have been done if she wanted to appease those with a bugbear on immigration.
For me that's the crux of the matter. Is it a constitutional brexit they want, or did you just want to stop immigrants maybe?
I don’t see her surviving the year.
Corbyn is wasting my time.
Harsh on Oscie, even if he was a bit odd.
Tom Newton Dunn still thinks there's a cross party effort to get a second referendum amendment in. It's against the wishes of the leaders of both parties but but is it will pass .
This is bullshit all options are on the table in the event they will campaign for a 2nd vote including remaining in the EU. They cannot possibly campaign to get a 2nd vote on a deal which fails to get through parliament and is rejected by the EU. The logical options would be no deal or remain and that is what will be on the table if there won't be a general election.
Tom Watson did an interview with Sophy Ridge (
) and when asked about his choice if there was to be a second referendum he said he would probably vote remain again so Patrick is talking shite!This is bullshit all options are on the table in the event they will campaign for a 2nd vote including remaining in the EU. They cannot possibly campaign to get a 2nd vote on a deal which fails to get through parliament and is rejected by the EU. The logical options would be no deal or remain and that is what will be on the table if there won't be a general election.
Tom Watson did an interview with Sophy Ridge (
Yeah that tweet appears to be based on a draft of the motion, which restricted a referendum to 'the terms of Brexit'. According to the BBC, that wording has since been removed.
Why have you posted this in 2 threads? We heard you the first time.
My prediction is that she's gone by the end of 2019 and Corbyn will never be PM.
@ everyone confusing constitutional law with an inverted X-factor popularity contest … where politicians are told who the winner is but are then dared to have a stab at how that fairy tale ending might happen in the real world at risk of losing the next election!2nd vote!!!This is bullshit all options are on the table in the event they will campaign for a 2nd vote including remaining in the EU. They cannot possibly campaign to get a 2nd vote on a deal which fails to get through parliament and is rejected by the EU. The logical options would be no deal or remain and that is what will be on the table if there won't be a general election.
Tom Watson did an interview with Sophy Ridge (
Who said anything about an election
If you think decisions are being made, right now, for the good of the realistic future of the economy or the people of the UK you are very much mistaken. For every political party involved it's all about doing what's best to stay in/or gain power come the next election.
So, hands-up I guess I mentioned an election! But it's not like it wasn't in all the headlines over the weekend and still this morning.
The lady leading everyone in the UK into the wilderness currently … voted to remain??? if that doesn't back up my argument that "getting voted in" trumps "the good of the people" I don't know what does! And NO "Trump" was not a freudian slip either it applies wonderfully here too!
Just look at the opposition's, just as pathetic, non-stance about whether (or not) to ratify another vote (the ONLY obvious transparent choice IMO btw after the facts uncovered about manipulation) because it might hurt their election credentials.
I agree with what you're saying, power is the only thing that interests them, not the good of the country. There are very few politicians who don't have their own self interest at heart.
May will do anything to try to stay in power so I don't see an election coming but I'm guessing things will get so bad that she'll have no choice but to resign as PM forced to so by her own party.
May is the worst PM the UK have had and Corbyn is somehow even worse.
What amazes me is that some young Labour voters, who tend to dislike the old, idolise him, when he's the most decrepid throwback to the 70s there is.
That's why I say May won't be there at the end of next year and Corbyn will never win an election now or in the future.
That's the worst thing about this whole debacle … the most important political decision of the new millennium is being decided under the watch of the weakest politicians we have ever seen!
Honestly I'm baffled by your post, the CTA included a common application of immigration rules. That's one of the very thing that the UK used as an argument for Brexit. The solution is that the UK and the 27 other accept common rules on immigration, trades and customs. Or the Republic of Ireland could be cut from the rest of the EU if that's the option that the Republic choose but there is no magical solution where the Island of Ireland has two legislation and one area.
But that was my point? So far it's basically been the Uk coming to the EU with (useless) solutions and the EU saying no. Rinse and repeat. The EU need to step it up here and offer alternatives. I'm not a fan of this approach as for me the UK don't deserve alternatives but ultimately the border is more important than that and we all know this UK gove is too incompetent and rubbish to reach a logical agreement themselves.
I didn't mind her when she became PM, it was only when she started having to defend Brexit when she started coming off as incompetent and rudderless. She's clearly never believed in it and it shows, whether she intends it or not.
She could of course have let someone else take over, but who? She's probably doing us all a favour by making sure non of the main Brexiteers take over. Boris could of had the job if he wanted it, he knows what a shit-show is coming though... It has to be the worse job in British post-war political history, whoever has the reigns can only lose.
The alternative is the one the UK are leaving because they don't want common rules. It's crazy that in 2018 people are still not integrating that basic thing, the UK entire issue is the common rules and collective decision making.
I'm no constitutional expert (so don't crucify me for this notion … that's all it is!)
I think after the constitutional (but legally, only advisory) vote went against the obvious wishes of the currently elected sitting government a general election should have been immediately called fought on the grounds of BREXIT.
Why? We're leaving - they have no desire to change the status quo and don't need to budge because they're the more powerful party here. Even if there's an argument it'd be helpful in some regards, from what perspective do the EU benefit by caving in to the demands of a country that's leaving? They've set out their fundamental principles and wants in this negotiation and don't intend to move from that. They'll be fine, or at least are at less risk of struggling than us, and so we need to work around them as a result. As was always going to be the case.
The EU offered numerous options at the very start which May rejected due to her stupied red lines. They aren't going to change the rules for us, no matter how hard we stamp our feet and hold our breath.
An election immediately afterwards is a decent idea in principle, but it wouldn't have stopped Brexit since no party would've probably had the balls to stand on a unified platform against it right after the vote. And doing so would've been terrible optics. Remember, much as it was seen as a shambles even back then, the extent to which it was going to be shambolic wasn't really yet known, and there remained hope for a lot of people. Even plenty of people on the Remain side thought it might turn out somewhat okay, even if it wasn't their preference.
You have changed your prediction about 10 times mate. Maybe next year eh
In the end it's simple the Island of Ireland is indivisible and needs to be in one of the two blocks, I don't think that this reality has been hammered enough. There is no magical solution.
You have changed your prediction about 10 times mate. Maybe next year eh
When?
Which puts us where we are right now … a bunch of people refusing to ratify anything because the fairy tale is impossible. But at least that way politicians (the people we elect to speak for us) would have been forced to admit that to the electorate in their election pledges in late 2016 and we could have moved on from a more realistic standpoint … instead of guiding us into a darkness they don't even believe in collectively so they can have a few extra days on the entry as PM or as the party in power on Wikipedia.
This
My original post made all this clear. Because of Ireland. The EU need to accept that Ireland and the border will have a very negative effect on a country that will still be in the EU should a deal not be reached. I don't disagree with what you're saying, the UK deserve to crash and burn for their stupidity but my country does not.
Look, it won't happen, unless the UK cave there will be a hard border, the EU won't budge on it, clearly. I just hope they're prepared for the consequences and don't leave us out on our arse.
Dont make me go through the whole thread but last year she'd be gone by autumn iirc
And that's why the EU proposed that NI stays in the EU, that way Ireland is in the same block. The issue with that is that one of the UK's red line is that NI can't be separated from the rest of the UK.
I can't understand what is the fuss really. The UK and the EU should agree to the withdrawal agreement were bills are settled there and then. Afterwards there will be plenty of time to negotiate a future trade deal.
Its not the EU's job to bail Brexit Britain out.
Its not the EU's job to bail Brexit Britain out.
Yes I'm fully aware how that works.