Ok. I must admit I have been too busy to follow the details of the negotiations lately, can you link to where the UK has proposed putting Irish land borders in place and where the EU has rejected that?
So let's get this straight. After spending the first half of this thread babbling nonsense such as "Just declare Ireland a free trade zone not subject to the EU's protectionist custom's union and the problem is solved" @Dinner now asserts that there should be a hard border on the island of Ireland and that the Good Friday Agreement which ended decades of sectarian violence should be torn up. Presumably this is to be done unilaterally by the UK on the grounds that those trying to protect it (the Irish government) somehow don't actually "give a shit". Furthermore, erecting a hard border and dismantling the peace agreement are expected in his head to have no impact whatever on the uneasy political situation in Northern Ireland. Dissidents who continue sporadic attacks won't attract more support, those who spent decades fighting to (among other things) remove the border won't care at all if it's suddenly returned and the economic impact of erecting huge barriers to trade won't create thousands of unemployed people looking for someone to blame. This plan is so brilliant and cogent that I don't understand why the UK and EU negotiators aren't begging @Dinner to get on the next available flight to Brussels. He can solve all of their problems!
Don't forget @Dinner has assured us the troubles won't be returning, so it's all good. Funnily enough I was in Belfast a few months back and can't say I agree with that particular comfort blanket, especially given (like yourself) I live well within the historical conflict zone.
The clusterfuck continues. It has come out in the wash that over the past few days a deal was reached by British negotiators, but the Brexit Secretary quashed it at the last minute, based largely on its unacceptability to the DUP. On the table at one point was the idea that goods produced in NI would have a double certification for the UK and EU markets, giving what has historically been a bit of a basket case economy a huge selling point to investors. Of course the DUP chose the old "no surrender" tactic of blinkered intransigence on the constitutional question and fucked that off. The simple reality is the British don't appear to have a majority in favour of any sort of deal - so unless something changes they're crashing out. Would an election solve that? Is there time?
No, as that is not what has happened. What the EU has said is it is uneilling to change anything and either whole or part of the UK must be stuck as a vassal of the EU or else it will force there to be a land border. They have explicitly said my way or tye highway so there is nothing to discuss and no deal is the best deal on offer.
No. Not unless the EU agree to delay Brexit - and en election solves nothing anyway. A Corbyn led government, likely a coalition, would have an equally fractious standing when it comes to negotiations and Parliamentary votes on a deal, and would lead us equally to a hard Brexit given the fact they don't have the support for Corbyn's customs union, downgraded membership plan. There is not enough time to do anything beyond pushing through a degraded EU membership a 'la Chequers or face a hard Brexit and in the long term I think the latter will prove more beneficial than some back of a fag packet rushed out mini-membership deal. This is all because of the rush to trigger Article 50. It is abundantly clear there is not enough time to do what needs to be done effectively, not least Parliamentary scrutiny of any deal and the much needed people's vote on a deal, and May should grow a pair, swallow her pride and ask the EU to agree an extension of the Article 50 deadline. Impatient Brexiteers should hang their hands in shame. This is all because of them. There should have been negotaions first, then a draft deal, then a Parliaentary vote on the deal and then a peoples' vote on it. Only then should we have triggered Article 50.
This sounds eminently sensible. Why have the people vote on something when they don't know what they will be getting?
That was the whole purpose of the attempt to establish "An Irish backstop". Especially their attempt to make it last forever this forcing the UK into a horrible negotiating position and perpetual servatude to the EU with no ability to actually be free of the EU's restrictions. Leaving aside that the EU genuinely does not give a shit about Northern Ireland beyond attempting to use the issue to strong arm the UK into a weaker position and force them to remain in the customs union while paying fees to Brussels. No deal is far better than that alternative. Yes, there will certainly be risks but those risks are worth it compared to the humiliation the EU is offering.
"Risk" implies something that is of unknown quantity, which may or may not come to pass. But we know very well the consequences of a no-deal scenario. As well as an internal single market, the EU is also party to dozens of trade deals with third-party countries, a situation which took decades of negotiation. As such the UK can trade with all of them now on favourable terms. In five months that would completely stop and every entity in the UK would be forced to trade externally on WTO rules, with all of the tariffs, barriers, border checks, delays and regulation issues that that entails. According to a UK Cabinet Report the impact would be a whopping 8% of GDP growth. This is known as catastrophe, not risk.
What to say about the shitshow of the last several days. Draft deal agreed. May has an extended cabinet meeting and announces that cabinet has approved it. But it leaks that she refused to allow them a vote. Four cabinet ministers resign the next morning. One of those who resigns is the man in charge of Brexit, rejecting what is supposedly his own deal, the second holder of the role to go. Five other cabinet ministers openly discuss changing aspects of the deal they don't like. Tory extremists declare that they're going to launch a leadership challenge and then fail to gather the necessary support to do so. The DUP threaten to bring down the government and vote against it on a number of budget amendments. The deal is rubbished by all sides in Parliament, and stands no chance of passing. Leaks indicate that the government is considering a financial crisis as leverage to force the deal through on a second attempt if they fail the first time. EU governments are yet to approve the deal themselves. Did I get the main bits? Tick tock. Oh, and in the midst of this, a UN report condemned the misery caused by the callous nature of the Tory governments austerity program, which has left a large proportion of the population in poverty and a non-negligible amount unable to afford basic necessities such as food.
May’s awful deal will not get through Parliament and we’ll likely end up with a constitutional crisis and likely Hard Brexit. Aren’t you safe in the Emerald Isle?
I'm still holding onto a glimmer of hope all this turmoil might just be enough to derail the whole process. There's no doubt in my mind at this stage that a so called "people's vote" would show strongly in favour of remain. What scares me is the real possibility of that resulting in another Northern Ireland situation writ large.
Both the EU and the UK are going to have to sharpen their pencils and come up with a more agreeable deal, or face a hard exit.
If we are able to get a second vote, we really need to be winning it out the park. 70% support staying or something along those lines. A narrow stay and we are going to be saddled with calls for a third vote and concerns about democracy for years to come.
Interesting, when I'm scathing about your country, it's out of concern for the people, not gloating about their fate.
Either way, the voters started this catastrophe; they ought to have the final say. And there ought to be only two choices: the deal that May has negotiated, or no Brexit.
You've missed Spain going gaga over Gibraltar and the French being, well French, over fishing. A cynic (moi?) may well look at the pushing of a deal that only May seems to like, and the mild airing of the merest possibility of a second referendum, as the precursor to a second referendum consisting of the binary proposition of May's BINO or No Brexit. A more cynical person may even suspect this of being the intention all along. Michael Foot may now rest knowing the '83 Labour Manifesto is now merely the second longest suicide note in history, the Tories having effectively handed the next election to Labour. Who won't be happy because remaining in the EU is the very last thing Corbyn and McDonnell want, as most of their plans for a socialist paradise fall afoul of EU rules. It will also cement the view that the EU is pretty much a Mafioso outfit, in that 'wrong' answers will be rectified. Meanwhile businesses get to keep cheap labour, East European gangs can continue shipping slaves into the UK to keep middle class wankers in their £5 car washes and drunks in blowjobs, Piotr from Krakow can spell Timothy from Islington's name wrong on his environmentally unfriendly and tax-dodged vente take away cup of hazlenut scented frappacino before schlepping off to the prison-sized sub-sub-sub-let room he can barely afford, whilst his cousin in Redcar is carrying his teeth home in a bag because no Brexit. Yay.
If I'm reading the signs correctly, you'll get a second referendum. It will be a low turnout, and you'll get the %ages, but it will be a very hollow victory given the numbers of those who refused the choice of No Brexit and May's Brexit. And the anti-EU sentiment won't go away. It'll fester. It'll also accelerate the movement from the centre toward far-left and far-right. Nothing good.
You think? I'm expecting an even bigger turn out than the first one. Those who didn't bother their arse to vote are going to be coming out in their droves to reinforce their choice - on both sides. The remainers will be desperate to change the vote, the leavers will be angry at potentially getting overturned.
If it was an in/out referendum, then, yes, bigger turnout possibly. What we'll get is the equivalent of the Coca Cola Christmas trucking rocking into town, only Bad Santa is driving and the options are Panda Cola or no cola. Nobody wanting cola is getting out of bed for Panda Cola. Or May's Brexit.
So you are saying a lot of people won’t be as enthusiastic about Reality Brexit as they were for Fantasy Brexit? I can believe that.
There was a whole spectrum of opportunities, pissed away by the spineless, managerialist shits the UK political system has produced. I mean, in no actual reality has anyone ever said "what we need is a Gove." What we'ev ended up with is the result of entire system doing it's level best to not leave. Shockingly enough the result is a bit crap. It's like watching a race no one wants to win, but where every competitor is terrified of not competing. Painting it as some binary fantasy/reality is just being childish. The real fun is when it fails at Parliament, and what Head Girl May's response is.
So if I am understanding this right brexit is sort of like what trump would be if he were a movement. It was voted in by a bunch of idiots who could not see the big picture and thought an obnoxious gesture would be the best course of action. Everyone who has a brain is trying to move really slow and delay things until something better replaces it. and it is causing the rabble to get all excited and want to break stuff. Does brexit have any stupid boy children or a good looking daughter it wants to fuck? Doe it have an annoying immigrant wife who does god awful things? Maybe my comparison is off.
