Full integration is not certain. It’s your opinion which you’re entitled to. People who disagree with it aren’t necessarily detached from reality because it hasn’t happened yet and there’s no proof that it will.Disagree - perhaps the Remainers did not know what they were voting for?
If we Remain beyond this point the certain outcome is integration - only the timing is a question
I understand that Remainers want to load a 2nd vote by portraying that the pre2016 world can carry on forever and prefer to set that against an extreme leave outcome
That is, IMO, called;
a) loading the dice
b) detached from reality- which a majority might fall for and thereby be attarctive - but there should be honesty on both sides
Thanks for your opinion. All valid points but it doesn’t answer the question asked which was what is the fallback position if a solution agreeable to both sides isn’t found and a time-bound backstop expires?
Corbyn can't deliver a second referendum only because he can't rely on his party to vote for one (or even on himself). Please be in no doubt, the leadership of the Labour Party is composed of openly declared Marxists - 'they really are' - led by Seumas Milne, John McDonnell and Andrew Murray, who is now Corbyn's chief strategic adviser after spending 40 years as chairman of the British Communist Party. They are backed by Len McCluskey, a former enthusiastic supporter of Militant Tendency and still Derek Hatton's best mate. Len's girlfriend Jenny Formby is now General Secretary of the Labour Party after Jon Lansmann, founder of Momentum, withdrew as a candidate on condition she was appointed. The Labour Party is 100% controlled by a Marxist group who consider themselves engaged in a class war and whose primary objective is not the wellbeing of this country or its citizens but the overthrow of the capitalist system.He cant, i thought that is obvious. It would depend on if he won a GE and then got a deal he thought worthy. Then quite rightly parliament would decide. As much as you think Labour are totalitarian Marxists, they really are not, they are democrats so he could not force it on the people, he is not a dictator.
Full integration is not certain. It’s your opinion which you’re entitled to. People who disagree with it aren’t necessarily detached from reality because it hasn’t happened yet and there’s no proof that it will.
The thing about a time-bound backstop that gets extended at the end in the event of no agreement is that it’s the same as an unfettered backstop. There has to be a fallback position at the end or it’s pointless.Sorry mate.
I dont think that situation would arise but if it did i can only see a further extension but as both sides have said re the backstop, it isn't what is wanted by anyone and best efforts to move on from it have been promised.
I think as brexiteers we have to allow a sizeable time frame say a minimum of 3 years to be applied to it and that the EU and Dublin should except that and honour those best effort promises to show a permanent back stop isn't on their agenda.
Its a guess but no one can answer your question with any certainty right now i dont think.
The thing about a time-bound backstop that gets extended at the end in the event of no agreement is that it’s the same as an unfettered backstop. There has to be a fallback position at the end or it’s pointless.
I strongly disagree. Being in the EU with our own currency helped this country to near the top of the EU growth league. It also meant we got away with only paying a small amount compared to the big Eurozone countries when Ireland and Greece needed bailing out. I think we are currently in a sweet spot where we get the benefits of membership in terms of trade, we have a say in setting the rules and we don’t have the downside of the problems brought about by the single currency.If we are to remain what i dont want is another 10/20/30 years of the same uncertainty, the same arguments and friction, seeing us opt out of this that and tother in Brussels and the seemingly never ending fraught relationship we have politically with the EU to continue and i certainly dont want us as a country fighting about it forever either.
Seriously if we are to remain then go full on in and at least then we would be fully on a level playing field with the French and Germans and have any real chance of directing its travel of direction.
Remaining as is now, being in but on the outside is doing no one any good and we shouldn't even contemplate it.
I strongly disagree. Being in the EU with our own currency helped this country to near the top of the EU growth league. It also meant we got away with only paying a small amount compared to the big Eurozone countries when Ireland and Greece needed bailing out. I think we are currently in a sweet spot where we get the benefits of membership in terms of trade, we have a say in setting the rules and we don’t have the downside of the problems brought about by the single currency.
I don’t think there’s any such thing as walking away. Without an agreement, there would have to be a Customs Union between ROI and NI (or the whole of the UK) or a hard border. One of those would have to be the fallback.What the UK wants is the walk away option whilst the unfettered option as is now in the WA means we have to have the permission of the EU to leave and its only that that most are objectionable to and rightly so imo.
The ultimate fall back from our prospective is to walk away and if we had to do that then it would mean no deal had been reached.
I dont however think it would ever come to that i really dont and a lengthy but reasonable time frame of say 3 years should be enough based on the paper produced recently for tech solutions to be applied.
Other than that answer mate which is nothing but opinion and best guess i dont have the answer.
I don’t think there’s any such thing as walking away. Without an agreement, there would have to be a Customs Union between ROI and NI (or the whole of the UK) or a hard border. One of those would have to be the fallback.
I think what you are calling a political spat in reality originates from the right wing press shit stirring about straight bananas, British fish and other such bollocks which has had the effect of making successive governments needing to look like they’re being intransigent with the EU to appease those that take the anti EU press seriously. In reality I doubt it’s that antagonistic.I didn't mention the Euro in that post although i did several times earlier today so you possibly picked it up from them.
Hear what you are saying but it doesnt alter the fact we have this continuous political spat with the EU and here at home it harbours a deep scepticism of the EU. I blame successive UK gov for this btw for signing bit by bit over the last 40 years whilst shouting here back home how they haven't done so and will tell the EU where to go etc etc. Maybe in the 70's the initial ref should have asked look, we want to go in and by in we mean in, lock stock and barrel?
I think what you are calling a political spat in reality originates from the right wing press shit stirring about straight bananas, British fish and other such bollocks which has had the effect of making successive governments needing to look like they’re being intransigent with the EU to appease those that take the anti EU press seriously. In reality I doubt it’s that antagonistic.
I’m not talking about the odd article here and there. I’m talking about a concerted campaign over many years by the Mail and Express that influences public opinion. Cameron had to do what he did to appease that sentiment but the reality was that there wasn’t that much the EU could offer. Where they all went wrong was it should have been made to look that Cameron had achieved something rather than show him up as a failure.I take the sentiment but i think it goes a tad deeper than the off sarcastic press report.
Cameron went cap in hand and basically got sent home with a flea in his ear.
That wasn't a press article and for many in the country possibly the deciding factor come the EU ref.
Its all moot now anyway and we have to move on from the last 3 years as a minimum and find a way out of the situation we now find ourselves in.
The problem is that No Deal necessitates a hard border or we would be in breach of WTO rules which would really fuck us up.Both sides have said the back stop is not a long term viable solution for either side and that it is temporary until such a time a FTA has been agreed.
What needs to happen and quick is both side move on their respective red lines and an agreed suitable time limit for the back stop agreed that allows them the time and space to get a FTA agreed as its in the interests of everyone involved to get it done.
Both sides need to say look a deal will get dont here and why shouldn't it given the only thing holding it all up is the question of the back stop being unfettered and unacceptable?
if that cant be sorted diplomatically then i dont see any other option other than walk with no deal and the UK has to be strong and say no hard border as far as we are concerned.
Someone will blink its just a question of who?
I’m not talking about the odd article here and there. I’m talking about a concerted campaign over many years by the Mail and Express that influences public opinion. Cameron had to do what he did to appease that sentiment but the reality was that there wasn’t that much the EU could offer. Where they all went wrong was it should have been made to look had Cameron had achieved something rather than show him up as a failure.
Not so according to Mr Rockwell.The problem is that No Deal necessitates a hard border or we would be in breach of WTO rules which would really fuck us up.
I don’t disagree with much of that and as you say there are plenty on the left of the Labour Party who dislike what the EU stands for and they too have had a lot of influence, and that includes Corbyn who was invisible during the referendum campaign.Yeah the conservative supporting press, read by conservative voters sceptical about out EU membership has without a doubt played to its audience but as seen by polls post ref, between 3 and 4 million traditional labour voters also voted to leave and i can assure you i didnt get spoon fed anything from the Mail etc.
its been a mistake from day one to make this out as a right wing tory thing as it goes way beyond that.
Lexit is a real thing and whilst I'm not on the extreme left o the labour party or movement and often disagree with what they do and want, im one of a good few million that listened to the Labour leave campaign and agree very much with what they say on the EU and brexit.
Agree completely that politically the EU had to give Cameron a bone to bring back home and it was a huge mistake in not doing so.
The problem is that No Deal necessitates a hard border or we would be in breach of WTO rules which would really fuck us up.
Not so according to Mr Rockwell.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ire...eu-or-uk-to-erect-hard-irish-border-1.3710136
If you read the article it says that it would be up to the UK and the ROI/EU to make sure border checks are carried out. This would necessitate some infrastructure. It’s just semantics to say this doesn’t need to be a hard border. It also says that the WTO would only get involved if one of its 164 members complained about WTO rules not being enforced. This could easily happen if border checks are inadequate.Not so according to Mr Rockwell.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ire...eu-or-uk-to-erect-hard-irish-border-1.3710136