The GFA has to be revised - that should not cause some massive discord unless people want to make it so.There was no weaponising until the DUP decided to make it so.
They threw a spanner into the works of something that had the potential to succeed, if compromises were made with a few red lines.
They would like nothing more than to renegotiate the GFA which they never agreed to.
This of course is something that you have mentioned would be part of your plan also.
There is a lot of sub plots going on @mcfc1632 but one man's version of the truth doesn't match everyone else's.
I've heard some crazy stuff and but this takes some beating and begs the question do these people have shit for brains ? I mean WTF!!
....
It's as though Johnson has sat down and said fuck Ireland fuck the Good Friday Agreement let's get Brexit done!!
Has MB wasted all those posts?There's simply no chance of us having a soft brexit with the current crop in charge.
A soft brexit would require a EFTA/EEA relationship with the EU which requires things such as:
* Freedom of movement
* European court of justice jurisdiction (to stay in the EEA)
* Financial contributions to the EU
* No regulatory autonomy from the EU
This isn't going to happen in a month of Sundays under the Conservatives or the Lib Dems
Yet again, you've not responded to any of my points (I can't be that stupid as that was my predicted outcome) but you've called me stupid, again. As many other posters have pointed out, there isn't much point trying to discuss things with you. Have a lovely afternoon.As I said:
"......as for your childish insults - well they just make you appear probably as clever as you really are."
Your previous post was enough to emphasise this - no need for further proof
The outcome was even clearer down here. Over 90%. and we did change two articles in our written constitution as a result. One being our claim to the six counties.Yawn.
i will give you a statement - that you might contest - N.I. took part in a national referendum in '98 with regard to the future of NI. One of the outcomes being any changes to the constitution/border must be put back to the people of NI. This was ratified by GB and RoI.
The outcome of that referendum was clear...VERY CLEAR, 72%. and the UK parliament committed to implementing and honouring that result. If so doing requires changes to existing treaties then you had better ask us first - simples
Don't get me wrong, it's theoretically possible.Has MB wasted all those posts?
The conditions that were prevailing at the time it was established will no longer exist - therefore it is only logical that the parties discuss how to revise it to reflect the new situation - there was no need for it to be made into some 'explosive topic
The GFA has to be revised - that should not cause some massive discord unless people want to make it so.
The conditions that were prevailing at the time it was established will no longer exist - therefore it is only logical that the parties discuss how to revise it to reflect the new situation - there was no need for it to be made into some 'explosive topic'
They've made it abundantly clear they don't want a deal on any terms that could possibly be acceptable to the other side. No Deal provides Johnson's backers with huge profits and keeps the tax authorities away from their offshore holdings. That's why this latest proposal is a complete sham which will be hyped by the Mail, Express and Sun as something new that the nasty Europeans won't even consider, when in reality it will be a re-hashed proposal rejected years ago.Don't get me wrong, it's theoretically possible.
But it's just highly unlikely bar a labour government being in power, the conservatives do not want a soft brexit (I'm not convinced they want a deal full stop) and the liberal democrats want to revoke article 50 entirely
Yeah it will never happen under the conservatives led by Johnson, I can't see anything but a no deal under himThey've made it abundantly clear they don't want a deal on any terms that could possibly be acceptable to the other side. No Deal provides Johnson's backers with huge profits and keeps the tax authorities away from their offshore holdings. That's why this latest proposal is a complete sham which will be hyped by the Mail, Express and Sun as something new that the nasty Europeans won't even consider, when in reality it will be a re-hashed proposal rejected years ago.
There needs to be a VONC followed by a GNU to come to a new agreement with the EU for the type of Brexit promised at the time of the referendum - i.e. FTA from Iceland to the Russian border along with a Customs Union to protect the GFA. That is the only feasible Brexit.
Very unfair - everyone should care a lot
Just care about the implementation of the referendum result as much/more - which you do not seem to
Very unfair - everyone should care a lot
Just care about the implementation of the referendum result as much/more - which you do not seem to
Don't get me wrong, it's theoretically possible.
But it's just highly unlikely bar a labour government being in power, the conservatives do not want a soft brexit (I'm not convinced they want a deal full stop) and the liberal democrats want to revoke article 50 entirely
Ironically a soft brexit would fix the Northern Ireland issue with free movement of people
This^.The outcome was even clearer down here. Over 90%. and we did change two articles in our written constitution as a result. One being our claim to the six counties.
I know we go around in circles with this @mcfc1632, but I do respect your decision to leave the EU but have maintained that if that was what you wanted to do, then this was never going to be the way to do it. You put the cart before the horse and the outcome was always going to be along these lines, because the two are incompatible.
The NI part of the UK question would always have to be solved before you leave, but even after three years you are still trying to do it the other way around.
Why? Because to renegotiate the GFA alone, would take you another decade considering the assembly isn't even running now.
Apart from the DUP, there is no will to renegotiate the GFA. Not in Ireland as a whole. Not internationally and shamefully, there shouldn't be the will from a British government as a knee-jerk reaction to a mess they've made.
I fully appreciate that Alex.No it doesnt, and no it shouldnt...you only say this as you have often said that the views of the english are not being listened to.
The GFA was not "about" leaving or staying in the EU....that, to use one of your phrases, is secondary to the main issues(s) of the Agreement.
After all the bloodshed and the YEARS of negotiation why should we renegotiate or revise it. Why?
You have mentioned you lived/stayed in Dublin for a while...no disrespect to that, or Eamo and the boys, but Dublin is not Belfast...its not NI....it doesnt paint a full picture of the situation here.
Also the GFA negotiations had nothing to do with England so for an Englishman to expect it to be revised because the English have voted for something that may jeopardise it is the height of arrogant entitled nonsense. It's also a very good reason why the referendum was flawed.No it doesnt, and no it shouldnt...you only say this as you have often said that the views of the english are not being listened to.
The GFA was not "about" leaving or staying in the EU....that, to use one of your phrases, is secondary to the main issues(s) of the Agreement.
After all the bloodshed and the YEARS of negotiation why should we renegotiate or revise it. Why?
You have mentioned you lived/stayed in Dublin for a while...no disrespect to that, or Eamo and the boys, but Dublin is not Belfast...its not NI....it doesnt paint a full picture of the situation here.
A real conspiracy theorist would suggest that he tips off his backers every time he's going to say sonething about getting a deal and the pound goes up.Again, I don’t agree mate. If we leave, especially without a second public vote, millions and millions of people will take the view that as a result of a dishonest campaign run by a bunch of spies and chancers, we have made ourselves worse off as a nation. When the inevitable tales emerge of vast sums made by hedge fund managers who have shorted the pound, that sense of having been swindled will increase. A soft Brexit merely reduces the economic damage
She lost by 230 when first tabling the agreement and there's only about 70 members of the ERG IIRC. So it was blocked by more than just the ERG.There is no doubt that the utter selfishness of the militant Brexiteers has reduced, not enhanced the prospects of leaving the EU, and has accentuated the ongoing divisions in our society.
What I simply don’t get is people blaming the failure of May’s deal on remainers, when it was manifestly the ERG that blocked it. That’s the simple application of mathematics.
The outcome was even clearer down here. Over 90%. and we did change two articles in our written constitution as a result. One being our claim to the six counties.
I know we go around in circles with this @mcfc1632, but I do respect your decision to leave the EU but have maintained that if that was what you wanted to do, then this was never going to be the way to do it. You put the cart before the horse and the outcome was always going to be along these lines, because the two are incompatible.
The NI part of the UK question would always have to be solved before you leave, but even after three years you are still trying to do it the other way around.
Why? Because to renegotiate the GFA alone, would take you another decade considering the assembly isn't even running now.
Apart from the DUP, there is no will to renegotiate the GFA. Not in Ireland as a whole. Not internationally and shamefully, there shouldn't be the will from a British government as a knee-jerk reaction to a mess they've made.
Bollocks - the demand for a referendum is from Remainers and the EU with the expectation being that the decision will be reversedJust so odd.
No-one I know who wants a referendum wants it for any other reason than giving the great British public a chance to change their mind (and give a million new voters a say in their future instead of the votes of the dead).
Don't imply there's some dishonesty involved.
PS I don't know Corbyn. But he may be smarter than I think his stance is.