Another new Brexit thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
BobKowalski said:
They debated the treaty, had concerns and voted against. Irish Govt negotiated changes to address those concerns and then it passed. The article, inbetween spluttering abuse about the EU, refers to these changes in passing ‘as a few addendums’ before returning to abusing all and sundry.

The EU had no authority to make Ireland hold another referendum anymore than it had authority to make us hold a second referendum. Nor did it make Ireland vote again for the exact treaty it rejected. Concerns were raised. Concerns were addressed and people reconsidered the treaty in light of these changes. The end.
Click to expand...
Hmmmmm - that seems to be taking refuge in pedantry
 
BobKowalski said:
Anywho moving on from 50p bits Barnier has been giving Member States the big pitch to sign off on phase 2 negotiations which in no particular order are

No negotiations other than through Barnier
No upsetting the balance with existing models of cooperation, specifically Norway and Switzerland
Level playing field with mechanism to enforce transgressions
Future deal dependent on deal over fishing
Security deal important but UK can no longer access the EU information database and systems currently used by British police. Also European Arrest Warrants will not apply in Germany etc as some countries do not permit extradition to non EU countries.
EU to decide on equivalence (financial services) and data standards.

Points to note. UK wants zero tariff/zero quota deal which not even Norway and Switzerland get across the board so we have to give a lot to get that. There will be a return to barriers on trade between UK and EU though it’s just a question now of how great the barrier. Services will be impacted most and EU will only mutually recognise professional qualifications that are in the EU’s interest (obvs) otherwise its host country rules to apply which will vary.

There will be custom border checks between GB and NI which Varadkar helpfully confirmed this morning.

No great surprises in any of this.
Click to expand...

Except to Johnson.
BobKowalski said:
I clicked the link. Saw the article was by Brendan O’Neill. Read it for the lols.

I repeat.

No one.
Click to expand...
As my favourite Irish comedian said, "We just thought, 'What the fuck have we done?' and voted again".

Brits just dug in and doubled down.
 
KS55 said:
I worked there for 3 years!!! So no need to tell me the rules. You need to consider how things will develop, and it is that which worries me. Powerful interests will find a way.

Here's an example. I asked a Central banker about foreign banks operating in his country. He said that they would not be allowed. When i protested that the 2nd banking directive gave them an absolute right, he said "But we can delay them a few years, until we get our own house in order"
"But the commission....." I replied. He just laughed.
There is an extraordinary amount of horse trading to persuade smaller countries to fall into line.
Click to expand...

It’s a trading bloc of 27 countries of varying sizes with a default position of fighting each other like rats in a sack. All of them obstruct, deflect and protect their own interests as much as they can and horse trading is the way solutions are found. But the larger nations don’t get it all their own way as witnessed when France and Germany wanted to merge their rail companies and the Commission blocked it despite the two biggest countries putting heavy pressure on them to wave it through.

The EU is what it is.
 
BobKowalski said:
Yes. Damn Irish getting above themselves again. Don’t they know their place?
Click to expand...
Strange twisting of words - have you been infected by the other Remainers that seem to do that on a daily basis

My comment was aimed specifically at Varadkar - not the Irish people/nation

Please don't tell me you are going to go the same disingenuous way as a number of other Remainers have in recent months
 
BobKowalski said:
If by pedantry you mean stating the facts then yes.

I naturally regret my inability to substitute facts with incoherent prejudice and conform to the Brexit group think.
Click to expand...
Nope - you are using a very narrow scope and ignoring a whole range of contributing facts.

In fact it is a pretty disingenuous post - but of course you know that

Question to @KS55 who brought the subject up.

If a Remain sycophantic UK government had decided that it did not like our 2016 referendum answer and went to work with the EU to take some actions that meant that things could be dressed up and following an 'improved communications campaign' the question could be presented again to get the right answer - would those committed to Brexit feel that integrity had been demonstrated?

Indeed Ireland was told to vote again - the Irish people that is and the telling came from the EU sycophantic political elite working with the EU.
 
Last edited:
Mëtal Bikër said:
You really distrust the rest of the world, don't you.

It's like you think every other nation is out to destroy us or something.
Click to expand...

I don’t believe that every other nation is out to destroy us but It would be naive to think that every other nation will not use what power they have to get the best for themselves.

Whilst dealing with the economic super powers we will be at a massive disadvantage.
 
BobKowalski said:
They debated the treaty, had concerns and voted against. Irish Govt negotiated changes to address those concerns and then it passed. The article, inbetween spluttering abuse about the EU, refers to these changes in passing ‘as a few addendums’ before returning to abusing all and sundry.

The EU had no authority to make Ireland hold another referendum anymore than it had authority to make us hold a second referendum. Nor did it make Ireland vote again for the exact treaty it rejected. Concerns were raised. Concerns were addressed and people reconsidered the treaty in light of these changes. The end.
Click to expand...
Weasel
 
mcfc1632 said:
Nope - you are using a very narrow scope and ignoring a whole range of contributing facts.

In fact it is a pretty disingenuous post - but of course you know that

Question to @KS55 who brought the subject up.

If a Remain sycophantic UK government had decided that it did not like our 2016 referendum answer and went to work with the EU to take some actions that meant that things could be dressed up and following an 'improved communications campaign' the question could be presented again to get the right answer - would those committed to Brexit feel that integrity had been demonstrated?

Indeed Ireland was told to vote again - the Irish people that is and the telling came from the EU sycophantic political elite working with the EU.
Click to expand...
Integrity is a moving feast. The first q would be "whats changed?" In the Irish case, quite a lot. The promise of a 'permanent' commissioner and allowing Ireland to derogate from directives on abortion.
I suspect that committed Brexiteers would not be happy.
 
mcfc1632 said:
...Indeed Ireland was told to vote again - the Irish people that is and the telling came from the EU sycophantic political elite working with the EU.
Click to expand...

Do you mean *checks notes* the Irish Government? Are you also saying that the elected Irish Govt took note of the peoples concerns, addressed those concerns and put it back to the people?

I’m outraged.
 
KS55 said:
Integrity is a moving feast. The first q would be "whats changed?" In the Irish case, quite a lot. The promise of a 'permanent' commissioner and allowing Ireland to derogate from directives on abortion.
I suspect that committed Brexiteers would not be happy.
Click to expand...
In the case of Ireland - for all the main parties it was an 'inconvenient wrong answer' - the vested interests of the Irish political elite worked with the EU to enact the best 'handling statregy'

So the reality - based on integrity - is that you were right in your earlier post
 
BobKowalski said:
Your detailed and forensic rebuttal of the points raised is an example to us all.
Click to expand...
Right.
1."Then it passed"......you mean the Irish voted on the amended treaty in a plebicite on changes to the constituton as included in the treaty. I call that voting twice.
2.I did not say the EU had any powers. The technical answer was ' The Irish gov ordered a second referendum, in the form of amendments to the constitution. Of course they were lent on to do this but, given the concessions, it was a no brainer.
3. Of course it was not exactly the same. Just silly, nobdy suggested otherwise. They were still voting on the Lisbon treaty.
4 You are still a weasel.
5 Your inability to address honestly the concerns of a Remainer (and they will need addressing) do you no credit.
 
KS55 said:
Right.
1."Then it passed"......you mean the Irish voted on the amended treaty in a plebicite on changes to the constituton as included in the treaty. I call that voting twice.
2.I did not say the EU had any powers. The technical answer was ' The Irish gov ordered a second referendum, in the form of amendments to the constitution. Of course they were lent on to do this but, given the concessions, it was a no brainer.
3. Of course it was not exactly the same. Just silly, nobdy suggested otherwise. They were still voting on the Lisbon treaty.
4 You are still a weasel.
5 Your inability to address honestly the concerns of a Remainer (and they will need addressing) do you no credit.
Click to expand...
And all because the Irish government and the opposition at the time were total EU sycophants - nobody amongst the Irish political elite were looking to do anything other than 'sort the inconvenient problem out'
 
KS55 said:
Right.
1."Then it passed"......you mean the Irish voted on the amended treaty in a plebicite on changes to the constituton as included in the treaty. I call that voting twice.
2.I did not say the EU had any powers. The technical answer was ' The Irish gov ordered a second referendum, in the form of amendments to the constitution. Of course they were lent on to do this but, given the concessions, it was a no brainer.
3. Of course it was not exactly the same. Just silly, nobdy suggested otherwise. They were still voting on the Lisbon treaty.
4 You are still a weasel.
5 Your inability to address honestly the concerns of a Remainer (and they will need addressing) do you no credit.
Click to expand...

A long way of saying I was right but I accept your ‘clarifications’ in good heart.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top