Political relations between UK-EU

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
mancity2012_eamo said:
You do it wrong and it will be as bad as agreeing to a border commission that never had any intention of following up on what it was supposed to do.

Christ when you think about it, Johnson kicking the can down the road with the border in the Irish Sea has a lot of similarities in approach.

For me the modern North needs to be convinced by us that they will have a better future with us. (Perhaps through the EU)
Whatever happens it needs to be permanent.

There was a lot of Protestants down south that were involved in push for a 32 county Ireland in a fairer socialist society that were completely forgotten about and left high and dry when De Valera jumped into bed with the clergy.

There were terrible mistakes made by both sides in the last 100 years.
If there is to be a sustainable future then an objective look at our history is needed. Lessons should be learned including how to deal with untrustworthy British governments.
Click to expand...
I did say we need to convince the unionists. I'd rather go federal with the provinces tbh
 
mancity2012_eamo said:
You do it wrong and it will be as bad as agreeing to a border commission that never had any intention of following up on what it was supposed to do.

Christ when you think about it, Johnson kicking the can down the road with the border in the Irish Sea has a lot of similarities in approach.

For me the modern North needs to be convinced by us that they will have a better future with us. (Perhaps through the EU)
Whatever happens it needs to be permanent.

There was a lot of Protestants down south that were involved in push for a 32 county Ireland in a fairer socialist society that were completely forgotten about and left high and dry when De Valera jumped into bed with the clergy.

There were terrible mistakes made by both sides in the last 100 years.
If there is to be a sustainable future then an objective look at our history is needed. Lessons should be learned including how to deal with untrustworthy British governments.
Click to expand...
And Dev was a ****.
 
joe123 said:
For my Irish in-laws it’s very much a case of when rather than if, but the economic aspect of it is a massive factor in when the right time will be.
Click to expand...
That depends on which side of the argument they sit.

My friend’s wife says never.

My Catholic pal from Belfast says now.
 
mcfc1632 said:
Well - sorry - it really is the case and their responsibility/failing.

I did explain the reasons in my long post earlier - e.g. the requirement for such visa or exemptions would have been registered within the HO programme plan and options for a solution identified years ago. Then it would have been within the scope of the negotiations.

But May/Hammond prevented that happening.

But too late for me to go into that again in detail - maybe tomorrow
Click to expand...

That makes absolutely no sense though. Scope of negotiations of what? It was always going to be part of the future deal negotiations which couldn’t start until there was a withdrawal agreement in place. They didn’t have any input into our requirements for that at all, it was long past their time.

It’s not just one programme, it never has been, it’s always been two - the WA then the future deal. Visa arrangements have changed between the two, as they were always going to. May and Robbins have absolutely nothing to do with what we’ve decided to do as part of this deal though.
 
Ban-jani said:
That depends on which side of the argument they sit.

My friend’s wife says never.

My Catholic pal from Belfast says now.
Click to expand...

Catholic population growth would suggest they’ll have the numbers soon enough. There’s a lot of factors, emotional and economic on top of that tho. Would guess at it being a fairly long process if and when the wheels are in motion. Both violence and economic trouble are too fresh in the memory for any rushed moves.
 
joe123 said:
Catholic population growth would suggest they’ll have the numbers soon enough. There’s a lot of factors, emotional and economic on top of that tho. Would guess at it being a fairly long process if and when the wheels are in motion. Both violence and economic trouble are too fresh in the memory for any rushed moves.
Click to expand...
There were claims a few years ago of this happening by now but what the studies show, is that even a Catholic majority doesn’t result in an upward trend for a United Ireland.

In a 2018 poll, 45% said they were Catholic but only 25% said they were solely Irish as their identity and that roughly translates into unification supporters.

So Catholicism might overtake Protestantism in NI, or may have already, but only just, but it’s not going to be enough to move enough into the direction of independence.

Independence in NI is less popular than Scotland was in 2014.

The vote is never going to be held anyway, there’s too much at stake.
 
meltonblue said:
That makes absolutely no sense though. Scope of negotiations of what? It was always going to be part of the future deal negotiations which couldn’t start until there was a withdrawal agreement in place. They didn’t have any input into our requirements for that at all, it was long past their time.

It’s not just one programme, it never has been, it’s always been two - the WA then the future deal. Visa arrangements have changed between the two, as they were always going to. May and Robbins have absolutely nothing to do with what we’ve decided to do as part of this deal though.
Click to expand...
Not only does it make perfect sense - it is the reality. I am speaking with regard to how things are managed as large programmes - as Brexit should have been but wasn't.

Re the part of your post that I have highlighted - with respect this is simply not how these things work.

The detail of what is negotiated in 2020 is derived from what has been captured as requirements and solutionised in the years 2017-2019 - I am sorry - it really is just how these things work

As I said earlier - this means that there will be a great many inconveniences - that were avoidable - that will have to be reacted to as they come to light - because they were not identified when they should have because May/Hammond prevented that work happening

I accept that it might be confusing if you are not familiar with the preparation and management of major programmes - but it really is true

Anyway - enough for me tonight
 
Ban-jani said:
There were claims a few years ago of this happening by now but what the studies show, is that even a Catholic majority doesn’t result in an upward trend for a United Ireland.

In a 2018 poll, 45% said they were Catholic but only 25% said they were solely Irish as their identity and that roughly translates into unification supporters.

So Catholicism might overtake Protestantism in NI, or may have already, but only just, but it’s not going to be enough to move enough into the direction of independence.

Independence in NI is less popular than Scotland was in 2014.

The vote is never going to be held anyway, there’s too much at stake.
Click to expand...
Ban-jani said:
There were claims a few years ago of this happening by now but what the studies show, is that even a Catholic majority doesn’t result in an upward trend for a United Ireland.

In a 2018 poll, 45% said they were Catholic but only 25% said they were solely Irish as their identity and that roughly translates into unification supporters.

So Catholicism might overtake Protestantism in NI, or may have already, but only just, but it’s not going to be enough to move enough into the direction of independence.

Independence in NI is less popular than Scotland was in 2014.

The vote is never going to be held anyway, there’s too much at stake.
Click to expand...
Reunification into a 32 county sovereign state, could become all the more attractive to elements of the Catholic unionists as well as a younger Protestant educated electorate, if doing so gave automatic re-entry into the EU, similar to East Germany.

The GFA provides for a referendum should the desire be there both north and south of the border. So don’t say ‘never’.
 
Ban-jani said:
And we’re talking about it’s immigration policy...

You are the one who wants to extend FoM to elsewhere, surely you should be talking about how the EU needs to let other people in?
Click to expand...
Came across this article:

Leave and Remain voters both favour end to free movement, but want to keep EU rules on firms (inews.co.uk)

And it made me think about the discussion of last week on FOM and open borders - and your calm and sensible support for a points based system

I of course agree with your stance - but others seemed to be suggesting that we were in the minority - apparently, as we knew, we are not:

"Voters from across the political spectrum are broadly in favour of immigration but want EU citizens to face tougher restrictions on moving to Britain, according to new research led by Britain’s best-known polling guru."

I thought these comments might suggest that our thinking is in common with the vast majority:

"Asked for their views on migration, a majority said that immigrants from elsewhere benefited Britain’s culture and economy. 63 per cent thought migration was a boost to the economy with just 6 per cent saying it was damaging."

and

"However, most supported the abolition of free movement from the EU, which took legal effect on Friday. Asked whether European citizens should have to apply to live in the UK in the same way as non-EU migrants, 73 per cent backed the idea while 17 per cent opposed. By the end of the deliberative sessions even a majority of Remain voters endorsed the change, up to 57 per cent from an initial 41 per cent."
 
mcfc1632 said:
Came across this article:

Leave and Remain voters both favour end to free movement, but want to keep EU rules on firms (inews.co.uk)

And it made me think about the discussion of last week on FOM and open borders - and your calm and sensible support for a points based system

I of course agree with your stance - but others seemed to be suggesting that we were in the minority - apparently, as we knew, we are not:

"Voters from across the political spectrum are broadly in favour of immigration but want EU citizens to face tougher restrictions on moving to Britain, according to new research led by Britain’s best-known polling guru."

I thought these comments might suggest that our thinking is in common with the vast majority:

"Asked for their views on migration, a majority said that immigrants from elsewhere benefited Britain’s culture and economy. 63 per cent thought migration was a boost to the economy with just 6 per cent saying it was damaging."

and

"However, most supported the abolition of free movement from the EU, which took legal effect on Friday. Asked whether European citizens should have to apply to live in the UK in the same way as non-EU migrants, 73 per cent backed the idea while 17 per cent opposed. By the end of the deliberative sessions even a majority of Remain voters endorsed the change, up to 57 per cent from an initial 41 per cent."
Click to expand...

Not this nonsense again.

We didn’t end EU citizens freedom of movement. We ended British citizens * freedom of movement. Pose the question the correct way and you will flip those findings in thirty minutes.

Guaranteed.

* Not applicable in NI
 
mcfc1632 said:
Not only does it make perfect sense - it is the reality. I am speaking with regard to how things are managed as large programmes - as Brexit should have been but wasn't.

Re the part of your post that I have highlighted - with respect this is simply not how these things work.

The detail of what is negotiated in 2020 is derived from what has been captured as requirements and solutionised in the years 2017-2019 - I am sorry - it really is just how these things work

As I said earlier - this means that there will be a great many inconveniences - that were avoidable - that will have to be reacted to as they come to light - because they were not identified when they should have because May/Hammond prevented that work happening

I accept that it might be confusing if you are not familiar with the preparation and management of major programmes - but it really is true

Anyway - enough for me tonight
Click to expand...

I’ll reiterate, brexit was always essentially two programmes. Your third paragraph is just wrong, a stipulation before agreeing the WA was that discussions around that future agreement couldn’t take place until the WA was in place. Nothing could be “solutionised” (ffs on that btw...) until post it and we’d had further discussions as you can’t solution anything until you know the requirements from both sides if you’re still in negotiations. We only stipulated what we wanted in Feb 2020 for example in regard to visas.

The WA and what Johnson signed up to, there’s an argument that you can blame May for some
of it. Not for the future agreement though, that’s either being disingenuous or just not understanding it at all.

Programme management and processes wise, you might pull a few in with that, but trust me, I’m not your target audience to try that with.

Let’s just leave it at that though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top