Another new Brexit thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The brexit magic roundabout in a nutshell
chedlee said:
I prefer ambivalent. Neutral, as you point out, suggests you have no opinion whereas ambivalence is holding a number of contradictory opinions. I think there are a few like that on here and in the broader Brexit debate.
Click to expand...
Broadly, in as much that semantics are the substitutes for facts ,as a brief glance at any page of this thread. Btw ambivalent can be two , a number of opinions suggests you are not sure wtf is going on
 
Out of interest, what were the issues with Mays deal? Is it just the backstop that “could” keep us locked into the EU indefinitely?

I’m now of the opinion that the May deal should be approved in order to adhere to the public vote. I’d prefer to remain but the May deal surely gives the leavers what they wanted? It would just take a longer period to be free of the EU than a no deal exit. I can’t believe that the EU would keep us locked in in perpetuity, that just would not happen. So eventually the leavers get what they want, and we remove the risk to the UK?
 
Hesperus said:
Out of interest, what were the issues with Mays deal? Is it just the backstop that “could” keep us locked into the EU indefinitely?

I’m now of the opinion that the May deal should be approved in order to adhere to the public vote. I’d prefer to remain but the May deal surely gives the leavers what they wanted? It would just take a longer period to be free of the EU than a no deal exit. I can’t believe that the EU would keep us locked in in perpetuity, that just would not happen. So eventually the leavers get what they want, and we remove the risk to the UK?
Click to expand...

Correct, however it relies on some solution to the ROI/NI issue to move forward - a solution that ERG types claim is very simple but they can not ever articulate it. They (the ERG types) raised the issue of being trapped when others where not that bothered suggesting that they themselves have little faith in there own argument that the border is easily solved.

Agreeing to May's deal and then getting stuck in it would make them look stupid over the course of time (IMO). That said the alternative No Deal just ignores the issue and wrecks the GFA and our economy. That seems preferable than the potential May Deal Purgatory to the ERG. A strange approach but as a remainer - it has been a significant contributor to the course of events that resulted in us still being in the EU. Both outcomes were/are bad but one would have got us out and the other has resulted in enough opposition to stop it.
 
Hesperus said:
Out of interest, what were the issues with Mays deal? Is it just the backstop that “could” keep us locked into the EU indefinitely?

I’m now of the opinion that the May deal should be approved in order to adhere to the public vote. I’d prefer to remain but the May deal surely gives the leavers what they wanted? It would just take a longer period to be free of the EU than a no deal exit. I can’t believe that the EU would keep us locked in in perpetuity, that just would not happen. So eventually the leavers get what they want, and we remove the risk to the UK?
Click to expand...
The backstop is undemocratic and contravenes the Good Friday Agreement because the majority of Unionists oppose it. It also locks us into a vassal state status with no unilateral exit mechanism, and May’s deal has been rejected three times largely because of it. In fact, May’s deal without the backstop has already shown it carries a majority in Parliament (Brady Amendment).
It has to go, and I believe Boris has made progress in explaining this to our European friends. Question is what replaces it? Clearly the British side has learnt from May’s mistakes and are keeping their cards close to their chest, but we can see the basics of the potential deal from what has been discussed already. It looks like we’re proposing an all Ireland approach to agriculture and food, a trusted trader scheme for goods with exemptions for small businesses and intelligence led checks carried out away from the border. All businesses will be required to sign up during the transition period, and be prepared to accept on site checks. Seems reasonable and achievable to me, and a deal along these lines could allow a route back for the Tory rebels and be supported by around 30 Labour MPs who represent Leave areas and are no doubt well aware that their days are numbered if the referendum result isn’t respected.
 
hgblue said:
The backstop is undemocratic and contravenes the Good Friday Agreement because the majority of Unionists oppose it. It also locks us into a vassal state status with no unilateral exit mechanism, and May’s deal has been rejected three times largely because of it. In fact, May’s deal without the backstop has already shown it carries a majority in Parliament (Brady Amendment).
It has to go, and I believe Boris has made progress in explaining this to our European friends. Question is what replaces it? Clearly the British side has learnt from May’s mistakes and are keeping their cards close to their chest, but we can see the basics of the potential deal from what has been discussed already. It looks like we’re proposing an all Ireland approach to agriculture and food, a trusted trader scheme for goods with exemptions for small businesses and intelligence led checks carried out away from the border. All businesses will be required to sign up during the transition period, and be prepared to accept on site checks. Seems reasonable and achievable to me, and a deal along these lines could allow a route back for the Tory rebels and be supported by around 30 Labour MPs who represent Leave areas and are no doubt well aware that their days are numbered if the referendum result isn’t respected.
Click to expand...

Why do the Unionists get a say when others don't. What makes them a special case when for example - the whole nation of Scotland opposes brexit?
 
hgblue said:
The backstop is undemocratic and contravenes the Good Friday Agreement because the majority of Unionists oppose it. It also locks us into a vassal state status with no unilateral exit mechanism, and May’s deal has been rejected three times largely because of it. In fact, May’s deal without the backstop has already shown it carries a majority in Parliament (Brady Amendment).
It has to go, and I believe Boris has made progress in explaining this to our European friends. Question is what replaces it? Clearly the British side has learnt from May’s mistakes and are keeping their cards close to their chest, but we can see the basics of the potential deal from what has been discussed already. It looks like we’re proposing an all Ireland approach to agriculture and food, a trusted trader scheme for goods with exemptions for small businesses and intelligence led checks carried out away from the border. All businesses will be required to sign up during the transition period, and be prepared to accept on site checks. Seems reasonable and achievable to me, and a deal along these lines could allow a route back for the Tory rebels and be supported by around 30 Labour MPs who represent Leave areas and are no doubt well aware that their days are numbered if the referendum result isn’t respected.
Click to expand...

I don’t accept the vassal state argument, this is just ERG hyperbole. The reality is that the EU would not keep us locked in. It may take a long time to extricate ourselves but it would happen eventually.

The boarder down the Irish Sea options seems like a good alternative it me but it needed the DUP and they wouldn’t sign up. The mood in parliament now may be changing and there could be a chance that it gets approved but it needs labour support given the stance by the Lib Dem’s.
 
Hesperus said:
I don’t accept the vassal state argument, this is just ERG hyperbole. The reality is that the EU would not keep us locked in. It may take a long time to extricate ourselves but it would happen eventually.

The boarder down the Irish Sea options seems like a good alternative it me but it needed the DUP and they wouldn’t sign up. The mood in parliament now may be changing and there could be a chance that it gets approved but it needs labour support given the stance by the Lib Dem’s.
Click to expand...
You understand how the backstop would be used by the EU to screw us over in the subsequent negotiations? The EU now
understand our clear position that it has to go.
The DUP will not be thrown under the bus and nor should they be, any agreement must have the consent of both traditions in the North in order for the GFA to be respected.
 
hgblue said:
You understand how the backstop would be used by the EU to screw us over in the subsequent negotiations? The EU now
understand our clear position that it has to go.
The DUP will not be thrown under the bus and nor should they be, any agreement must have the consent of both traditions in the North in order for the GFA to be respected.
Click to expand...

Aaaannnnddd.... that’s impossible.
 
hgblue said:
The backstop is undemocratic and contravenes the Good Friday Agreement because the majority of Unionists oppose it. It also locks us into a vassal state status with no unilateral exit mechanism, and May’s deal has been rejected three times largely because of it. In fact, May’s deal without the backstop has already shown it carries a majority in Parliament (Brady Amendment).
It has to go, and I believe Boris has made progress in explaining this to our European friends. Question is what replaces it? Clearly the British side has learnt from May’s mistakes and are keeping their cards close to their chest, but we can see the basics of the potential deal from what has been discussed already. It looks like we’re proposing an all Ireland approach to agriculture and food, a trusted trader scheme for goods with exemptions for small businesses and intelligence led checks carried out away from the border. All businesses will be required to sign up during the transition period, and be prepared to accept on site checks. Seems reasonable and achievable to me, and a deal along these lines could allow a route back for the Tory rebels and be supported by around 30 Labour MPs who represent Leave areas and are no doubt well aware that their days are numbered if the referendum result isn’t respected.
Click to expand...
PS For the avoidance of doubt " May's deal" should be termed " the British Government's deal".
 
hgblue said:
You understand how the backstop would be used by the EU to screw us over in the subsequent negotiations? The EU now
understand our clear position that it has to go.
The DUP will not be thrown under the bus and nor should they be, any agreement must have the consent of both traditions in the North in order for the GFA to be respected.
Click to expand...
They may well understand why some people think it has to go, until Ireland accepts an alternative it won't go.
 
Hesperus said:
Out of interest, what were the issues with Mays deal? Is it just the backstop that “could” keep us locked into the EU indefinitely?

I’m now of the opinion that the May deal should be approved in order to adhere to the public vote. I’d prefer to remain but the May deal surely gives the leavers what they wanted? It would just take a longer period to be free of the EU than a no deal exit. I can’t believe that the EU would keep us locked in in perpetuity, that just would not happen. So eventually the leavers get what they want, and we remove the risk to the UK?
Click to expand...

The main issue with it is it makes us the country Leave told us we were prior to the referendum i.e a rule taker but not a rule maker
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top