Another new Brexit thread

[mancity2012_eamo]

Yep, Unionists dragged out of the union against their will should lead to peace and harmony on the island of Ireland. Got to be preferable to reaching a sensible compromise with the evil Brits, yes?

Lovely soundbite. There's no dragging anybody anywhere that the majority both sides of the border wouldn't want to go, under the terms of the GFA. It would be a very democratic process. It 'll be a toxic debate however under these circumstances.
What is undemocratic is what seems to be on offer at the moment. A veto of a minority, granted in the assembly, which isn't operating at the moment, so the majority there now aren't granted the same privilege to vote against this proposal.
This then becomes the norm every four years. There is no incentive for the DUP to even get the Assembly going under current circumstances in the UK parliament as all legal decisions would default to Westminster.
This circumvents the democracy of a majority vote by referendum in Northern Ireland.

 

[Metal Biker]

Haha! Well he was advocating for a Norway-type arrangement tbf!

He did indeed. He also advocated that "to suggest we couldn't trade with Europe under terms of the EEA" was nonsense.

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

It can hand its A50 letter into the EU.


Ireland's solution is obvious though. An autonomous and United Ireland loyal to the crown and part of a fully sovereign and independent United Kingdom.

It's so obvious when you see it written down!

 

[TheBlueDune]

UK joins the EFTA

Doesn't that still allow free movement of people? The anti-immigrants wouldn't want that.

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

As an EFTA member, if we wanted to trade with the EU we'd have to join the EEA - with no say in its governance and under the jurisdiction of the ECJ. In effect a colony.

You should try it for a while, if for nothing else, just to get an appreciation of colonialism from the other side.

 

[George Hannah]

Lovely soundbite. There's no dragging anybody anywhere that the majority both sides of the border wouldn't want to go, under the terms of the GFA. It would be a very democratic process. It 'll be a toxic debate however under these circumstances.
What is undemocratic is what seems to be on offer at the moment. A veto of a minority, granted in the assembly, which isn't operating at the moment, so the majority there now aren't granted the same privilege to vote against this proposal.
This then becomes the norm every four years. There is no incentive for the DUP to even get the Assembly going under current circumstances in the UK parliament as all legal decisions would default to Westminster.
This circumvents the democracy of a majority vote by referendum in Northern Ireland.

I don't understand why the Assembly, the only democratic structure in NI, provides an automatic minority veto for anything. You need to remember that all sides have acknowledged that the backstop is temporary and will be replaced by arrangements which will not threaten GFA treaty obligations. A democratic renewal of those transitional arrangements until no longer required seems the only reasonable solution.

 

[hgblue]

Lovely soundbite. There's no dragging anybody anywhere that the majority both sides of the border wouldn't want to go, under the terms of the GFA. It would be a very democratic process. It 'll be a toxic debate however under these circumstances.
What is undemocratic is what seems to be on offer at the moment. A veto of a minority, granted in the assembly, which isn't operating at the moment, so the majority there now aren't granted the same privilege to vote against this proposal.
This then becomes the norm every four years. There is no incentive for the DUP to even get the Assembly going under current circumstances in the UK parliament as all legal decisions would default to Westminster.
This circumvents the democracy of a majority vote by referendum in Northern Ireland.

I’m sure these proposals can be amended to reflect any concerns there may be, probably would be best for everyone to focus on trying to reach a sensible compromise.

 

[Metal Biker]

Doesn't that still allow free movement of people? The anti-immigrants wouldn't want that.

Well, if those who don't mind about EU immigration (the remainers, soft brexiters...) both unite on this issue, then under democratic policy, we can allow the compromise to win through.

How does staying in the EU satisfy the anti-immigrants? You see how this argument doesn't satisfy? If you want compromise, you have to accept you won't get everything you want. Remainers don't want to leave the EU, but wish to be connected to Europe. EFTA. Leavers want to leave the EU. EFTA isn't like the EU.

 

[Gareth Barry Conlon]

Doesn't that still allow free movement of people? The anti-immigrants wouldn't want that.

Yes it does, 4 freedoms apply but it does not cover the full free market and does not remove the obligation to undertake customs checks.

The worst of all outcomes unless you start softening it down + CU.

It adds nothing to the debate.

 

[Ifwecouldjust.......]

We could have an advanced free trade agreement like Canada and Japan. That way we would continue to trade positively with the EU. Yet we would also be in charge of our laws, borders, money and trade. We would be free to do trade deals around the world while still trading closely with the EU. The GFA is for its two principal treaty signatories to honour, for the RoI to attempt to subcontract negotations to ensure its obligations are met to a subordinate trade group is indefensible.

We are already in charge of

Our Laws (see recent Supreme Court decision)
Our Borders (there are strict rules around who can enter the UK from the Eu - shame we didn't bother enforcing them )
Our Money (Ive just checked again and the cash in my pocket is still sterling , Im also happy that we have an agreement in place that means we don't have to bail out any failing Eu state)
Our Trade (Im really pleased that we did a £14billion deal with China by ourselves in 2014 which started this year ... we had great celebrations at the Etihad when Xi Jinping popped in for photos - remember that ?)

The GFA is an international agreement ratified by the united nations (and therefore not just an agreement between two parties.

 

[Metal Biker]

Yes it does, 4 freedoms apply but it does not cover the full free market and does not remove the obligation to undertake customs checks.

The worst of all outcomes unless you start softening it down + CU.

It adds nothing to the debate.

Then add something besides "revoking" and "remaining" which are the worst of all outcomes for leave voters.

Where is YOUR compromise?

 

[TheBlueDune]

I guess it would be similar to the Norway/Sweden border , I don't know how that works but it seemed fairly open when I used it.

EFTA members (Norway, Iceland, Switzerland and Liechtenstein) are all in the Schengen Zone and can not only travel but reside in EU. And vice versa.

Switzerland being different in many ways, has its own agreement with EU giving same rights, so there's an exception to allow EFTA membership but separate movement rules.

 

[aguerrrroooooooooooo]

Yes it does, 4 freedoms apply but it does not cover the full free market and does not remove the obligation to undertake customs checks.

The worst of all outcomes unless you start softening it down + CU.

It adds nothing to the debate.

Wait so EFTA would not solve the Irish problem?

 

[George Hannah]

We are already in charge of

Our Laws (see recent Supreme Court decision)
Our Borders (there are strict rules around who can enter the UK from the Eu - shame we didn't bother enforcing them )
Our Money (Ive just checked again and the cash in my pocket is still sterling , Im also happy that we have an agreement in place that means we don't have to bail out any failing Eu state)
Our Trade (Im really pleased that we did a £14billion deal with China by ourselves in 2014 which started this year ... we had great celebrations at the Etihad when Xi Jinping popped in for photos - remember that ?)

The GFA is an international agreement ratified by the united nations (and therefore not just an agreement between two parties.

I think each of those responses misrepresents the true situation i.e. you are wrong on all counts and your examples illustrate this. The reasons have been extensively explored on this and previous threads.

 

[Metal Biker]

Wait so EFTA would not solve the Irish problem?

Do you conveniently ignore the fact that the EU and the EFTA themselves state that membership WOULD solve the problem of the GFA, as it would allow free movement/goods?

 

[aguerrrroooooooooooo]

Do you conveniently ignore the fact that the EU and the EFTA themselves state that membership WOULD solve the problem of the GFA, as it would allow free movement/goods?

I'm simply asking the question based on the idea of customs checks, don't shoot down curiosity.

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

I don't understand why the Assembly, the only democratic structure in NI, provides an automatic minority veto for anything. You need to remember that all sides have acknowledged that the backstop is temporary and will be replaced by arrangements which will not threaten GFA treaty obligations. A democratic renewal of those transitional arrangements until no longer required seems the only reasonable solution.

With respect George, then you should read the procedures of the Assembly that I posted last night. That veto is something they have as a right given to them out of the GFA negotiations. The DUP see it now as a way of permanently keeping that power within the assembly rather than a Border Poll that would be granted by the GFA.
If the backstop is seen by many in England as a trap, then this by any standard is most definitely a trap.
Listen, if Johnson was to accept an extension then what is on offer could indeed be clarified and the same amount of forensic study and meticulous detail be put into the final deal, that was put into the GFA in the first place.

This is an English Nationalist solution to Brexit which offers the DUP what they've wanted all along, the undermining of the GFA and in their minds the securing of NI into the UK contrary to what was agreed in an International Treaty.
It puts the onus back into the assembly as I've outlined above, and rids the UK government of their responsibilities concerning NI.
Jobs a happy one for any English Nationalist. Just call it what it is though.

 

[west didsblue]

The EFTA itself does not seek to establish one, but allows it's members to join one if they so wish.

"Whilst the EFTA is not a customs union and member states have full rights to enter into bilateral third-country trade arrangements, it does have a coordinated trade policy. As a result, its member states have jointly concluded free trade agreements with the EU and a number of other countries."

"Art. 56.3 of the EFTA Convention states that a new EFTA member state ‘shall apply to become a party to the free trade agreements between the Member States on the one hand and third states, unions of states or international organisations on the other.’ As a member of a customs union, a country acceding to EFTA could not comply with this obligation. EFTA membership does not preclude from entering into a customs arrangement with the EU; existing EFTA countries govern their relation to the EU through different instruments."

Yes I know.

 

[Gareth Barry Conlon]

Then add something besides "revoking" and "remaining" which are the worst of all outcomes for leave voters.

Where is YOUR compromise?

Why must I compromise with an alternate position full of BS and misinformation. To me Brexit is binary - there are 3 options and always has been:

1. remain a member of the EU - best option

2. Leave and enter a soft brexit deal with a CU and full SM access - acceptable outcome although pointless as you are clearly better of with the first option.

3. Leave without a deal or with a WA that will lead to a hard brexit and screw up NI/ROI + every other port (not to mention the impact on the economy). This will never be popular when laid out in detail and will be an instant disaster if we ever try it.

There is no other option than the 3 above. There is no compromise. There is no magic solution. There is only different periods of transition from 1 to 2 or 3.

I would accept 2 but it was taken out the back and shot by the tory party in late 2016 without consulting anyone. I won't now ever budge from promoting option 1. I have had no part in the BS propagated around the non existent other options and I wont start now. Brexit was and is a massive con that there is some magical way forward that allows us the best of all scenarios. It's utter BS and I will always hold that view, if 52% of the population were conned into voting for a load of BS that's on them - I can only hope that enough of them change their mind and we get a chance to have a second vote. If we as a population keep voting for BS then collectively we will ultimately get what we deserve.

 

[Rascal]

I'm prepared to be surprised.

It's important to try to be accurate about what the Labour Party has become - just a host for CP parasites and after their feast they will leave it a hollow shell.

Oi! I am not a parasite