Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2021 12:35:44 GMT
... and he wonders why he keeps getting slapped. Slap him again someone, but harder !
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2021 14:47:06 GMT
... and he wonders why he keeps getting slapped. Slap him again someone, but harder ! Preferably with a frozen sausage!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2021 15:39:58 GMT
Slap him again someone, but harder ! Preferably with a frozen sausage! Indeed. He's a greasy, sniveling, vile little man.
|
|
|
Post by johnhurtdoctor on Jun 13, 2021 16:08:56 GMT
Preferably with a frozen sausage! Indeed. He's a greasy, sniveling, vile little man. Boris Johnson certainly is, a lying, racist, adulterous, moral vacuum.
|
|
|
Post by johnhurtdoctor on Jun 13, 2021 17:56:34 GMT
|
|
|
Post by doctorkernow on Jun 13, 2021 18:10:48 GMT
Hello again
Sounds like the disastrous Green Homes Initiative...
|
|
|
Post by charlesuirdhein on Jun 14, 2021 0:26:03 GMT
Trying very hard to leave out the politics on this, I'm assuming that Ireland trades with the UK on a scale several times larger than with the EU?
We operate the CTA to our mutual benefit without affecting Ireland's rights within the EU, couldn't a "Common Trade Area" be equally beneficial? The EU seem convinced that continuing free UK-Ireland trade will be a gaping hole in the protectionist wall around Europe, but would it really?
I don't say there wouldn't be 'leaks' but compared with the benefits I imagine they would be small - unless global, uniform application of 'the rules' is seen as more important than anything else.
EDIT: I thought that both Britain and Ireland had always carried out at least some 'health checks' on goods to take advantage of having sea borders to help protect our farming industries. (Protect as in medically, not economically.) Is that not right?
Yeah, sounds lovely. Except one nation in your proposed "Common Trade Area" is part and parcel to the entire EU trading bloc, with all the rights and responsibilities thereof and takes those same rights and responsibilities seriously. And the other one isn't and doesn't. The simple thing is Irish companies import/export to the UK, and UK companies import/export to Ireland. There is no trade deal the UK can make with Ireland alone. It's just that simple. The EU are convinced that free trade between the UK and Ireland will be a gaping hole....because it will be. And "protectionist"? The EU have literally not changed anything since the UK was a member and it wasn't protectionist then, but once they leave then it is protectionist? No, just that you don't get the benefits of the club when you leave the club. Agreed, checks were carried out back in the day, and I'll give you a good example of that. One of the two countries had a period of Mad Cow/BSE where it literally could not export beef for love or money, and the other one didn't. And when that was happening the Unionists in Northern Ireland (and this was PRE GFA!) were fighting tooth and nail to have their herds aligned with those of Ireland. Even up to 2005 when there was a serious outbreak of Bovine Foot & Mouth disease in the UK, the late Ian Paisley of all people said "Our people may be British but our cows are Irish". This entire thing has been botched and mismanaged and is just a shambles. A shambles that will ruin lives and futures. Instead of embracing the possibility of having a foot in both camps and getting the best of both worlds, Northern Ireland, a lovely place with wonderful people, has been sold a pup that is the worst of both. You can't sell the dream of wonderful isolation and "Our Island Nation", when one part of the UK is on an entirely different island, one with a land border to the EU! Brexit is done. Brexit is Brexit. And the Tory government still cannot tell you exactly what you voted for if you voted for it. Those who voted Remain, like I did, lost. But at least we knew what we were voting for.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2021 2:42:30 GMT
Sorry that having a PM who is a racist, lying thug enabler bores you Ian. Oh I'm not bored by the PM.
|
|
lidar2
Castellan
You know, now that you mention it, I actually do rather like Attack of the Cybermen ...
Likes: 5,813
|
Post by lidar2 on Jun 14, 2021 8:56:21 GMT
Sounds like the perfect solution to me The perfect solution is that it cannot happen or that Ireland effectively leaves the EU? If you are seriously suggesting the latter then I don't know what to say to you. I know we're on opposite sides of the political wall on many a thing but we've had sensible and fun discussions here and there, but again, if you ARE seriously suggesting the latter then you're justifying Tory exceptionalism where the rules never apply to them, only to other people. And if that comment was tongue in cheek, perhaps a bit more tone to the text? Best. It was meant as tongue in cheek. And I think the chances of it happening are precisely zero. The NI Protocol was as much about rewarding Ireland as punishing the UK
However, having said that, there is a certain logic to it. Everyone accepts there has to be a border somewhere and there are only 3 places it can be - GB/NI, NI/ROI or ROI/EU. If everyone has ruled out NI/ROI, and GB/NI causes the Assembly to collapse and leads to loyalist violence, then logically, by a process of elimination, there is only one place left where there can be a border that does not jeopardise the GFA. However I think that is not a logic that nationalist Ireland or EU will ever be prepared to recognise.
I personally think the NI Assembly will collapse again eventually. The only reason it hasn't collapsed so far is because no party wants to get the blame for collapsing it in the middle of a pandemic. Put yourself in the unionist/loyalist position. We hear constantly from the EU and the US that the Protocol is necessary to protect the GFA, but there is a very easy way for unionists to blow a hole in that argument. If we end up with a collapsed Assembly and/or loyalist rioting then the argument that NI Protocol is needed to protect the GFA becomes demonstrably untrue. Former First minister and DUP leader Peter Robinson, the most effective Unionist politician of the last 50 years and who is on the moderate (Jeffrey Donaldson) wing of the DUP, wrote recently that Unionists would have to collapse the Assembly to get rid of the Protocol. Add to that, the TUV are snapping at the DUP's heels and the DUP will not want to be seen to be acquiescing in the Protocol - the last 50 years of Unionist political history is littered with the corpses of Unionist leaders who were swept aside for being too moderate - Terence O'Neill, Brian Faulkner, David Trimble, Arlene Foster. And even leaving the NI Protocol aside, the proposed Irish Language Act is enough to collapse the Assembly all by itself.
As an aside the DUP are in big trouble. Edwin Poots does not go down particularly well with a lot of more moderate DUP voters, and the internal ructions are not helping. As well as the TUV threat on the right, to the DUP's left the UUP have a new leader who is making a good impression (Doug Beattie), although it is early days yet. Plus the NI Health Minister is a prominent member of the UUP who has been very high profile over the last 18 months and who is generally perceived as having done a good job. In fact, leaving party and orange/green labels to the side, I think Robin Swann is probably the most highly though of minister in the executive. I predict the UUP and TUV will increase their vote at the next Assembly election and the DUP's will go down
The other possibility - again I think it extremely unlikely - is that the NI Assembly votes to end the Protocol in 4 years time. What would happen then? If the GB/NI border is done away with by the vote, then you are left with a choice between the NI/ROI border or the ROI/EU border.
I would however take issue with the comment that "Ireland effectively leaves the EU". The Irish Government has been at pains to point out that the NI Protocol has no constitutional implications and does not weaken NI's place in the UK. Surely then, applying the Irish government's own reasoning, the equivalent situation for ROI would not therefore have any implications for Ireland's place in the EU?
|
|
|
Post by Chakoteya on Jun 14, 2021 10:38:05 GMT
Anyone running a book on when the Reunification vote will take place? (as allowed in the Good Friday Agreement) After all, Ulster voted Remain, and the best way out of the current dilemma is to ask the Irish what they want to do, not have Westminster-centric old Etonians blathering all the time.
|
|
|
Post by charlesuirdhein on Jun 14, 2021 11:44:48 GMT
It was meant as tongue in cheek. And I think the chances of it happening are precisely zero. The NI Protocol was as much about rewarding Ireland as punishing the UK
However, having said that, there is a certain logic to it. Everyone accepts there has to be a border somewhere and there are only 3 places it can be - GB/NI, NI/ROI or ROI/EU. If everyone has ruled on NI/ROI, and GB/NI causes the Assembly to collapse and leads to loyalist violence, then logically, by a process of elimination, there is only one place left where there can be a border that does not jeopardise the GFA. However I think that is not a logic that nationalist Ireland or EU will ever be prepared to recognise.
I personally think the NI Assembly will collapse again eventually. The only reason it hasn't collapsed so far is because no party wants to get the blame for collapsing it in the middle of a pandemic. Put yourself in the unionist/loyalist position. We hear constantly from the EU and the US that the Protocol is necessary to protect the GFA, but there is a very easy way for unionists to blow a hole in that argument. If we end up with a collapsed Assembly and/or loyalist rioting then the argument that NI Protocol is needed to protect the GFA becomes demonstrably untrue. Former First minister and DUP leader Peter Robinson, the most effective Unionist politician of the last 50 years and who is on the moderate (Jeffrey Donaldson) wing of the DUP, wrote recently that Unionists would have to collapse the Assembly to get rid of the Protocol. Add to that, the TUV are snapping at the DUP's heels and the DUP will not want to be seen to be acquiescing in the Protocol - the last 50 years of Unionist political history is littered with the corpses of Unionist leaders who were swept aside for being too moderate - Terence O'Neill, Brian Faulkner, David Trimble, Arlene Foster. And even leaving the NI Protocol aside, the proposed Irish Language Act is enough to collapse the Assembly all by itself.
As an aside the DUP are in big trouble. Edwin Poots does not go down particularly well with a lot of more moderate DUP voters, and the internal ructions are not helping. As well as the TUV threat on the right, to the DUP's left the UUP have a new leader who is making a good impression (Doug Beattie), although it is early days yet. Plus the NI Health Minister is a prominent member of the UUP who has been very high profile over the last 18 months and who is generally perceived as having done a good job. In fact, leaving party and orange/green labels to the side, I think Robin Swann is probably the most highly though of minister in the executive. I predict the UUP and TUV will increase their vote at the next Assembly election and the DUP's will go down
The other possibility - again I think it extremely unlikely - is that the NI Assembly votes to end the Protocol in 4 years time. What would happen then? If the GB/NI border is done away with by the vote, then you are left with a choice between the NI/ROI border or the ROI/EU border.
I would however take issue with the comment that "Ireland effectively leaves the EU". The Irish Government has been at pains to point out that the NI Protocol has no constitutional implications and does not weaken NI's place in the UK. Surely then, applying the Irish government's own reasoning, the equivalent situation for ROI would not therefore have any implications for Ireland's place in the EU?
A couple of things that are ultimately opinion, but I have thought about them and let's see how it goes written down. Anyone can blow a hole in the Assembly for any reason, as was proved when, glory be, it was done over the RHI scandal. (A reason I was initially secretly delighted about at the time because it was a normal, boring political scandal that happens to normal governments, as opposed to the hard core politics that plague NI. Initially.) So simply put, depth charging the Assembly proves nothing other than the DUP has put on its "NO!" hat. You're right about the Irish Language Act unfortunately. And I'll shade that "unfortunately" with the caveat that this is patently ridiculous. Linda Ervine (the late David Ervine's sister-in-law) teaches Irish and more should follow her example. Irish has been used by Sinn Fein & Co too long as a political divisor and that power should be taken away from them. If our history had gone differently then I would not speak English as one of my first languages, but I do and it's a wonderful language. But so is Irish. As for 4 years later? Deity of your choice help us there! You can take issue but I believe you are simply wrong. There is a conflation of constitutional integrity and economic integrity, and there should not be. There is no challenge to the constitutional integrity of the UK from the EU. There simply isn't. That is entirely manufactured by the Tory government. They simply refuse to adhere to a protocol they understood and signed and sold to the electorate as a great deal, much better than Theresa May's previous efforts, much better. For Ireland to do the equivalent would not affect Ireland's constitutional status one whit, but yes, it would mean effectively leaving the EU. Northern Ireland has been thrown under the bus by the Tories. It was ever thus. You know your history, I'll leave you with Edward Carson's words - himself a fluent and proud Irish speaker: "What a fool I was! I was only a puppet, and so was Ulster, and so was Ireland, in the political game that was to get the Conservative Party into Power." They don't give a shit about Northern Ireland, they never did and they never will. The rest of us see it, why can't the Unionists? And no, I wouldn't vote for SF if you paid me and I wouldn't want to see a United Ireland without something like an 80/20 turnout minimum in any vote for it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2021 11:46:49 GMT
The EU have literally not changed anything since the UK was a member and it wasn't protectionist then, but once they leave then it is protectionist? No, just that you don't get the benefits of the club when you leave the club. Did they not threaten to stop the export of Covid vaccine out of the EU, until the world hammered them down? And as for not getting the benefits of the club, maybe that ought to explained to the French with regard fishing. The EU is a vile self centred organization.
|
|
|
Post by johnhurtdoctor on Jun 14, 2021 12:07:12 GMT
The EU have literally not changed anything since the UK was a member and it wasn't protectionist then, but once they leave then it is protectionist? No, just that you don't get the benefits of the club when you leave the club. Did they not threaten to stop the export of Covid vaccine out of the EU, until the world hammered them down? And as for not getting the benefits of the club, maybe that ought to explained to the French with regard fishing. The EU is a vile self centred organization. Surprised we voted to leave, sounds like we fit right in!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2021 12:13:50 GMT
Did they not threaten to stop the export of Covid vaccine out of the EU, until the world hammered them down? And as for not getting the benefits of the club, maybe that ought to explained to the French with regard fishing. The EU is a vile self centred organization. Surprised we voted to leave, sounds like we fit right in!
|
|
|
Post by charlesuirdhein on Jun 14, 2021 12:29:00 GMT
The EU have literally not changed anything since the UK was a member and it wasn't protectionist then, but once they leave then it is protectionist? No, just that you don't get the benefits of the club when you leave the club. Did they not threaten to stop the export of Covid vaccine out of the EU, until the world hammered them down? And as for not getting the benefits of the club, maybe that ought to explained to the French with regard fishing. The EU is a vile self centred organization. Yes. And they were wrong about that. Absolutely. And that has NOTHING to do with what we were talking about. The French and fishing? I throw my hands in the air. All of that should have been dealt with and negotiated BEFORE leaving. And it could have been. The French are being ham fisted about it, that's definitely true. The EU is a vile and self-centred organization? Nope, they are tedious and bureaucratic and at times I want to shake them, but vile and self-centred? Well, as for the latter, possibly, because that's the entire point of a trading bloc, and that was fine when the UK was on the inside. The former? Well, that's like, just your opinion, man. As the Dude would say.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2021 12:49:55 GMT
Did they not threaten to stop the export of Covid vaccine out of the EU, until the world hammered them down? And as for not getting the benefits of the club, maybe that ought to explained to the French with regard fishing. The EU is a vile self centred organization. Yes. And they were wrong about that. Absolutely. And that has NOTHING to do with what we were talking about. The French and fishing? I throw my hands in the air. All of that should have been dealt with and negotiated BEFORE leaving. And it could have been. The French are being ham fisted about it, that's definitely true. The EU is a vile and self-centred organization? Nope, they are tedious and bureaucratic and at times I want to shake them, but vile and self-centred? Well, as for the latter, possibly, because that's the entire point of a trading bloc, and that was fine when the UK was on the inside. The former? Well, that's like, just your opinion, man. As the Dude would say. It certainly had something to do with the point you made that I highlighted. They were quite happy to go back on their agreement when it suited them to do so. As for the fishing rights, well yes, it should have been sorted out before the UK left. However we were told repeatedly by the EU 'NO CHERRY PICKING', that is unless of course you're French, and insist on cherry picking the fishing rights!
|
|
|
Post by johnhurtdoctor on Jun 14, 2021 12:54:03 GMT
|
|
|
Post by charlesuirdhein on Jun 14, 2021 13:08:13 GMT
Yes. And they were wrong about that. Absolutely. And that has NOTHING to do with what we were talking about. The French and fishing? I throw my hands in the air. All of that should have been dealt with and negotiated BEFORE leaving. And it could have been. The French are being ham fisted about it, that's definitely true. The EU is a vile and self-centred organization? Nope, they are tedious and bureaucratic and at times I want to shake them, but vile and self-centred? Well, as for the latter, possibly, because that's the entire point of a trading bloc, and that was fine when the UK was on the inside. The former? Well, that's like, just your opinion, man. As the Dude would say. It certainly had something to do with the point you made that I highlighted. They were quite happy to go back on their agreement when it suited them to do so. As for the fishing rights, well yes, it should have been sorted out before the UK left. However we were told repeatedly by the EU 'NO CHERRY PICKING', that is unless of course you're French, and insist on cherry picking the fishing rights! Cherry picking the fishing rights? When in the EU the UK and not the government of Jersey dictated what could and could not be done and dictated in Jersey waters. Now apparently it's Jersey's responsibility/fault for the waters and Westminister wring their hands and so on, "oh, THOSE waters aren't UK waters", once again moving the goalposts. No, it's not absolving the French from being gobshites but it remains entirely disingenuous on the part of the Tory government. Right. I'm off. I try to stay out of this because it does exercise me, and most here are entirely agreeable folk and I'd rather not annoy them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2021 13:11:36 GMT
It certainly had something to do with the point you made that I highlighted. They were quite happy to go back on their agreement when it suited them to do so. As for the fishing rights, well yes, it should have been sorted out before the UK left. However we were told repeatedly by the EU 'NO CHERRY PICKING', that is unless of course you're French, and insist on cherry picking the fishing rights! No, it's not absolving the French from being gobshites . I entirely agree with you.
|
|
|
Post by charlesuirdhein on Jun 14, 2021 22:10:14 GMT
Anyone running a book on when the Reunification vote will take place? (as allowed in the Good Friday Agreement) After all, Ulster voted Remain, and the best way out of the current dilemma is to ask the Irish what they want to do, not have Westminster-centric old Etonians blathering all the time. But the Westminister-centric old Etonians are BRITISH! In all honesty if Ireland embraced its own NHS, which it doesn't have in the same way the UK does, then a lot of swing voters might vote for reunification. So many issues to deal with though. So many. Really too many to go into here. Best stick to the simpler and far more solvable problem of Brexit!
|
|