BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴

rjsterry

Longshot wrote:

Marina Hyde's take on the CPC: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -untouched

Worth it for the following line alone: "Yet again, Boris Johnson swears blind he’s going to withdraw on schedule. A promise an unspecified number of single mothers have heard before."

Also worth a watch is the video of Owen Jones (yes, I know, but he doesn't say very much) interviewing various people at CPC. A surprising amount of discontent at the line Johnson is taking, especially from younger members.

https://www.theguardian.com/global/vide ... nnihilated

They should have got JRM to do the same at the Labour conference.

TheBigBean

Rick Chasey wrote:

It’s not clear how the proposal is in line with the GFA

It is surely more in line than anything put forward so far by the EU. It allows the elected body to oversee the regulation, for example.

pblakeney

darkhairedlord wrote:

BJ to prorogue on 8th until 14th.
So BJ will have been PM for 85 days by the time he is supposed to be at the EU summit and will have only faced 1 PMQ.
IS that poor?

I’ve lost track. Is it only 6 or 7 days that he has sat in parliament as PM? :roll:
One PMQ out of 7 days is a reasonable average.

rjsterry

TheBigBean wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

It’s not clear how the proposal is in line with the GFA

It is surely more in line than anything put forward so far by the EU. It allows the elected body to oversee the regulation, for example.

At first glance it appears to allow the DUP to veto the initial setup after a few years reverting to a hard border.

TheBigBean

rjsterry wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

It’s not clear how the proposal is in line with the GFA

It is surely more in line than anything put forward so far by the EU. It allows the elected body to oversee the regulation, for example.

At first glance it appears to allow the DUP to veto the initial setup after a few years reverting to a hard border.

It's not perfect, and I suspect this part will be refined to something that represents the views of electorate, but it is still more in line with the agreement than the backstop.

tailwindhome

rjsterry wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

It’s not clear how the proposal is in line with the GFA

It is surely more in line than anything put forward so far by the EU. It allows the elected body to oversee the regulation, for example.

At first glance it appears to allow the DUP to veto the initial setup after a few years reverting to a hard border.

It does more than that.

It allows the DUP to veto it in the transition period, taking NI out of the SM, while legally obliging the EU not to do any checks on the Irish border.

tailwindhome

This is a deal which, in NI, only has the support of the DUP.

rjsterry

TailWindHome wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

It’s not clear how the proposal is in line with the GFA

It is surely more in line than anything put forward so far by the EU. It allows the elected body to oversee the regulation, for example.

At first glance it appears to allow the DUP to veto the initial setup after a few years reverting to a hard border.

It does more than that.

It allows the DUP to veto it in the transition period, taking NI out of the SM, while legally obliging the EU not to do any checks on the Irish border.

On that basis, it would seem that the EU are going through the motions of fully considering the proposal but it hasn't got a chance.

tailwindhome

Labour going to be kicking themselves they didn't back May's deal.

kingstongraham

TheBigBean wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

It’s not clear how the proposal is in line with the GFA

It is surely more in line than anything put forward so far by the EU. It allows the elected body to oversee the regulation, for example.

That sounds guaranteed to bring the parties back together in the elected body that hasn't sat for two years then.

rick_chasey

TheBigBean wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

It’s not clear how the proposal is in line with the GFA

It is surely more in line than anything put forward so far by the EU. It allows the elected body to oversee the regulation, for example.

At first glance it appears to allow the DUP to veto the initial setup after a few years reverting to a hard border.

It's not perfect, and I suspect this part will be refined to something that represents the views of electorate, but it is still more in line with the agreement than the backstop.

I find it curious how the backstop has now become some kind of extremist position to be negotiated from, when it was in fact already a chunky compromise on both sides.

Customs border = no GFA compliance, surely?

john80

TailWindHome wrote:

Labour going to be kicking themselves they didn't back May's deal.

That would require a level of self awareness that most MP's seem unable to perform.

TheBigBean

KingstonGraham wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

It’s not clear how the proposal is in line with the GFA

It is surely more in line than anything put forward so far by the EU. It allows the elected body to oversee the regulation, for example.

That sounds guaranteed to bring the parties back together in the elected body that hasn't sat for two years then.

There was disagreement yesterday with the UK government saying if they weren't sitting it would be done by referendum, and the DUP saying that wasn't the deal.

TheBigBean

Rick Chasey wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

It’s not clear how the proposal is in line with the GFA

It is surely more in line than anything put forward so far by the EU. It allows the elected body to oversee the regulation, for example.

At first glance it appears to allow the DUP to veto the initial setup after a few years reverting to a hard border.

It's not perfect, and I suspect this part will be refined to something that represents the views of electorate, but it is still more in line with the agreement than the backstop.

I find it curious how the backstop has now become some kind of extremist position to be negotiated from, when it was in fact already a chunky compromise on both sides.

Customs border = no GFA compliance, surely?

Debatable, but probably not. Regulation without representation and an overall change in status of NI without a referendum probably are.

I find it curious that that isn't more widely appreciated.

TheBigBean

TailWindHome wrote:

This is a deal which, in NI, only has the support of the DUP.

Aside from the DUP veto, what objections do you (or other NI people) have?

kingstongraham

TailWindHome wrote:

Labour going to be kicking themselves they didn't back May's deal.

What else has changed in the "deal" except the Northern Ireland issue?

rick_chasey

TheBigBean wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

It’s not clear how the proposal is in line with the GFA

It is surely more in line than anything put forward so far by the EU. It allows the elected body to oversee the regulation, for example.

At first glance it appears to allow the DUP to veto the initial setup after a few years reverting to a hard border.

It's not perfect, and I suspect this part will be refined to something that represents the views of electorate, but it is still more in line with the agreement than the backstop.

I find it curious how the backstop has now become some kind of extremist position to be negotiated from, when it was in fact already a chunky compromise on both sides.

Customs border = no GFA compliance, surely?

Debatable, but probably not. Regulation without representation and an overall change in status of NI without a referendum probably are.

I find it curious that that isn't more widely appreciated.

NI is represented in parliament....

rick_chasey

Love how Gibraltar is just ignored entirely.

Longshot

john80 wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

Labour going to be kicking themselves they didn't back May's deal.

That would require a level of self awareness that most MP's seem unable to perform.

This highlights another failing in the modern world of politics. They've been trained for so long to just shout "No" at everything that comes from the other side that they've forgotten how to consider the relative merits of any proposal.

Longshot

Rick Chasey wrote:

Love how Gibraltar is just ignored entirely.

It's barbaryous.

tailwindhome

TheBigBean wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

This is a deal which, in NI, only has the support of the DUP.

Aside from the DUP veto, what objections do you (or other NI people) have?

From the centre and nationalists/remain they're getting all the objections you'd expect

From their right and other unionists they're getting objections for having conceded anything.

From the business community they're getting all the 'remain' objections + objections to the 4 yearly cycle of an in/out vote and the chaos that'll bring.

They're having defend against nationalism and remain by pointing out what they've given while defending on the right that they given nothing and can pull out anytime

tailwindhome

KingstonGraham wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

Labour going to be kicking themselves they didn't back May's deal.

What else has changed in the "deal" except the Northern Ireland issue?

The NI issue isn't just the NI issue.
It influences the final landing zone of the future relationship.
It takes labour further away from their objectives of customs union and alignment

kingstongraham

TailWindHome wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

Labour going to be kicking themselves they didn't back May's deal.

What else has changed in the "deal" except the Northern Ireland issue?

The NI issue isn't just the NI issue.
It influences the final landing zone of the future relationship.
It takes labour further away from their objectives of customs union and alignment

You think Labour knows what their objectives are?

TheBigBean

TailWindHome wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

Labour going to be kicking themselves they didn't back May's deal.

What else has changed in the "deal" except the Northern Ireland issue?

The NI issue isn't just the NI issue.
It influences the final landing zone of the future relationship.
It takes labour further away from their objectives of customs union and alignment

It does explicitly state that it should have no influence on any future discussions e.g. Dover - Calais

TheBigBean

Rick Chasey wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

It’s not clear how the proposal is in line with the GFA

It is surely more in line than anything put forward so far by the EU. It allows the elected body to oversee the regulation, for example.

At first glance it appears to allow the DUP to veto the initial setup after a few years reverting to a hard border.

It's not perfect, and I suspect this part will be refined to something that represents the views of electorate, but it is still more in line with the agreement than the backstop.

I find it curious how the backstop has now become some kind of extremist position to be negotiated from, when it was in fact already a chunky compromise on both sides.

Customs border = no GFA compliance, surely?

Debatable, but probably not. Regulation without representation and an overall change in status of NI without a referendum probably are.

I find it curious that that isn't more widely appreciated.

NI is represented in parliament....

Which is not how the BA/GFA works.

TheBigBean

TailWindHome wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

This is a deal which, in NI, only has the support of the DUP.

Aside from the DUP veto, what objections do you (or other NI people) have?

From the centre and nationalists/remain they're getting all the objections you'd expect

From their right and other unionists they're getting objections for having conceded anything.

From the business community they're getting all the 'remain' objections + objections to the 4 yearly cycle of an in/out vote and the chaos that'll bring.

They're having defend against nationalism and remain by pointing out what they've given while defending on the right that they given nothing and can pull out anytime

It is terrible for the business community, but will anyone else actually notice?

cycleclinic

The uk cant change how the good friday agreement is implemented by itself. The irish government and devolved government in NI have to agree as well. Since they cant as they are not sitting this new plan surely cant be implemented without the prospect of court challenges. The americans might get involved too as they helped broker it.

Why is the government insisted on opening cans of worms that are best kept closed.

Also I do wonder how the boarder arrangements will work. I have 900 rims due this weekend in port. A shipping company handles the HMRC and customs clearance. That mostly involves submitting commodity codes and paying the vat and duties. That surely is what the government means by trusted trader. If there are checks it not on the food physically unless boarder/customs agents suspect something as my goods have never been opened. So what checks are actually done on physical goods. On agricultural products there maybe closer inspections.

What new systems would be required to be created in the implementation phase to have everything ready by December 2020.

There too much vagueness and steve Barclay this morning did not clear this points up when on telly. I tend to find tv news to be semi informative. The detail tends to be lacking.

What technology is actually required. How well tracked do all the goods need to be. In the case of my rims how different would the process be for goods crossing the NI boarder.

rick_chasey

BB: explain how "Regulation without representation and an overall change in status of NI without a referendum probably are [against the GFA}", because I don't really follow.

tailwindhome

Rick Chasey wrote:

Love how Gibraltar is just ignored entirely.

We've decided to focus on the hard place and ignore the rock

cycleclinic

Rick Chasey wrote:

BB: explain how "Regulation without representation and an overall change in status of NI without a referendum probably are [against the GFA}", because I don't really follow.

I'm not sure I understand this either. The status of northern ireland is not issue here. It surely is the implementation of the good friday agreement with respect to the all ireland economy.