Theresa May (Vol.2)
Discussion
esxste said:
You're fundamentally misunderstanding/underestimating the situation surrounding the GFA and the effect a hard border would have. It's a compromise agreement that allows those who live in Northern Ireland and consider themselves to be Irish citizens to live their lives as if they were Irish. They consider those who think of themselves as British as invaders/occupiers.
Introducing a hard border, along with the fact the power-sharing isn't working well, returns NI back to where it was before the GFA.
A sizeable population who consider themselves and their country under the yoke of an occupying power. Leavers should have some understanding of what this feels like, since they're all so keen on taking back control, sovereignty and all of that.
The EU was part of the solution of NI. With alignment of regulations between the UK and Ireland as part of the EU, free movement of goods, services, people and capital, at a practical level there was little difference between NI being a part of the UK or part of Ireland.
Ah, so you are saying it is a big deal and that the Government (and indeed Parliament) would be wrong to dismiss it as a trifle thing and that if the EU is not happy with a Max Fac solution by itself because they would need some physical checks (understandable, surely?) and NI/ROI are not happy with anything even remotely resembling a Hard Border and physical checks...then the UK can only leave if it has a Norway type solution and forget Hard Brexit or anything that has a Hard Border? Introducing a hard border, along with the fact the power-sharing isn't working well, returns NI back to where it was before the GFA.
A sizeable population who consider themselves and their country under the yoke of an occupying power. Leavers should have some understanding of what this feels like, since they're all so keen on taking back control, sovereignty and all of that.
The EU was part of the solution of NI. With alignment of regulations between the UK and Ireland as part of the EU, free movement of goods, services, people and capital, at a practical level there was little difference between NI being a part of the UK or part of Ireland.
I mean, I know what the GFA is and why but my discussion leads to the point that while some in the rest of the UK dismiss the GFA as a trifle and irritation and shouldn't stand in the way of a good deal with the EU, the fact remains that for NI and ROI, it is a very big deal even if I personally think it rather daft. If NI wants to go independent, why don't they vote for such instead of crying about being under the British yoke? Do a Scotland and see what happens and everyone accept the result. It is bloody immature and, frankly, pathetic to me that the Unionists and Nationalists cannot accept Democracy in this day and age.
But my personal views on why the GFA was needed, and those who share them in Britain, are immaterial to the Brexit issue if the UK Government wants to uphold their end of the GFA and ensure peace in the region.
It is still more a UK issue to resolve for Brexit than the EU's...a complicated mess that should have been discussed and resolved before taking the UK down the road to Brexit, don'tcha think?
Again, just my musings, probably all b
ks. 
CaptainSlow said:
saaby93 said:
CaptainSlow said:
esxste said:
CaptainSlow said:
Why is the DUP stopping this? I would have thought they'd love that idea.
Because they're not keen on a return of the constant violence, the loss of life, the disruption to life, business and economy that came with The Troubles ?However the best (so far) way of not having it is the draft agreement - thats one of the (main) reasons its on the table.
Without it the border comes in which almost nobody wants.
Its not clear which way the DUP want their bread buttered
"c) Full Brexit with the border across Ireland - trouble is DUP"
DUP dont want a border - so unless they have some hidden strategy all theyre doing is shooting themselves in the foot
At least Reesmogg and the ERG seem consistent with abandon the agreement even if it means having a border
Edited by saaby93 on Tuesday 20th November 12:50
saaby93 said:
The easy way of doing things - options
a) abandon Brexit - trouble is the people have voted
b)Full Brexit with border down the Irish Sea - trouble is DUP
c) Full Brexit with the border across Ireland - trouble is DUP
d) Full Brexit but take Eire out too
e) Brexit plus draft agreement
If I carry more than the permitted quantity of alcohol or tobacco across teh Eire/NI border, which border post do I declare it at?
In a nutshell, there should be a border there today, despite the fact that we're in the EU. There isn't a border there simply because it is not worth enforcing, and it won't be worth enforcing even in the event of full brexit.
The EU have said they won't enforce it.
The Irish government have said they won't enforce it.
Christ knows why the UK government has allowed it to be used as a stick to beat us with.
saaby93 said:
d) Full Brexit but take Eire out too
Such astounding arrogance! How to you propose to "take out" any sovereign nation from its own international treaties with other nations against the will of the vast majority of its citizens? that aside, there is of course far more to the need for the "Backstop" in the WA than just economics or a border, hard, soft, half-baked or whatever they come up with.
There is a very considerable section of the NI population that have no faith or trust in the British system of justice, because they know how that was used to suppress them since the partition of Ireland. They've invested in the GFA precisely because that gives them access to another system of justice that they can accept whilst remaining under British rule. Brexit threatens to undermine fundamentally that buy-in.
Read this, if you want to understand and educate yourself:
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/brexit-debate-i...
saaby93 said:
Isnt that only assuming there's an agreement in place 
No. The EU said they won't enforce it even in the event of "no deal", I've seen the footage from the Irish equivalent of BBC Parliament. I think it was Juncker sat there so pretty much straight from the horses mouth.Coolbanana said:
Ah, so you are saying it is a big deal and that the Government (and indeed Parliament) would be wrong to dismiss it as a trifle thing and that if the EU is not happy with a Max Fac solution by itself because they would need some physical checks (understandable, surely?) and NI/ROI are not happy with anything even remotely resembling a Hard Border and physical checks...then the UK can only leave if it has a Norway type solution and forget Hard Brexit or anything that has a Hard Border?
I mean, I know what the GFA is and why but my discussion leads to the point that while some in the rest of the UK dismiss the GFA as a trifle and irritation and shouldn't stand in the way of a good deal with the EU, the fact remains that for NI and ROI, it is a very big deal even if I personally think it rather daft. If NI wants to go independent, why don't they vote for such instead of crying about being under the British yoke? Do a Scotland and see what happens and everyone accept the result. It is bloody immature and, frankly, pathetic to me that the Unionists and Nationalists cannot accept Democracy in this day and age.
But my personal views on why the GFA was needed, and those who share them in Britain, are immaterial to the Brexit issue if the UK Government wants to uphold their end of the GFA and ensure peace in the region.
It is still more a UK issue to resolve for Brexit than the EU's...a complicated mess that should have been discussed and resolved before taking the UK down the road to Brexit, don'tcha think?
Again, just my musings, probably all bks.
You can't compare the Scottish with NI. The situations are different. Scotland joined with England as a Union of crowns; its nominally a more equal relationship. Some Scots want Independence,some Scots wanted to stay in the Union. They (mostly) all see themselves and each other as Scottish, and thus have an equal say. I mean, I know what the GFA is and why but my discussion leads to the point that while some in the rest of the UK dismiss the GFA as a trifle and irritation and shouldn't stand in the way of a good deal with the EU, the fact remains that for NI and ROI, it is a very big deal even if I personally think it rather daft. If NI wants to go independent, why don't they vote for such instead of crying about being under the British yoke? Do a Scotland and see what happens and everyone accept the result. It is bloody immature and, frankly, pathetic to me that the Unionists and Nationalists cannot accept Democracy in this day and age.
But my personal views on why the GFA was needed, and those who share them in Britain, are immaterial to the Brexit issue if the UK Government wants to uphold their end of the GFA and ensure peace in the region.
It is still more a UK issue to resolve for Brexit than the EU's...a complicated mess that should have been discussed and resolved before taking the UK down the road to Brexit, don'tcha think?
Again, just my musings, probably all b
ks. NI is different because it is the result of England/Britain invading Ireland and the events that unfolded after that. Before the RoI gained independence, the Irish considered themselves an occupied nation. In Northern Ireland, you have people who consider themselves Irish - the republicans. They still consider Britain an occupying power. They cannot democratically get what they want in a referendum, because the Unionists, mostly descendants of British colonists, are in the majority and they consider themselves British. The Republicans want NI returned to RoI. Neither side wants to become an independent nation. The problem is further complicated by the time period involved... most Unionists are many generations down from the original colonists. They and they're families have been there 100's of years now, and feel they have just as much right to be there and get what they want as the Republicans do.
It can't be considered a UK internal issue, because one of side the argument do not consider themselves to be British. That's why the GFA involves the RoI.
saaby93 said:
If the DUP kill the draft agreement - (c) full Brexit and a full border comes into play
DUP dont want a border - so unless they have some hidden strategy all theyre doing is shooting themselves in the foot
At least Reesmogg and the ERG seem consistent with abandon the agreement even if it means having a border
When the UK, Eire and EU have all said they won't create a hard border if no deal is reached. Whats the bloody problem?DUP dont want a border - so unless they have some hidden strategy all theyre doing is shooting themselves in the foot
At least Reesmogg and the ERG seem consistent with abandon the agreement even if it means having a border
Edited by saaby93 on Tuesday 20th November 12:50
No one will build it, they will do checks away from the border. Just as they have now.
jsf said:
When the UK, Eire and EU have all said they won't create a hard border if no deal is reached. Whats the bloody problem?
No one will build it, they will do checks away from the border. Just as they have now.
RoI are not in Schengen right now, and right now have a common travel area with the UK and Border Checks are done on entry to UK or Ireland, but not in between. No one will build it, they will do checks away from the border. Just as they have now.
I.e Travel from Paris to Dublin to London and back to Paris and you'll get passport checked on the Paris to Dublin leg, and the London to Paris leg.
What happens when RoI decides that it wants to join Schengen?
jsf said:
saaby93 said:
If the DUP kill the draft agreement - (c) full Brexit and a full border comes into play
DUP dont want a border - so unless they have some hidden strategy all theyre doing is shooting themselves in the foot
At least Reesmogg and the ERG seem consistent with abandon the agreement even if it means having a border
When the UK, Eire and EU have all said they won't create a hard border if no deal is reached. Whats the bloody problem?DUP dont want a border - so unless they have some hidden strategy all theyre doing is shooting themselves in the foot
At least Reesmogg and the ERG seem consistent with abandon the agreement even if it means having a border
No one will build it, they will do checks away from the border. Just as they have now.
At the moment the draft agreement was supposed to create an adequate resolution forl this
Most business seems to think it has
saaby93 said:
jsf said:
saaby93 said:
If the DUP kill the draft agreement - (c) full Brexit and a full border comes into play
DUP dont want a border - so unless they have some hidden strategy all theyre doing is shooting themselves in the foot
At least Reesmogg and the ERG seem consistent with abandon the agreement even if it means having a border
When the UK, Eire and EU have all said they won't create a hard border if no deal is reached. Whats the bloody problem?DUP dont want a border - so unless they have some hidden strategy all theyre doing is shooting themselves in the foot
At least Reesmogg and the ERG seem consistent with abandon the agreement even if it means having a border
No one will build it, they will do checks away from the border. Just as they have now.
At the moment the draft agreement was supposed to create an adequate resolution forl this
Most business seems to think it has
Today there are meant to be checks done on various goods moving within the single market, there are customs controls on spirits for example.
In NI/ROI, there is no border and the checks are done elsewhere. People who want to smuggle things illegally across the border can do so with near impunity.
Why does it need to be different in the future? Just don't put up the border, do the checks away from the border, accept that there may be some smuggling of certain products just as there is today.
TLDR - We don't enforce the required border controls now (the ones that are required even though we're in the EU), why are we worrying about enforcing them in the future?
Blue Oval84 said:
We're talking about people and goods.
Today there are meant to be checks done on various goods moving within the single market, there are customs controls on spirits for example.
In NI/ROI, there is no border and the checks are done elsewhere. People who want to smuggle things illegally across the border can do so with near impunity.
Why does it need to be different in the future?
Because in the future one side will be in the EU and the other side not Today there are meant to be checks done on various goods moving within the single market, there are customs controls on spirits for example.
In NI/ROI, there is no border and the checks are done elsewhere. People who want to smuggle things illegally across the border can do so with near impunity.
Why does it need to be different in the future?
At the moment it doesnt matter too much cos both are in the EU.
As soon as its two separate trading areas an agreement needs to be in place - and hence the draft agreement
saaby93 said:
ecause in the future one side will be in the EU and the other side not
At the moment it doesnt matter too much cos both are in the EU.
As soon as its two separate trading areas an agreement needs to be in place - and hence the draft agreement
It's already two separate trading areas, there are differences in duty applied between the countries. There's meant to be a border there today but there isn't. Just leave it the same afterwards, and to re-state this as you seem to have missed it, the EU ave already said they won't enforce it in the event of no deal, therefore there doesn't need to be an agreement to avoid a hard border.At the moment it doesnt matter too much cos both are in the EU.
As soon as its two separate trading areas an agreement needs to be in place - and hence the draft agreement
paulrockliffe said:
They violate the Good Friday Agreement?
Or they come up with a technology-based solution that is acceptable on the other side of the border.
The GFA say's no hard borders. Or they come up with a technology-based solution that is acceptable on the other side of the border.
If the EU/Schengen countries are quite happy to allow visitors to cross the NI border with no checks, then there is no violation.
Blue Oval84 said:
It's already two separate trading areas, there are differences in duty applied between the countries. There's meant to be a border there today but there isn't. Just leave it the same afterwards, and to re-state this as you seem to have missed it, the EU ave already said they won't enforce it in the event of no deal, therefore there doesn't need to be an agreement to avoid a hard border.
no not missed it.What they havent said is what they'll do in place of enforcing the border if there's no deal
One option was treating the border as if its in the Irish sea and if theres no agreement they can come up with as many as they like, which is whats bothering business.
Hence the usefulness of the draft agreement
Coolbanana said:
It is still more a UK issue to resolve for Brexit than the EU's...a complicated mess that should have been discussed and resolved before taking the UK down the road to Brexit, don'tcha think?
Again, just my musings, probably all bks.
I'll agree with this - our negotiators allowed it to become a sticking point, and with May's badly judged election, the DUP ended up with more symbolic power than they've had in a long time. Personally I'm of the opinion that the border could be respected with minimal visible or physical checks, but others are more cynical ("it could never be done! change! woe!"). Again, just my musings, probably all b
ks. The UK negotiators should have been far more forceful in pushing for such solutions within Ireland, but the impression I get is that slightly too many of the negotiating team and those in the civil service are of the "computer says no" variety.
Consequently, the EU has found a weak point, and some of the nuttier Remainers have seized on the very existence of Ireland as an immovable block to ever leaving Europe.
Blue Oval84 said:
saaby93 said:
jsf said:
saaby93 said:
If the DUP kill the draft agreement - (c) full Brexit and a full border comes into play
DUP dont want a border - so unless they have some hidden strategy all theyre doing is shooting themselves in the foot
At least Reesmogg and the ERG seem consistent with abandon the agreement even if it means having a border
When the UK, Eire and EU have all said they won't create a hard border if no deal is reached. Whats the bloody problem?DUP dont want a border - so unless they have some hidden strategy all theyre doing is shooting themselves in the foot
At least Reesmogg and the ERG seem consistent with abandon the agreement even if it means having a border
No one will build it, they will do checks away from the border. Just as they have now.
At the moment the draft agreement was supposed to create an adequate resolution forl this
Most business seems to think it has
Today there are meant to be checks done on various goods moving within the single market, there are customs controls on spirits for example.
In NI/ROI, there is no border and the checks are done elsewhere. People who want to smuggle things illegally across the border can do so with near impunity.
But, there IS a border and has been since the founding of the Free State
People need to get away from the idea there isn’t a border ...
It’s just how it is policed and controlled that this argument is about
Earthdweller said:
But, there IS a border and has been since the founding of the Free State
People need to get away from the idea there isn’t a border ...
It’s just how it is policed and controlled that this argument is about
And that there is more than just this border, the EU can do what it likes with the others if there's no agreement about this onePeople need to get away from the idea there isn’t a border ...
It’s just how it is policed and controlled that this argument is about
Tuna said:
I'll agree with this - our negotiators allowed it to become a sticking point, and with May's badly judged election, the DUP ended up with more symbolic power than they've had in a long time. Personally I'm of the opinion that the border could be respected with minimal visible or physical checks, but others are more cynical ("it could never be done! change! woe!").
The UK negotiators should have been far more forceful in pushing for such solutions within Ireland, but the impression I get is that slightly too many of the negotiating team and those in the civil service are of the "computer says no" variety.
Consequently, the EU has found a weak point, and some of the nuttier Remainers have seized on the very existence of Ireland as an immovable block to ever leaving Europe.
Or, you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the politics of NI, and the arrogance to assume that everyone in NI will go along with whatever the UK Government decide. The UK negotiators should have been far more forceful in pushing for such solutions within Ireland, but the impression I get is that slightly too many of the negotiating team and those in the civil service are of the "computer says no" variety.
Consequently, the EU has found a weak point, and some of the nuttier Remainers have seized on the very existence of Ireland as an immovable block to ever leaving Europe.
Given the violence of The Troubles, it is far from hyperbole to say peoples lives are at risk if the NI issue is not handled properly.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff