Brexit - was it worth it? (Vol. 2)

[Earthdweller]

DeejRC said:

I’m half based in the EU and half in the U.K. you twit. “They” are both “us” for me.
Unlike you, I actually need VDL to stop cocking up because it doesn’t affect you, whereas it does affect me. Boris I’ve already taken steps to ensure doesn’t affect me.

Absolutely this ^^^^

Living one side of the border and working the other side ( both wife and I ) and paid in Sterling it is critical to us and countless thousands of other “cross border” workers on the island of Ireland that both sides stop dicking around

Particularly the EU who’s leaders seem to have a complete lack of comprehension about the geography/politics and whole island economy

It is crying out for a typical Irish fudge “ it’ll be grand, lads”

Except we have Latvian politician who’s idea of borders is formed firmly in the east and shaped by the former USSR and a very poor German politician

If only filthy Phil hadn’t gone to Clifden to
Play golf because there would
Likely have been a much stronger push from ROI/EU for a less “ Germanic and proper” position on the island

As I understand it ( happy to be corrected ) only 0.2% of total imports into the main part of the Eu come from NI

To paraphrase and generalise . “what goes onto the island stays on the island

[roger.mellie]

DeejRC said:

It sort of is what Sway is arguing Roger, except he is doing his usual technical argument. The U.K. side is stronger than the EU side, it always has been from the start of this spat. It’s a fairly simple thing for me, but then it’s bugger all to do with me in truth.

VDL is vastly worse than Hancock unfortunately Do you have any idea of the jokes and memes going round Germany on her? She is…worse than Gordon Brown My old Italian colleagues and neighbours are blaming the rise of Madame Loony in Italy directly on her.

The EU have achieved their objectives in the same way that they won the vaccine court case. Politically it’s been a disastrous year for the EU, and I say these posts very much wearing my EU hat not the British one.

You must Roge, you are slightly biased on the Irish threads, you have a dog in the fight . Ireland doesn’t affect me at all, but VDL’s wider performance unfortunately does

I have some idea, my work focus has drifted away from the eu (nowt to do with brexit) but I still make regular social calls and the ebbs and flows mean it will probably increase again in the future.

I have a dog in the fight, I don’t hide that but I do mix objectivety and subjectivity as I see fit.

On this I still think you can’t blame everything on VDL. She’s the head that wears the crown but the complaints are structural and I say that as a pro eu person. Attacking individuals ignores the bigger picture (as does my Hancock jibe).

[roger.mellie]

Earthdweller said:

Absolutely this ^^^^

Living one side of the border and working the other side ( both wife and I ) and paid in Sterling it is critical to us and countless thousands of other “cross border” workers on the island of Ireland that both sides stop dicking around

Particularly the EU who’s leaders seem to have a complete lack of comprehension about the geography/politics and whole island economy

It is crying out for a typical Irish fudge “ it’ll be grand, lads”

Except we have Latvian politician who’s idea of borders is formed firmly in the east and shaped by the former USSR and a very poor German politician

If only filthy Phil hadn’t gone to Clifden to
Play golf because there would
Likely have been a much stronger push from ROI/EU for a less “ Germanic and proper” position on the island

As I understand it ( happy to be corrected ) only 0.2% of total imports into the main part of the Eu come from NI

To paraphrase and generalise . “what goes onto the island stays on the island

I’ve spent many a year being a cross border worker too in the other direction. Now I have the “luxury” of being in a cross border company where I can pick which payroll to be on.

I hope you’re not being screwed by the home working tax rules the CBWC are fighting for.

[Mrr T]

Vanden Saab said:

Mrr T said:

Vanden Saab said:

Mortarboard said:

Sway said:

Meanwhile, posters supporting the EU's position have ignored they have caved - and pushed it down the road, amusingly and tellingly to the point in which we apply those same controls to all third nation imports.

Funny that, it's almost like I pointed out weeks ago the UK's leverage in this debate.

Uk requests extension on the exemption:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/bre...

Sway: "The EU has caved!"

The initial exemption was to enable NI retailers to (and I quote here) "make changes" https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-55245...

i.e. either get a trusted trader scheme up and running, or establish alternative suppliers.

To suggest this is "an EU ban" is bks. Remember the "shellfish ban"? Funny how that all worked out to not actually be a ban after all.

What next? "Services ban?" "Financial products ban?"

Frost & team need to start dealing with the practicalities of the Brexit deal (and I include the EU's responsibility to engage in it also), and less focus on Tory/Bojo PR management.

M.

I do not think you understand, We follow the rules ie. ask first. If they say yes all well and good. If the EU say no then we will do it anyway as saying no will be breaking the terms of the Protocol and the UK is then allowed to disregard it . It is win win for the UK.

You really really do not understand. In March Frosty extended the transition on other products unilaterally. No request to the JC and a clear breach of the IP and committee agreements. This time he again threatened to extend unilaterally. Now he asked the JC for a extension on the transition period. I wonder why the change of mind?

I expect the EU will agree. However, if they refuse it is not a beach of the IP or committee agreement.

So this is a big win for the UK since it seems our government is at last acting in a proper manner.

You are actually suggesting that the UK were in clear breach of the protocol and the EU just ignored it... Oh my.....

Well not really ignored.

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail...

[ArmaghMan]

To all those posters who think the N.I protocol is about trade or access or dare I say it, what type of sausages (frozen or otherwise ) are available in N.I are missing the point completely.
One side of the community here are holding protests on an almoat daily basis, their political parties are tearing themselves apart from within and they feel that their identity is being threatened.
The other side...dont really care.
If the protocol was really about trade and economics and everyone being worse off then both sides would be protesting but they're not.
As ever in N.I everything is about them and us, that difference trumps everything else.
Once brexit was voted for, one side in N.I was going to lose.
Bojo played a blinder and up until the last minute convinced the unionists it wouldnt be them. Then he called a snap election, got a thumping majority, didnt need the DUP and fked them over.
Now they see their British identity being threatened. This isnt about extra cost, or not being able to order things on Amazon or vetinary checks at Larne harbour. This is now about the one thing that unionists/loyalists. Their Britishness.

[Tuna]

roger.mellie said:

I have a dog in the fight, I don’t hide that but I do mix objectivety and subjectivity as I see fit..

With the best will in the world, that's does not put your posts in a positive light.

[Tuna]

ArmaghMan said:

Now they see their British identity being threatened. This isnt about extra cost, or not being able to order things on Amazon or vetinary checks at Larne harbour. This is now about the one thing that unionists/loyalists. Their Britishness.

That's funny, I thought it was about certain people taking the opportunity to st stir.

Hopefully, calmer heads will prevail.

[roger.mellie]

Tuna said:

roger.mellie said:

I have a dog in the fight, I don’t hide that but I do mix objectivety and subjectivity as I see fit..

With the best will in the world, that's does not put your posts in a positive light.

Lol, with the best will in the world guess how many fingers I’m holding up. I don’t do false sanctimony.

I may be serious or not in my next post.

[roger.mellie]

ArmaghMan said:

To all those posters who think the N.I protocol is about trade or access or dare I say it, what type of sausages (frozen or otherwise ) are available in N.I are missing the point completely.
One side of the community here are holding protests on an almoat daily basis, their political parties are tearing themselves apart from within and they feel that their identity is being threatened.
The other side...dont really care.
If the protocol was really about trade and economics and everyone being worse off then both sides would be protesting but they're not.
As ever in N.I everything is about them and us, that difference trumps everything else.
Once brexit was voted for, one side in N.I was going to lose.
Bojo played a blinder and up until the last minute convinced the unionists it wouldnt be them. Then he called a snap election, got a thumping majority, didnt need the DUP and fked them over.
Now they see their British identity being threatened. This isnt about extra cost, or not being able to order things on Amazon or vetinary checks at Larne harbour. This is now about the one thing that unionists/loyalists. Their Britishness.

Where are you in Armagh my man? I’ve a bandit country wife so I do.

I don’t fully agree with that analysis. Most parties, businesses etc are of the “let’s just make it work and get the fk on with it” view rather than expecting or proposing getting rid of it. Tweaks and improvements definitely. But stability and predictability matters more than anything.

But no one expects the uk to pull the plug on the whole deal other than a, ahem, select few who are trying to pretend they had nothing to do with it and can’t work out whether it’s the brit’s fault or varadkar’s. You’re right on that one.

[Mortarboard]

Tuna said:

roger.mellie said:

I have a dog in the fight, I don’t hide that but I do mix objectivety and subjectivity as I see fit..

With the best will in the world, that's does not put your posts in a positive light.

You tell 'im Tuna.



I'd love to hear why your opinion should be considered more valuable T.

M.

[Tuna]

Mortarboard said:

Tuna said:

roger.mellie said:

I have a dog in the fight, I don’t hide that but I do mix objectivety and subjectivity as I see fit..

With the best will in the world, that's does not put your posts in a positive light.

You tell 'im Tuna.



I'd love to hear why your opinion should be considered more valuable T.

M.

Never said it did. It was just mildly amusing. The normal approach in debate is to try to show you're being objective, consistent and to (where possible) not have a dog in the fight. To outright say (in effect) "yeah, I say what I want because I want to win" is commendably honest, but it does rather undermine the authority of your commentary.

FWIW, I enjoy rorger's posts - he puts forward a case and will discuss his reasoning. It's clear that he argues for a particular viewpoint, and he's a master at ignoring inconvenient details, but his contributions add to the debate and he provides a little calm when things get hot-headed.

[roger.mellie]

Tuna said:

Never said it did. It was just mildly amusing. The normal approach in debate is to try to show you're being objective, consistent and to (where possible) not have a dog in the fight. To outright say (in effect) "yeah, I say what I want because I want to win" is commendably honest, but it does rather undermine the authority of your commentary.

FWIW, I enjoy rorger's posts - he puts forward a case and will discuss his reasoning. It's clear that he argues for a particular viewpoint, and he's a master at ignoring inconvenient details, but his contributions add to the debate and he provides a little calm when things get hot-headed.

I enjoy your posts too Tuna, the forum would be a poorer place without you.

This conversation is just becoming man playing, don't over egg a one-off comment where I was more honest than most of the extremely biased posters on here that you wouldn't write a post about.

Meanwhile back in brexit land, the protocol is still proving to be an incomplete solution to a predictable problem.

Irish gov - https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-i...

Cross border trade boost is bad news for some - https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/brexit/bre...

Meanwhile some are willing to give their life in a fight they don't understand due to wker politicians that over escalate the issues for personal gain - https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-i...

If only the UK had a calm head that would damp down the issue rather than use it for political gain I'd be a happier person, any twisting I do on this forum doesn't even come close.

Edited by roger.mellie on Monday 21st June 09:43

[Ivan stewart]

Mortarboard said:

Well, I’d have to say Brexit made an impact on EU members. Can’t see any increased appetite for leaving the “club” following Brexit

M.

That’s good then !! Maybe the punishment beatings will end and they will start behaving like adults ?

[Earthdweller]

roger.mellie said:

If only the UK both sides had a calm head that would damp down the issue rather than use it for political gain I'd be a happier person, any twisting I do on this forum doesn't even come close.

FTFY

The EU are not blameless

[roger.mellie]

Earthdweller said:

roger.mellie said:

If only the UK Both sides had a calm head that would damp down the issue rather than use it for political gain I'd be a happier person, any twisting I do on this forum doesn't even come close.

FTFY

The EU are not blameless

True, and I certainly won't deny that.

But if I was apportioning blame it wouldn't be 50:50. They have different priorities. I'd give the UK 75 at least . Being serious, they have different priorities in finding a solution and different priorities on what the solution should be. Getting brexit done was a myth. Dealing with the stty little details is beyond Boris' ability but he could at least appoint someone who's prepared to do it rather than a yes man. It was a mistake to replace Julian Smith with Brandon Lewis unless your priorities were more about having people on side rather than sorting the problems.

[Murph7355]

roger.mellie said:

...Being serious, they have different priorities in finding a solution and different priorities on what the solution should be. ..

Indeed.

The EU's is on "protecting the Single Market" and the UK's is on "respecting the UK internal market"...both aspects of what was agreed.

[roger.mellie]

Murph7355 said:

Indeed.

The EU's is on "protecting the Single Market" and the UK's is on "respecting the UK internal market"...both aspects of what was agreed.

Indeed indeed.

This was known and not unexpected.

I do on occasion wonder how things might have turned out differently if the UK recognised that the SM rules aren't up for negotiation and went from there. Controversial opinion but I think May got that point much better than Boris did and drove a harder bargain.

Regardless, it's water under the bridge.

Thing is, as you well know, protecting the UK internal market was a flexible line for Boris compared to May. It's one thing to say it is a red line now, it's another to have negotiated based on that position. he didn't.

Edited by roger.mellie on Monday 21st June 15:43

[Tuna]

roger.mellie said:

Indeed indeed.

This was known and not unexpected.

I do on occasion wonder how things might have turned out differently if the UK recognised that the SM rules aren't up for negotiation and went from there. Controversial opinion but I think May got that point much better than Boris did and drove a harder bargain.

Regardless, it's water under the bridge.

Thing is, as you well know, protecting the UK internal market was a flexible line for Boris compared to May. It's one thing to say it is now, it's another to have negotiated based on that position. he didn't.

This is where our interpretations radically diverge. May didn't drive a bargain at all when it came to the SM - she simply accepted (or was told) that the EU weren't interested in a compromise and tried to present it to parliament as a fait accompli. They (rightfully) took a dim view of the lack of negotiation demonstrated.

Johnson was right to recognise that NI presents the EU with a unique problem - a physical border with a nation that is determined to allow for regulatory divergence. All of the 'easy' solutions involve one side or the other making some inconceivable sacrifice. After delaying Brexit for nearly five years, finding a better compromise could easily have extended negotiations by many more years - so rather than keeping the entire nation in limbo at the behest of the EU, the choice was straightforward - "agree to disagree", with the NIP to protect both sides' interests, get the bulk of Brexit negotiations out of the way to unlock the majority of the UK and then return to the issue of Ireland on a timetable that wasn't held hostage by wider interests.

The whole narrative of NI being abandoned is predicated on the idea that there was some option on the table that could have been 'instantly' agreed without one side or the other having to make inconceivable constitutional changes. That's only made worse by commentators who think that something like the reunification of Ireland is just the question of flicking a switch and everyone will magically accept the change.

The harsh reality is that entrenched views and complex political legacies mean that the compromise will take serious time to be found, and that both sides will have to compromise. Boris clearly knows this (though he's gung ho in his speeches), but the EU is equally clearly taking time to come round to the idea that they can't just dig their heels in and wait for the other side to capitulate. And by saying that, I'm not 'hating on the EU' - just observing that their standard negotiating tactic with *every* trade and regulatory agreement has been to prevaricate and delay way beyond the eleventh hour - and that's even for non-controversial negotiations with friendly third parties like Canada.

Suggesting that May had a solution to Ireland is wildly disingenuous - she was willing to accept handing over regulatory control of the entire nation to the EU, with no measures to protect our interests and competition. I know many people dismiss that as "no big deal", but observing things like the EU's behaviour over vaccine rollout demonstrates clearly that as a third party nation we must be able to protect our interests as they certainly have no reason to do so on our behalf. Again - that's not an attack on the EU, just an observation of how our relationship naturally shifts once we a no longer members.

(end of ramble)

[Vasco]

Tuna said:

roger.mellie said:

Indeed indeed.

This was known and not unexpected.

I do on occasion wonder how things might have turned out differently if the UK recognised that the SM rules aren't up for negotiation and went from there. Controversial opinion but I think May got that point much better than Boris did and drove a harder bargain.

Regardless, it's water under the bridge.

Thing is, as you well know, protecting the UK internal market was a flexible line for Boris compared to May. It's one thing to say it is now, it's another to have negotiated based on that position. he didn't.

This is where our interpretations radically diverge. May didn't drive a bargain at all when it came to the SM - she simply accepted (or was told) that the EU weren't interested in a compromise and tried to present it to parliament as a fait accompli. They (rightfully) took a dim view of the lack of negotiation demonstrated.

Johnson was right to recognise that NI presents the EU with a unique problem - a physical border with a nation that is determined to allow for regulatory divergence. All of the 'easy' solutions involve one side or the other making some inconceivable sacrifice. After delaying Brexit for nearly five years, finding a better compromise could easily have extended negotiations by many more years - so rather than keeping the entire nation in limbo at the behest of the EU, the choice was straightforward - "agree to disagree", with the NIP to protect both sides' interests, get the bulk of Brexit negotiations out of the way to unlock the majority of the UK and then return to the issue of Ireland on a timetable that wasn't held hostage by wider interests.

The whole narrative of NI being abandoned is predicated on the idea that there was some option on the table that could have been 'instantly' agreed without one side or the other having to make inconceivable constitutional changes. That's only made worse by commentators who think that something like the reunification of Ireland is just the question of flicking a switch and everyone will magically accept the change.

The harsh reality is that entrenched views and complex political legacies mean that the compromise will take serious time to be found, and that both sides will have to compromise. Boris clearly knows this (though he's gung ho in his speeches), but the EU is equally clearly taking time to come round to the idea that they can't just dig their heels in and wait for the other side to capitulate. And by saying that, I'm not 'hating on the EU' - just observing that their standard negotiating tactic with *every* trade and regulatory agreement has been to prevaricate and delay way beyond the eleventh hour - and that's even for non-controversial negotiations with friendly third parties like Canada.

Suggesting that May had a solution to Ireland is wildly disingenuous - she was willing to accept handing over regulatory control of the entire nation to the EU, with no measures to protect our interests and competition. I know many people dismiss that as "no big deal", but observing things like the EU's behaviour over vaccine rollout demonstrates clearly that as a third party nation we must be able to protect our interests as they certainly have no reason to do so on our behalf. Again - that's not an attack on the EU, just an observation of how our relationship naturally shifts once we a no longer members.

(end of ramble)

Good post

[roger.mellie]

Tuna said:

This is where our interpretations radically diverge. May didn't drive a bargain at all when it came to the SM - she simply accepted (or was told) that the EU weren't interested in a compromise and tried to present it to parliament as a fait accompli. They (rightfully) took a dim view of the lack of negotiation demonstrated.

Johnson was right to recognise that NI presents the EU with a unique problem - a physical border with a nation that is determined to allow for regulatory divergence. All of the 'easy' solutions involve one side or the other making some inconceivable sacrifice. After delaying Brexit for nearly five years, finding a better compromise could easily have extended negotiations by many more years - so rather than keeping the entire nation in limbo at the behest of the EU, the choice was straightforward - "agree to disagree", with the NIP to protect both sides' interests, get the bulk of Brexit negotiations out of the way to unlock the majority of the UK and then return to the issue of Ireland on a timetable that wasn't held hostage by wider interests.

The whole narrative of NI being abandoned is predicated on the idea that there was some option on the table that could have been 'instantly' agreed without one side or the other having to make inconceivable constitutional changes. That's only made worse by commentators who think that something like the reunification of Ireland is just the question of flicking a switch and everyone will magically accept the change.

The harsh reality is that entrenched views and complex political legacies mean that the compromise will take serious time to be found, and that both sides will have to compromise. Boris clearly knows this (though he's gung ho in his speeches), but the EU is equally clearly taking time to come round to the idea that they can't just dig their heels in and wait for the other side to capitulate. And by saying that, I'm not 'hating on the EU' - just observing that their standard negotiating tactic with *every* trade and regulatory agreement has been to prevaricate and delay way beyond the eleventh hour.

Suggesting that May had a solution to Ireland is wildly disingenuous - she was willing to accept handing over regulatory control of the entire nation to the EU, with no measures to protect our interests and competition. I know many people dismiss that as "no big deal", but observing things like the EU's behaviour over vaccine rollout demonstrates clearly that as a third party nation we must be able to protect our interests as they certainly have no reason to do so on our behalf. Again - that's not an attack on the EU, just an observation of how our relationship naturally shifts once we a no longer members.

(end of ramble)

We're chewing old cud but I'm happy to do so.

May's deal was much more scary for many of the EU nations than Boris' was. Many were delighted by Boris's willingness to accept a deal that May wouldn't as long as he could claim it was different.

Boris was right to realise that the NI border presents the UK with a problem that gets in the way of brexit ambitions and ruthlessly said fk it. But is now using it to score points. I enjoy throwing an NI perspective into the conversations but I don't really expect anyone who supports brexit to give a flying other than when it becomes useful to their cause. They didn't when it counted, fair fks, but the false worry now whatevs.

May didn't have a solution, she had a workaround. Maybe Boris has the solution but I'm sure many won't like it, and they're currently probably on the street rioting. At least he gave them a chance to do what they enjoy.

The harsh reality if there is one is that UK politics is drifting further away from NI politics than it has ever been and the ones who care haven't got the message yet.

Never apologise for rambling, I enjoyed reading.