Jump to content


Consequences Of Brexit [Part 9] Read First Post Before Posting

Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, Sidonica said:

Welcome back tzijlstra, many remainers no longer post on here but there are some new ones still challenging the leavers, although quite a lot of the

leavers have left as well.  

 

Thanks Sidonica, we'll see how long I last :D the below post doesn't bode too well - typical deflection from the real questions. 

7 hours ago, Car Boot said:

I don't support the Tory government.

 

I support a full, clean, No Deal Brexit. Just what we voted for. 

 

Let's do this.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Car Boot said:

The only people who want a hard border in Ireland are the EU trading bloc fanatics to protect their precious Single Market.

The UK certainly isn't putting up any borders. Let's be serious for a moment though, neither is Ireland or the EU. It's not happening. All this talk of borders and invoking the GFA and terrorists is a pretty shoddy negotiating rouse by the EU. They don't believe it, our negotiators don't believe it, but it makes headlines and frightens people so they create public confusion during the process that's designed to put pressure on the Team UK. 

 

A few daft people have been so bamboozled by the EU that they even think that the UK should divide itself up internally to avoid a soft border with an external trade bloc. I mean, how mad is that!!! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Car Boot said:

The only people who want a hard border in Ireland are the EU trading bloc fanatics to protect their precious Single Market.

 

Stuff the Single Market. Protect the UK Internal Market.

No, the EU don't want a hard border in Ireland, they have made very clear that they don't hence it was included in Johnson's 'deal' that he is now rescinding on. Hence they are suing the UK government to ensure that the agreement that was in place is kept in place. The fact that Johnson is prepared to pull the plug on that 'deal' shows that he doesn't care if there is a hard border in Ireland or not. 

 

Quite frankly, why should it bother him and his mates? That isn't where the bankers that they are trying to protect through Brexit are based. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, tzijlstra said:

Hence they are suing the UK government to ensure that the agreement that was in place is kept in place.

Where are they doing that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tony said:

I'd say that's a one dimensional view. The economics aspect is important but so are the societal aspects.

 

The economic aspects are as yet unproven and I expect that in a few years time we'll all look back and think "was that all?" Time will tell. 

 

On society, that's already won by a large margin so long as there is no backsliding on sovereignty, ie that the EU has no oversight or legal jurisdiction over the UK and it's people.  UK democracy, such as can be is, is enhanced and protected. Again, time will tell but we will know by year end. 

 

The "winning strategy" as you call it, was for the UK to leave European Union. That's done. Won. Over. - subject to backsliding in an FTA.

But that's what Boris does best, backsliding, he's already started, but you suckers lapped it up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, melthebell said:

But that's what Boris does best, backsliding, he's already started, but you suckers lapped it up

Please point this sucker in the direction of the backsliding. I try to keep up to date with Frost & Co but I missed this sovereignty backsliding you mention. Cheers Mel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Tony said:

The UK certainly isn't putting up any borders. 

If you have two regulatory regimes then you have a border. That's the simple reality of life. If you want no border then both regulatory regimes have to be and remain identical. 

 

The NI economy is dependent on trade both with the UK and the EU and any border is damaging to it, which is why everyone went to great pains to avoid one. 

 

Imposing  a border between NI and the Republic, certainly stretches the GFA even if it doesn't break it. I've no idea if there is anyone over there, or over here for that matter, who would use this as an excuse to restart violence but that is essentially the risk you seem willing to take. 

 

19 minutes ago, Tony said:

A few daft people have been so bamboozled by the EU that they even think that the UK should divide itself up internally to avoid a soft border with an external trade bloc. I mean, how mad is that!!! 

The obvious solution would be maintain enough regulatary equivalence but that seems to have been too hard for our negotiators to manage. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Tony said:

Please point this sucker in the direction of the backsliding. I try to keep up to date with Frost & Co but I missed this sovereignty backsliding you mention. Cheers Mel.

kicking the can down the road for 3 years on fishing rights is one hes already been mooted to be backsliding on

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@andyofborgRegulatory divergence is paperwork between trusting nations, not a border. Please don't fall for the nonsense of invoking the GFA. 

 

The bottom line doesn't change and I described it above. There will be no border worthy of the name.

3 minutes ago, melthebell said:

kicking the can down the road for 3 years on fishing rights is one hes already been mooted to be backsliding on

Is that it? I thought I'd missed something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Tony said:

@andyofborgRegulatory divergence is paperwork between trusting nations, not a border. Please don't fall for the nonsense of invoking the GFA. 

 

The bottom line doesn't change and I described it above. There will be no border worthy of the name.

Is that it? I thought I'd missed something.

You obviously did miss it if you didnt know, and its quite an important one since one of the main supposed benefits of brexit is taking back "control" of our fisheries and Boris has stated many times there wont be any extensions.

The WA arguement could be seen as backsliding too since he didnt like mays, he got his own agreed, told everybody it was great and the best thing ever, everybody votes for it, votes for him, then suddenly its a "bad" deal

 

I personally cant trust anything this government says or does and i pity any of you suckers that do

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tony said:

On society, that's already won by a large margin so long as there is no backsliding on sovereignty, ie that the EU has no oversight or legal jurisdiction over the UK and it's people.  UK democracy, such as can be is, is enhanced and protected. Again, time will tell but we will know by year end. 

You do realise that every trade deal we sign will include some sort of dispute resolution procedure. Generally these are secret groups of lawyers who function outside of the public view. For all their possible faults, the EU instituations do operate in the open. 

 

You do realise that every deal, convention and international body we've ever subscribed too involves giving up some soverignty. If you really want soverignenty then we should leave the UN, WTO, NATO etc. and resile from every other treaty and convention we've ever signed.  

 

 

Edited by andyofborg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, andyofborg said:

You do realise that every trade deal we sign will include some sort of dispute resolution procedure. Generally these are secret groups of lawyers who function outside of the public view. For all their possible faults, the EU instituations do operate in the open. 

 

You do realise that every deal, convention and international body we've ever subscribed too involves giving up some soverignty. If you really want soverignenty then we should leave the UN, WTO, NATO etc. and resile from every other treaty and convention we've ever signed.  

 

 

Yes. And? Why is this supposed to be a surprise?

 

 

Talking of surprises,

@melthebell Mel, it's not a surprise. You don't have a point.  

 

 

 

All, can we raise this discussion up a notch or two please? It's well down in the weeds at the moment and I am really bored of people trying to prove whether or not I know something (that they just found on Google) instead of discussing matters of substance with an understanding that others might have a point that's valid even if we don't agree. That might, just might, even include acknowledging that there are plus and minus points and everything is subject to nuance and change. This low-grade 6th form debating room gotcha crud is why I usually stay away from SF these days. It's dull, irritating, unfulfilling and ultimately pointless. Cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.