Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The timing of this leak makes me think it is all about ousting

SystemSystem Posts: 3,967
edited November 27 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The timing of this leak makes me think it is all about ousting Damian Green, and ultimately Mrs May

Exc: Damian Green “offered to pay salary of DUP staff member from Tory party funds” after confidence and supply deal struck https://t.co/d2CaaG4ybl

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • RobDRobD Posts: 30,411
    First, if Vanilla doesn’t eat it!
  • Interesting to note the story credits the civil servant Sue Gray with blocking public money being spent by Damien Green on a DUP special advisor . And who is currently running the investigation into Damien Green ? Civil servant Sue Gray.

    So the story is a double whammy. It's not only an anti Damien Green piece but it's a pro Sue Gray piece establishing her independence of mind in general and re Damien Green in particular. And all just before she gives judgement on Damien Green.

    The timing seems significant.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 25,806
    edited November 27
    Far too much effort is spent on ensuring Theresa May remains Prime Minister, and not enough effort on what is in the best interests of the party and the country.

    Oh pulease! Does it ever get chilly up there on the moral high ground? I suppose you can wrap up well in pomposity to keep warm....

    But yes, what’s really interesting is who is doing the leaking and why....
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 14,976

    Far too much effort is spent on ensuring Theresa May remains Prime Minister, and not enough effort on what is in the best interests of the party and the country.

    Oh pulease! Does it ever get chilly up there on the moral high ground? I suppose you can wrap up well in pomposity to keep warm....

    But yes, what’s really interesting is who is doing the leaking and why....

    More like far too much effort is being put into trying to undermine government ministers, and not enough effort into the business of the day.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 7,006
    The timing of this leak makes me think it is all about who runs the DUP and the impact on Damian Green and Theresa May (and Sue Gray if Yellow Submarine, upthread, is right) is incidental.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 14,976
    FPT:
    Does anyone understand what Ireland are up to here? It appears that the previous Irish administration under Enda Kenny were working with the British on an electronic goods customs system, but the new guy cancelled the project and says it’s entirely Britian’s problem if the EU insist on Ireland having a border - and doing it in such an antagonistic way that it puts the trade talks themselves in jeopardy. Either he got quickly housetrained by Junker, or there’s something else going on here.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 14,976
    Okay, so almost every media report of yesterday’s F1 race says it was dull and boring. I disagree, from my vantage point at Turns 8 and 9 it was a great race.
  • Ally_BAlly_B Posts: 162
    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    Does anyone understand what Ireland are up to here? It appears that the previous Irish administration under Enda Kenny were working with the British on an electronic goods customs system, but the new guy cancelled the project and says it’s entirely Britian’s problem if the EU insist on Ireland having a border - and doing it in such an antagonistic way that it puts the trade talks themselves in jeopardy. Either he got quickly housetrained by Junker, or there’s something else going on here.
    I think this was covered well last night but to summarise the UK has paid no attention to the implications of Brexit on the Irish border, preferring to kick it into the long grass as being insolvable, for this government anyway. The Irish know that if both discussions run in parallel the UK will continue to pay no attention to this 'local' difficulty. At this stage the Irish have a veto but if discussions run through to a trade agreement then that might be agreed under QV and the Irish voice has much less effect. Hence they put a road block here and only the UK government is to blame because they stuck their collective heads in the ground.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 14,976
    edited November 27
    Ally_B said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    Does anyone understand what Ireland are up to here? It appears that the previous Irish administration under Enda Kenny were working with the British on an electronic goods customs system, but the new guy cancelled the project and says it’s entirely Britian’s problem if the EU insist on Ireland having a border - and doing it in such an antagonistic way that it puts the trade talks themselves in jeopardy. Either he got quickly housetrained by Junker, or there’s something else going on here.
    I think this was covered well last night but to summarise the UK has paid no attention to the implications of Brexit on the Irish border, preferring to kick it into the long grass as being insolvable, for this government anyway. The Irish know that if both discussions run in parallel the UK will continue to pay no attention to this 'local' difficulty. At this stage the Irish have a veto but if discussions run through to a trade agreement then that might be agreed under QV and the Irish voice has much less effect. Hence they put a road block here and only the UK government is to blame because they stuck their collective heads in the ground.
    But the British and Irish governments were already quietly and privately talking about how to make the border work, it was the Irish side that called the talks off, apparently at the request of the new prime minister - deciding instead to publicly critise the British side.

    From a British perspective, every few weeks the EU are finding a different new reason not to move to the trade talks. This is exactly as I predicted their playbook would be. They’ve no interest in a continuous trade deal, as we need to be seen to be punished. Their plan is to run the clock down and present us with an eleventh-hour one-sided fait accompli to avoid a chaotic crash out. Which is why we need to decide by next month whether we should stop wasting our time playing their game and spend the fifteen months we have left getting ourselves ready for an orderly exit to WTO terms.

    We are happy to have no border or an electronic one. What Ireland and the EU decide to do on their side is entirely up to them.
  • felixfelix Posts: 6,872
    Ally_B said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    Does anyone understand what Ireland are up to here? It appears that the previous Irish administration under Enda Kenny were working with the British on an electronic goods customs system, but the new guy cancelled the project and says it’s entirely Britian’s problem if the EU insist on Ireland having a border - and doing it in such an antagonistic way that it puts the trade talks themselves in jeopardy. Either he got quickly housetrained by Junker, or there’s something else going on here.
    I think this was covered well last night but to summarise the UK has paid no attention to the implications of Brexit on the Irish border, preferring to kick it into the long grass as being insolvable, for this government anyway. The Irish know that if both discussions run in parallel the UK will continue to pay no attention to this 'local' difficulty. At this stage the Irish have a veto but if discussions run through to a trade agreement then that might be agreed under QV and the Irish voice has much less effect. Hence they put a road block here and only the UK government is to blame because they stuck their collective heads in the ground.
    Rofl - in your opinion...
  • Sandpit said:

    We are happy to have no border or an electronic one. What Ireland and the EU decide to do on their side is entirely up to them.

    Whatever happened to wanting to take back control of borders and immigration? The EU do a poor job of holding their external border remember, and once people are in they can go anywhere remember, and that has to STOP with whatever is left of the Border Force thanks to Tory cuts able to man a British Border under British Rules in the British Interest.

    Until it's clear that a border isn't in our interest. We don't want trucks being stopped. Or delays added. So it's just the EU being silly insisting there will be a hard border on their border like we demanded. No need for a border or checks, we'll just waive them through like we do now why can't they do the same? Control our own land border with the EU? Not at all, let anyone walk into the UK, that's how we take back control and solve the apparent problem of anyone walking into the UK.

    Aware of how absurd your position is?

  • @Sandpit So in short your questions are " Why is the Irish government acting in it's own long term interests rather than making Brexit easier for the British government ? " and " Why are the Irish using their moment of maximum leverage in the talks structure to pursue those self interests rather than ballsing up like we are ? ".

    I confess I'm stumped on both counts.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 14,976
    edited November 27

    @Sandpit So in short your questions are " Why is the Irish government acting in it's own long term interests rather than making Brexit easier for the British government ? " and " Why are the Irish using their moment of maximum leverage in the talks structure to pursue those self interests rather than ballsing up like we are ? ".

    I confess I'm stumped on both counts.

    No, my question is why are the Irish government not working to effect a mutually beneficial “win-win” outcome to the trade talks, that both protects their largest trade routes and negates the need to do anything with the border?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 14,976
    edited November 27

    Sandpit said:

    We are happy to have no border or an electronic one. What Ireland and the EU decide to do on their side is entirely up to them.

    Whatever happened to wanting to take back control of borders and immigration? The EU do a poor job of holding their external border remember, and once people are in they can go anywhere remember, and that has to STOP with whatever is left of the Border Force thanks to Tory cuts able to man a British Border under British Rules in the British Interest.

    Until it's clear that a border isn't in our interest. We don't want trucks being stopped. Or delays added. So it's just the EU being silly insisting there will be a hard border on their border like we demanded. No need for a border or checks, we'll just waive them through like we do now why can't they do the same? Control our own land border with the EU? Not at all, let anyone walk into the UK, that's how we take back control and solve the apparent problem of anyone walking into the UK.

    Aware of how absurd your position is?

    It’s not absurd at all. Firstly “taking back control” means that we, the British, decide what to do with our borders, who and what we let through and how we police it. If we choose, for the obvious historical reasons, to have an electronic border to monitor traffic north from the RoI into the U.K. that’s entirely up to us.

    Secondly, there’s already a common travel area between the UK and RoI, which predates our EU membership and no-one at all is proposing to change. British and Irish citizens will be bale to visit each other’s countries and work in each countries after Brexit, in exactly the same way as they can now.

    What we are changing, is that we will abolish what the EU call “Freedom of movement”. This has a very specific meaning which has nothing at all to do with borders and passports, refers solely to the issuance of national insurance numbers and entitlement to state benefits and services to any EU citizen as if they were British. People who should know better are conflating “Freedom of movement” so much with border controls and passport checks that, rather like the conflation of debt and deficit a few years ago, one gets the impression that it’s being done deliberately in support of their position.
  • Ally_BAlly_B Posts: 162

    Sandpit said:

    We are happy to have no border or an electronic one. What Ireland and the EU decide to do on their side is entirely up to them.

    Whatever happened to wanting to take back control of borders and immigration? The EU do a poor job of holding their external border remember, and once people are in they can go anywhere remember, and that has to STOP with whatever is left of the Border Force thanks to Tory cuts able to man a British Border under British Rules in the British Interest.

    Until it's clear that a border isn't in our interest. We don't want trucks being stopped. Or delays added. So it's just the EU being silly insisting there will be a hard border on their border like we demanded. No need for a border or checks, we'll just waive them through like we do now why can't they do the same? Control our own land border with the EU? Not at all, let anyone walk into the UK, that's how we take back control and solve the apparent problem of anyone walking into the UK.

    Aware of how absurd your position is?

    Throughout this sordid chapter of UK history the EU has been consistent in saying that no border means EEA membership in effect, with all that entails for the frothers and nutjobs in or on the edge of government. We have heard nothing from our government as there is no alternative. A compromise solution won't be found and the next six months will be used to prepare the country for a 'no exit' Brexit.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 8,896
    Sandpit said:

    Ally_B said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    Does anyone understand what Ireland are up to here? It appears that the previous Irish administration under Enda Kenny were working with the British on an electronic goods customs system, but the new guy cancelled the project and says it’s entirely Britian’s problem if the EU insist on Ireland having a border - and doing it in such an antagonistic way that it puts the trade talks themselves in jeopardy. Either he got quickly housetrained by Junker, or there’s something else going on here.
    I think this was covered well last night but to summarise the UK has paid no attention to the implications of Brexit on the Irish border, preferring to kick it into the long grass as being insolvable, for this government anyway. The Irish know that if both discussions run in parallel the UK will continue to pay no attention to this 'local' difficulty. At this stage the Irish have a veto but if discussions run through to a trade agreement then that might be agreed under QV and the Irish voice has much less effect. Hence they put a road block here and only the UK government is to blame because they stuck their collective heads in the ground.
    But the British and Irish governments were already quietly and privately talking about how to make the border work, it was the Irish side that called the talks off, apparently at the request of the new prime minister - deciding instead to publicly critise the British side.

    From a British perspective, every few weeks the EU are finding a different new reason not to move to the trade talks. This is exactly as I predicted their playbook would be. They’ve no interest in a continuous trade deal, as we need to be seen to be punished. Their plan is to run the clock down and present us with an eleventh-hour one-sided fait accompli to avoid a chaotic crash out. Which is why we need to decide by next month whether we should stop wasting our time playing their game and spend the fifteen months we have left getting ourselves ready for an orderly exit to WTO terms.

    We are happy to have no border or an electronic one. What Ireland and the EU decide to do on their side is entirely up to them.
    There isn't nearly enough time to land a trade deal anyway, which is why we need a long transitional period, and ideally a deferment of the A50 date.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 1,157
    Sandpit said:

    @Sandpit So in short your questions are " Why is the Irish government acting in it's own long term interests rather than making Brexit easier for the British government ? " and " Why are the Irish using their moment of maximum leverage in the talks structure to pursue those self interests rather than ballsing up like we are ? ".

    I confess I'm stumped on both counts.

    No, my question is why are the Irish government not working to effect a mutually beneficial “win-win” outcome to the trade talks, that both protects their largest trade routes and negates the need to do anything with the border?
    The "win-win" outcome is cancelling Brexit.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 14,976

    Sandpit said:

    @Sandpit So in short your questions are " Why is the Irish government acting in it's own long term interests rather than making Brexit easier for the British government ? " and " Why are the Irish using their moment of maximum leverage in the talks structure to pursue those self interests rather than ballsing up like we are ? ".

    I confess I'm stumped on both counts.

    No, my question is why are the Irish government not working to effect a mutually beneficial “win-win” outcome to the trade talks, that both protects their largest trade routes and negates the need to do anything with the border?
    The "win-win" outcome is cancelling Brexit.
    At a price of ignoring the democratic mandate of 17.5 million Brits?

    Personally I’d rather not see Nigel Farage holding the balance of power in the next Parliament.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 1,157
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    @Sandpit So in short your questions are " Why is the Irish government acting in it's own long term interests rather than making Brexit easier for the British government ? " and " Why are the Irish using their moment of maximum leverage in the talks structure to pursue those self interests rather than ballsing up like we are ? ".

    I confess I'm stumped on both counts.

    No, my question is why are the Irish government not working to effect a mutually beneficial “win-win” outcome to the trade talks, that both protects their largest trade routes and negates the need to do anything with the border?
    The "win-win" outcome is cancelling Brexit.
    At a price of ignoring the democratic mandate of 17.5 million Brits?

    Personally I’d rather not see Nigel Farage holding the balance of power in the next Parliament.
    Then that is the correct analysis. We can't come up with a satisfactory solution to the Irish border problem without ignoring the democratic outcome of the referendum. So we will have to take the hit on our trade with the Irish republic. It is going to cost a lot. The same applies to all our other trade relationships.
  • Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    @Sandpit So in short your questions are " Why is the Irish government acting in it's own long term interests rather than making Brexit easier for the British government ? " and " Why are the Irish using their moment of maximum leverage in the talks structure to pursue those self interests rather than ballsing up like we are ? ".

    I confess I'm stumped on both counts.

    No, my question is why are the Irish government not working to effect a mutually beneficial “win-win” outcome to the trade talks, that both protects their largest trade routes and negates the need to do anything with the border?
    The "win-win" outcome is cancelling Brexit.
    At a price of ignoring the democratic mandate of 17.5 million Brits?

    Personally I’d rather not see Nigel Farage holding the balance of power in the next Parliament.
    This extraordinary and entirely new belief that voters are entitled to have something just because they voted for it is what got us Corbynism. The Referendum was last year and was a UK event. We're now in the actual implementation phase and dealing with a sovereign third party government. The idea the Irish should self immolate just because a narrow majority of Britons voted for an undeliverable fantasy is so absurd it shouldn't need discussion.

    The way the talks are structured Irish influence peaks at this stage and diminishes afterward. Of course they should make their move at their moment of maximum advantage. Good on them.
  • Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    @Sandpit So in short your questions are " Why is the Irish government acting in it's own long term interests rather than making Brexit easier for the British government ? " and " Why are the Irish using their moment of maximum leverage in the talks structure to pursue those self interests rather than ballsing up like we are ? ".

    I confess I'm stumped on both counts.

    No, my question is why are the Irish government not working to effect a mutually beneficial “win-win” outcome to the trade talks, that both protects their largest trade routes and negates the need to do anything with the border?
    The "win-win" outcome is cancelling Brexit.
    At a price of ignoring the democratic mandate of 17.5 million Brits?

    Personally I’d rather not see Nigel Farage holding the balance of power in the next Parliament.
    They've voted for a fantasy. Thats like saying "the British peope voted for the moon on a stick and by golly that's what they have to have because Democracy". But just you can't have the moon on a stick you cant have either the fantasy island deal in our interest only or have hard Brexit WTO where we waive WTO rules only for Europe work either.

    But in reality the fantasy is what people like you insist they voted for. "Should Britain remain part of the European Union or leave the European Union". That's all. Not migration or the NHS or the EEA or the CU. The EU and only the EU. The EU is a legally specific entity so were it not for people conflating it with all these other things it would be extremely simple.

    Which is why the solution to Brexit is simple - Brexit. We leave the EU. What people voted for thus satisfying democracy. We don't leave the EEA or CU so that our economy continues to function. We end Freedom of Movement by imposing already available EU rules that mandate migrants to have a job or be removed.

    We could do these things. But that cretin May and her band of dipshits have declared honouring the referendum to not be honouring the referendum.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 14,976
    edited November 27

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    @Sandpit So in short your questions are " Why is the Irish government acting in it's own long term interests rather than making Brexit easier for the British government ? " and " Why are the Irish using their moment of maximum leverage in the talks structure to pursue those self interests rather than ballsing up like we are ? ".

    I confess I'm stumped on both counts.

    No, my question is why are the Irish government not working to effect a mutually beneficial “win-win” outcome to the trade talks, that both protects their largest trade routes and negates the need to do anything with the border?
    The "win-win" outcome is cancelling Brexit.
    At a price of ignoring the democratic mandate of 17.5 million Brits?

    Personally I’d rather not see Nigel Farage holding the balance of power in the next Parliament.
    This extraordinary and entirely new belief that voters are entitled to have something just because they voted for it is what got us Corbynism. The Referendum was last year and was a UK event. We're now in the actual implementation phase and dealing with a sovereign third party government. The idea the Irish should self immolate just because a narrow majority of Britons voted for an undeliverable fantasy is so absurd it shouldn't need discussion.

    The way the talks are structured Irish influence peaks at this stage and diminishes afterward. Of course they should make their move at their moment of maximum advantage. Good on them.
    The belief that the wishes of the majority be carried forward is hardly new and extraordinary. Rather it’s the very basis of democracy itself, the alternatives being dictatorship or anarchy.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 17,768
    Would such a payment be permitted under the Conservative party's constitutional arrangements?
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 1,157

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    @Sandpit So in short your questions are " Why is the Irish government acting in it's own long term interests rather than making Brexit easier for the British government ? " and " Why are the Irish using their moment of maximum leverage in the talks structure to pursue those self interests rather than ballsing up like we are ? ".

    I confess I'm stumped on both counts.

    No, my question is why are the Irish government not working to effect a mutually beneficial “win-win” outcome to the trade talks, that both protects their largest trade routes and negates the need to do anything with the border?
    The "win-win" outcome is cancelling Brexit.
    At a price of ignoring the democratic mandate of 17.5 million Brits?

    Personally I’d rather not see Nigel Farage holding the balance of power in the next Parliament.
    This extraordinary and entirely new belief that voters are entitled to have something just because they voted for it is what got us Corbynism. The Referendum was last year and was a UK event. We're now in the actual implementation phase and dealing with a sovereign third party government. The idea the Irish should self immolate just because a narrow majority of Britons voted for an undeliverable fantasy is so absurd it shouldn't need discussion.

    The way the talks are structured Irish influence peaks at this stage and diminishes afterward. Of course they should make their move at their moment of maximum advantage. Good on them.
    Good point. In fact if we are willing to lose the EMA and passporting rights in the name of respecting democracy we might as well just write the Irish a big cheque to compensate them for the damage our policy will do them. We've already conceded that democracy matters more than economic interest so lets get the wallet out.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 17,801
    @Benpointer FPT

    "Dad's family" has a very specific definition - it's descendants in the male line from Sir Richard XX It doesn't refer to "all ancestors".

    My mother's family were Whigs and then Liberal Unionists (although one did resign from the Cabinet to set up the Ulster Unionists) so I don't see that as a bad thing.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 5,371
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    @Sandpit So in short your questions are " Why is the Irish government acting in it's own long term interests rather than making Brexit easier for the British government ? " and " Why are the Irish using their moment of maximum leverage in the talks structure to pursue those self interests rather than ballsing up like we are ? ".

    I confess I'm stumped on both counts.

    No, my question is why are the Irish government not working to effect a mutually beneficial “win-win” outcome to the trade talks, that both protects their largest trade routes and negates the need to do anything with the border?
    The "win-win" outcome is cancelling Brexit.
    At a price of ignoring the democratic mandate of 17.5 million Brits?

    Personally I’d rather not see Nigel Farage holding the balance of power in the next Parliament.
    This extraordinary and entirely new belief that voters are entitled to have something just because they voted for it is what got us Corbynism. The Referendum was last year and was a UK event. We're now in the actual implementation phase and dealing with a sovereign third party government. The idea the Irish should self immolate just because a narrow majority of Britons voted for an undeliverable fantasy is so absurd it shouldn't need discussion.

    The way the talks are structured Irish influence peaks at this stage and diminishes afterward. Of course they should make their move at their moment of maximum advantage. Good on them.
    The belief that the wishes of the majority be carried forward is hardly new and extraordinary. Rather it’s the very basis of democracy itself, the alternatives being dictatorship or anarchy.
    When was the last time a Government had the backing of the majority?
  • Ally_BAlly_B Posts: 162

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    @Sandpit So in short your questions are " Why is the Irish government acting in it's own long term interests rather than making Brexit easier for the British government ? " and " Why are the Irish using their moment of maximum leverage in the talks structure to pursue those self interests rather than ballsing up like we are ? ".

    I confess I'm stumped on both counts.

    No, my question is why are the Irish government not working to effect a mutually beneficial “win-win” outcome to the trade talks, that both protects their largest trade routes and negates the need to do anything with the border?
    The "win-win" outcome is cancelling Brexit.
    At a price of ignoring the democratic mandate of 17.5 million Brits?

    Personally I’d rather not see Nigel Farage holding the balance of power in the next Parliament.
    Then that is the correct analysis. We can't come up with a satisfactory solution to the Irish border problem without ignoring the democratic outcome of the referendum. So we will have to take the hit on our trade with the Irish republic. It is going to cost a lot. The same applies to all our other trade relationships.
    So we ignore the so called democratic mandate. The evidence is now appearing that the election was rigged by the Russians and their puppets in the Leave campaign so that the UK would suffer long term damage. It won't take too much effort on behalf of a government showing what the Security Services have and the Electoral Commission throwing out a few lawsuits to provide them with enough to be able to show the public were deceived. If need be you rerun the referendum, only this time you provide fully costed options for, say, Remain, EEA or Leave. After all "you can fool all the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time but not all of the people all of the time".

    As for the Irish issue, its not trade that is most important to us, it is security. The various agreements that ended the troubles were based on there not being a border. Reinstate the border and, some say, the troubles will return. It isn't worth waiting for another Londonderry bombing to find out whether that is true.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 14,976

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    @Sandpit So in short your questions are " Why is the Irish government acting in it's own long term interests rather than making Brexit easier for the British government ? " and " Why are the Irish using their moment of maximum leverage in the talks structure to pursue those self interests rather than ballsing up like we are ? ".

    I confess I'm stumped on both counts.

    No, my question is why are the Irish government not working to effect a mutually beneficial “win-win” outcome to the trade talks, that both protects their largest trade routes and negates the need to do anything with the border?
    The "win-win" outcome is cancelling Brexit.
    At a price of ignoring the democratic mandate of 17.5 million Brits?

    Personally I’d rather not see Nigel Farage holding the balance of power in the next Parliament.
    This extraordinary and entirely new belief that voters are entitled to have something just because they voted for it is what got us Corbynism. The Referendum was last year and was a UK event. We're now in the actual implementation phase and dealing with a sovereign third party government. The idea the Irish should self immolate just because a narrow majority of Britons voted for an undeliverable fantasy is so absurd it shouldn't need discussion.

    The way the talks are structured Irish influence peaks at this stage and diminishes afterward. Of course they should make their move at their moment of maximum advantage. Good on them.
    The belief that the wishes of the majority be carried forward is hardly new and extraordinary. Rather it’s the very basis of democracy itself, the alternatives being dictatorship or anarchy.
    When was the last time a Government had the backing of the majority?
    Err, the EU referendum vote?
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 1,752
    edited November 27
    40 years ago the Mad Monk led the crusade to convert the Conservative Party to a Neo-Liberal Radical party. Because it made a lot of people well off it survived the transition.

    40 years later we have BoJo Davis Fox and the Moggmeister successfully turning the Conservative Party into Anarchists. Forget your rules man, we don't obey your rules we do what we want. The Man is a Pig and needs to be smashed. Our way or the highway, we want to be at the top table but fuck your rules pig we do what we want. We want to take back control man, of our borders. A hard border? No man, not for us, just for you. Trade? WTO all the way. Problems? Just waive them through that's taking back control. WTO won't let us waive some through and not others? Fuck your rules man, we're the man now. Anarchy!!!!

    Unlike the experiment with Monetarism, the experiment with Anarchy isn't backed by the man. The Tories patrons are well aware of the hideous damage this will bring and are against. All the business and lobby groups that were their friends are against. And as the jobs disappear the working man will be against as well. Bye bye Tories - will you doggedly insist a vote for Labour would destroy the economy even as you bring it to ruin discovering that The Man (EU, WTO) actually does have rules?
  • Again, the democratic mandate is to leave the European Union and ONLY the European Union. No mention of migration or the NHS or the EEA or CU on the ballot paper which is the democratic mandate.

    How profoundly undemocratic to insist that people voting for one specific thing also voted for a whole pile of other things and that their non vote is binding and final
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 16,177
    Ally_B said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    Does anyone understand what Ireland are up to here? It appears that the previous Irish administration under Enda Kenny were working with the British on an electronic goods customs system, but the new guy cancelled the project and says it’s entirely Britian’s problem if the EU insist on Ireland having a border - and doing it in such an antagonistic way that it puts the trade talks themselves in jeopardy. Either he got quickly housetrained by Junker, or there’s something else going on here.
    I think this was covered well last night but to summarise the UK has paid no attention to the implications of Brexit on the Irish border, preferring to kick it into the long grass as being insolvable, for this government anyway. The Irish know that if both discussions run in parallel the UK will continue to pay no attention to this 'local' difficulty. At this stage the Irish have a veto but if discussions run through to a trade agreement then that might be agreed under QV and the Irish voice has much less effect. Hence they put a road block here and only the UK government is to blame because they stuck their collective heads in the ground.
    guff

    Ireland has a weak minority govt, a 38 year old narciissist as taoiseach and he's banging the kick the brits drum in an effort to stay in government

    stirring things up in the \\north is plain idiotic
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 8,896
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    @Sandpit So in short your questions are " Why is the Irish government acting in it's own long term interests rather than making Brexit easier for the British government ? " and " Why are the Irish using their moment of maximum leverage in the talks structure to pursue those self interests rather than ballsing up like we are ? ".

    I confess I'm stumped on both counts.

    No, my question is why are the Irish government not working to effect a mutually beneficial “win-win” outcome to the trade talks, that both protects their largest trade routes and negates the need to do anything with the border?
    The "win-win" outcome is cancelling Brexit.
    At a price of ignoring the democratic mandate of 17.5 million Brits?

    Personally I’d rather not see Nigel Farage holding the balance of power in the next Parliament.
    This extraordinary and entirely new belief that voters are entitled to have something just because they voted for it is what got us Corbynism. The Referendum was last year and was a UK event. We're now in the actual implementation phase and dealing with a sovereign third party government. The idea the Irish should self immolate just because a narrow majority of Britons voted for an undeliverable fantasy is so absurd it shouldn't need discussion.

    The way the talks are structured Irish influence peaks at this stage and diminishes afterward. Of course they should make their move at their moment of maximum advantage. Good on them.
    The belief that the wishes of the majority be carried forward is hardly new and extraordinary. Rather it’s the very basis of democracy itself, the alternatives being dictatorship or anarchy.
    Just a shame that those responsible for advocating this path spent so long telling everyone how easy-peasy it would be to implement?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 7,729

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    @Sandpit So in short your questions are " Why is the Irish government acting in it's own long term interests rather than making Brexit easier for the British government ? " and " Why are the Irish using their moment of maximum leverage in the talks structure to pursue those self interests rather than ballsing up like we are ? ".

    I confess I'm stumped on both counts.

    No, my question is why are the Irish government not working to effect a mutually beneficial “win-win” outcome to the trade talks, that both protects their largest trade routes and negates the need to do anything with the border?
    The "win-win" outcome is cancelling Brexit.
    At a price of ignoring the democratic mandate of 17.5 million Brits?

    Personally I’d rather not see Nigel Farage holding the balance of power in the next Parliament.
    This extraordinary and entirely new belief that voters are entitled to have something just because they voted for it is what got us Corbynism. The Referendum was last year and was a UK event. We're now in the actual implementation phase and dealing with a sovereign third party government. The idea the Irish should self immolate just because a narrow majority of Britons voted for an undeliverable fantasy is so absurd it shouldn't need discussion.

    The way the talks are structured Irish influence peaks at this stage and diminishes afterward. Of course they should make their move at their moment of maximum advantage. Good on them.
    The belief that the wishes of the majority be carried forward is hardly new and extraordinary. Rather it’s the very basis of democracy itself, the alternatives being dictatorship or anarchy.
    When was the last time a Government had the backing of the majority?
    Technically the Coalition, the parties involved had the backing of 53% of the electorate.

    But the last time a single party got over 50% of the vote was 1931 (and ironically they were in a coalition anyway at the time).
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 17,768
    On Ireland, Britain is entitled to interpret the referendum decision as a mandate to restrict freedom of movement and reimpose immigration controls. The EU in turn is entitled to insist that is inconsistent with Single Market membership. The Republic of Ireland is in turn entitled to press that both positions be reconciled with the Good Friday Agreement and their strong wish for no hard border with Northern Ireland.

    For some reason, Leavers don't seem to get past the first of these three.
  • YellowSubmarineYellowSubmarine Posts: 2,409
    edited November 27
    The Alchemists task is complete, the Great Work is at hand, the Philosopher's Stone has been found. All we need do now is secure a narrow win in a referendum and Lead is transmuted into Gold.

    Every house will have a Free Owl and a Star Trek replicator. Want and sickness have been abolished by the Will of the People. Why not have Jeremy Corbyn as PM now that practicality has been abolished by popular vote ?
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 16,177

    40 years ago the Mad Monk led the crusade to convert the Conservative Party to a Neo-Liberal Radical party. Because it made a lot of people well off it survived the transition.

    40 years later we have BoJo Davis Fox and the Moggmeister successfully turning the Conservative Party into Anarchists. Forget your rules man, we don't obey your rules we do what we want. The Man is a Pig and needs to be smashed. Our way or the highway, we want to be at the top table but fuck your rules pig we do what we want. We want to take back control man, of our borders. A hard border? No man, not for us, just for you. Trade? WTO all the way. Problems? Just waive them through that's taking back control. WTO won't let us waive some through and not others? Fuck your rules man, we're the man now. Anarchy!!!!

    Unlike the experiment with Monetarism, the experiment with Anarchy isn't backed by the man. The Tories patrons are well aware of the hideous damage this will bring and are against. All the business and lobby groups that were their friends are against. And as the jobs disappear the working man will be against as well. Bye bye Tories - will you doggedly insist a vote for Labour would destroy the economy even as you bring it to ruin discovering that The Man (EU, WTO) actually does have rules?

    youve turned into Fluffy
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 9,540

    Ally_B said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    Does anyone understand what Ireland are up to here? It appears that the previous Irish administration under Enda Kenny were working with the British on an electronic goods customs system, but the new guy cancelled the project and says it’s entirely Britian’s problem if the EU insist on Ireland having a border - and doing it in such an antagonistic way that it puts the trade talks themselves in jeopardy. Either he got quickly housetrained by Junker, or there’s something else going on here.
    I think this was covered well last night but to summarise the UK has paid no attention to the implications of Brexit on the Irish border, preferring to kick it into the long grass as being insolvable, for this government anyway. The Irish know that if both discussions run in parallel the UK will continue to pay no attention to this 'local' difficulty. At this stage the Irish have a veto but if discussions run through to a trade agreement then that might be agreed under QV and the Irish voice has much less effect. Hence they put a road block here and only the UK government is to blame because they stuck their collective heads in the ground.
    guff

    Ireland has a weak minority govt, a 38 year old narciissist as taoiseach and he's banging the kick the brits drum in an effort to stay in government

    stirring things up in the \\north is plain idiotic
    TBH it would appear that both the last two posts have a strong element of a true assessment of the situation!
    We kicked it all off, though. What a tangled web.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 16,177
    Reminers seem particularly tetchy this morning

    Monday blues chaps ?
  • Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    @Sandpit So in short your questions are " Why is the Irish government acting in it's own long term interests rather than making Brexit easier for the British government ? " and " Why are the Irish using their moment of maximum leverage in the talks structure to pursue those self interests rather than ballsing up like we are ? ".

    I confess I'm stumped on both counts.

    No, my question is why are the Irish government not working to effect a mutually beneficial “win-win” outcome to the trade talks, that both protects their largest trade routes and negates the need to do anything with the border?
    The "win-win" outcome is cancelling Brexit.
    At a price of ignoring the democratic mandate of 17.5 million Brits?

    Personally I’d rather not see Nigel Farage holding the balance of power in the next Parliament.
    This extraordinary and entirely new belief that voters are entitled to have something just because they voted for it is what got us Corbynism. The Referendum was last year and was a UK event. We're now in the actual implementation phase and dealing with a sovereign third party government. The idea the Irish should self immolate just because a narrow majority of Britons voted for an undeliverable fantasy is so absurd it shouldn't need discussion.

    The way the talks are structured Irish influence peaks at this stage and diminishes afterward. Of course they should make their move at their moment of maximum advantage. Good on them.
    The belief that the wishes of the majority be carried forward is hardly new and extraordinary. Rather it’s the very basis of democracy itself, the alternatives being dictatorship or anarchy.
    When was the last time a Government had the backing of the majority?
    I was going to say the coalition too, but I was beaten to it.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 8,837

    @Sandpit So in short your questions are " Why is the Irish government acting in it's own long term interests rather than making Brexit easier for the British government ? " and " Why are the Irish using their moment of maximum leverage in the talks structure to pursue those self interests rather than ballsing up like we are ? ".

    I confess I'm stumped on both counts.

    I love this touching faith in a secret 'electronic' border.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 16,177

    Ally_B said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    Does anyone understand what Ireland are up to here? It appears that the previous Irish administration under Enda Kenny were working with the British on an electronic goods customs system, but the new guy cancelled the project and says it’s entirely Britian’s problem if the EU insist on Ireland having a border - and doing it in such an antagonistic way that it puts the trade talks themselves in jeopardy. Either he got quickly housetrained by Junker, or there’s something else going on here.
    I think this was covered well last night but to summarise the UK has paid no attention to the implications of Brexit on the Irish border, preferring to kick it into the long grass as being insolvable, for this government anyway. The Irish know that if both discussions run in parallel the UK will continue to pay no attention to this 'local' difficulty. At this stage the Irish have a veto but if discussions run through to a trade agreement then that might be agreed under QV and the Irish voice has much less effect. Hence they put a road block here and only the UK government is to blame because they stuck their collective heads in the ground.
    guff

    Ireland has a weak minority govt, a 38 year old narciissist as taoiseach and he's banging the kick the brits drum in an effort to stay in government

    stirring things up in the \\north is plain idiotic
    TBH it would appear that both the last two posts have a strong element of a true assessment of the situation!
    We kicked it all off, though. What a tangled web.
    that lovely Mr Cameron kicked it all off and his supporters would have you believe the Faragegruffalo made him do it.

    but he did it all by himself
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 9,540
    edited November 27

    Ally_B said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    Does anyone understand what Ireland are up to here? It appears that the previous Irish administration under Enda Kenny were working with the British on an electronic goods customs system, but the new guy cancelled the project and says it’s entirely Britian’s problem if the EU insist on Ireland having a border - and doing it in such an antagonistic way that it puts the trade talks themselves in jeopardy. Either he got quickly housetrained by Junker, or there’s something else going on here.
    I think this was covered well last night but to summarise the UK has paid no attention to the implications of Brexit on the Irish border, preferring to kick it into the long grass as being insolvable, for this government anyway. The Irish know that if both discussions run in parallel the UK will continue to pay no attention to this 'local' difficulty. At this stage the Irish have a veto but if discussions run through to a trade agreement then that might be agreed under QV and the Irish voice has much less effect. Hence they put a road block here and only the UK government is to blame because they stuck their collective heads in the ground.
    guff

    Ireland has a weak minority govt, a 38 year old narciissist as taoiseach and he's banging the kick the brits drum in an effort to stay in government

    stirring things up in the \\north is plain idiotic
    TBH it would appear that both the last two posts have a strong element of a true assessment of the situation!
    We kicked it all off, though. What a tangled web.
    that lovely Mr Cameron kicked it all off and his supporters would have you believe the Faragegruffalo made him do it.

    but he did it all by himself
    Because he put the short-term interests of his party before those of the country. A classic example of the Peter Principle, too, prmoted (self-promoted) above his ability.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 17,321
    I am struggling with the idea that funding an employee for the DUP to allow the Conservatives to remain in office and give them a majority in Parliament would not be thought to be a proper use of Conservative party funds. What are those funds for if not to maintain the party in office?

    In fact I would go further. This is a lot more legitimate than using £1bn of public money to bribe the DUP into supporting the government. That was shameful, this is self interest.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 16,177
    Alistair said:

    @Sandpit So in short your questions are " Why is the Irish government acting in it's own long term interests rather than making Brexit easier for the British government ? " and " Why are the Irish using their moment of maximum leverage in the talks structure to pursue those self interests rather than ballsing up like we are ? ".

    I confess I'm stumped on both counts.

    I love this touching faith in a secret 'electronic' border.
    bit like the SNP proposals then
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 17,801

    On Ireland, Britain is entitled to interpret the referendum decision as a mandate to restrict freedom of movement and reimpose immigration controls. The EU in turn is entitled to insist that is inconsistent with Single Market membership. The Republic of Ireland is in turn entitled to press that both positions be reconciled with the Good Friday Agreement and their strong wish for no hard border with Northern Ireland.

    For some reason, Leavers don't seem to get past the first of these three.

    1. Agree
    2. Most leavers have accepted that FoM is part of the SM I believe? It's ususally the anti-Brexit camp that is pushing the SM case
    3. I don't think anyone has argued that Ireland isn't entitled to push for this. Criticism has focused on the fact they are playing politics with peace and that their tactics seem odd
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 11,318

    Sandpit said:

    We are happy to have no border or an electronic one. What Ireland and the EU decide to do on their side is entirely up to them.

    Whatever happened to wanting to take back control of borders and immigration? The EU do a poor job of holding their external border remember, and once people are in they can go anywhere remember, and that has to STOP with whatever is left of the Border Force thanks to Tory cuts able to man a British Border under British Rules in the British Interest.

    Until it's clear that a border isn't in our interest. We don't want trucks being stopped. Or delays added. So it's just the EU being silly insisting there will be a hard border on their border like we demanded. No need for a border or checks, we'll just waive them through like we do now why can't they do the same? Control our own land border with the EU? Not at all, let anyone walk into the UK, that's how we take back control and solve the apparent problem of anyone walking into the UK.

    Aware of how absurd your position is?

    Of all the many absolutely bonkers elements of Br*x*t this has to be the most mind numbing.

    Land of Hope and Glory PB Brexiters telling us that sovereignty consists of letting someone else control our borders.

    I mean what is sovereignty if not control over your own borders?
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,328

    40 years ago the Mad Monk led the crusade to convert the Conservative Party to a Neo-Liberal Radical party. Because it made a lot of people well off it survived the transition.

    40 years later we have BoJo Davis Fox and the Moggmeister successfully turning the Conservative Party into Anarchists. Forget your rules man, we don't obey your rules we do what we want. The Man is a Pig and needs to be smashed. Our way or the highway, we want to be at the top table but fuck your rules pig we do what we want. We want to take back control man, of our borders. A hard border? No man, not for us, just for you. Trade? WTO all the way. Problems? Just waive them through that's taking back control. WTO won't let us waive some through and not others? Fuck your rules man, we're the man now. Anarchy!!!!

    Unlike the experiment with Monetarism, the experiment with Anarchy isn't backed by the man. The Tories patrons are well aware of the hideous damage this will bring and are against. All the business and lobby groups that were their friends are against. And as the jobs disappear the working man will be against as well. Bye bye Tories - will you doggedly insist a vote for Labour would destroy the economy even as you bring it to ruin discovering that The Man (EU, WTO) actually does have rules?

    Very amusing. You capture the absurdity of the core Establishment pretending to be anti-Establishment.

    When Corbynism appears to be the sane alternative, we are indeed down the rabbit hole.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 17,768
    Charles said:

    On Ireland, Britain is entitled to interpret the referendum decision as a mandate to restrict freedom of movement and reimpose immigration controls. The EU in turn is entitled to insist that is inconsistent with Single Market membership. The Republic of Ireland is in turn entitled to press that both positions be reconciled with the Good Friday Agreement and their strong wish for no hard border with Northern Ireland.

    For some reason, Leavers don't seem to get past the first of these three.

    1. Agree
    2. Most leavers have accepted that FoM is part of the SM I believe? It's ususally the anti-Brexit camp that is pushing the SM case
    3. I don't think anyone has argued that Ireland isn't entitled to push for this. Criticism has focused on the fact they are playing politics with peace and that their tactics seem odd
    The Leaver position on 3 can usually on close examination be seen to be "how dare they?". I think the Republic of Ireland will probably cave eventually but I'm not certain they will and their position is considerably more logical than the British position which can be fairly transcribed as "we don't want to think about this".
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 8,837

    Alistair said:

    @Sandpit So in short your questions are " Why is the Irish government acting in it's own long term interests rather than making Brexit easier for the British government ? " and " Why are the Irish using their moment of maximum leverage in the talks structure to pursue those self interests rather than ballsing up like we are ? ".

    I confess I'm stumped on both counts.

    I love this touching faith in a secret 'electronic' border.
    bit like the SNP proposals then
    The previous SNP proposals where based on Scotland and rUK both being in the EU.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 25,806
    DavidL said:

    I am struggling with the idea that funding an employee for the DUP to allow the Conservatives to remain in office and give them a majority in Parliament would not be thought to be a proper use of Conservative party funds. What are those funds for if not to maintain the party in office?

    In fact I would go further. This is a lot more legitimate than using £1bn of public money to bribe the DUP into supporting the government. That was shameful, this is self interest.

    +1

    Some very prissy purists about (or maybe they just don’t like May)
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 17,801
    DavidL said:

    I am struggling with the idea that funding an employee for the DUP to allow the Conservatives to remain in office and give them a majority in Parliament would not be thought to be a proper use of Conservative party funds. What are those funds for if not to maintain the party in office?

    In fact I would go further. This is a lot more legitimate than using £1bn of public money to bribe the DUP into supporting the government. That was shameful, this is self interest.

    But the allocation of supply has always been what politics is about. There's no magical "right" answer. It's all about trade offs. The DUP has simply said "we will support the budget if it includes extra money for NI" and the government has agreed to amend the budget accordingly so it can command a majority in the house
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 16,177
    Alistair said:

    Alistair said:

    @Sandpit So in short your questions are " Why is the Irish government acting in it's own long term interests rather than making Brexit easier for the British government ? " and " Why are the Irish using their moment of maximum leverage in the talks structure to pursue those self interests rather than ballsing up like we are ? ".

    I confess I'm stumped on both counts.

    I love this touching faith in a secret 'electronic' border.
    bit like the SNP proposals then
    The previous SNP proposals where based on Scotland and rUK both being in the EU.
    the current ones arent

    keep up with your own bullshit
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 17,321
    The position that the EU have adopted on Ireland makes no sense whatsoever. How can we possibly resolve what our border with Ireland is going to be until we know what our relationship with the EU is going to be?

    At one time I thought this could be used as a backdoor way of discussing the nature of that relationship going forward but we now have the truly absurd position that they are threatening not to discuss that relationship until we agree the border arrangements with an EU member state.

    What we are saying is that we want a free trade deal with the EU with minimal disruption at the borders of the Customs Union. It is the EU who is trying to say that we can't have a FTA without freedom of movement because these things are supposedly indivisible (not sure how Canada feels about that).

    If we get what we want the Irish border should be a minor inconvenience. If the EU hold to their position (which of course they are entitled to do, however, irrational) then it will be much more of a problem for both sides of the border. These issues are resolvable but only if there is rapid negotiation on the practicalities and details now. The idea that Ireland may seek to prevent those discussions is just bonkers.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 22,049
    Ally_B said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    @Sandpit So in short your questions are " Why is the Irish government acting in it's own long term interests rather than making Brexit easier for the British government ? " and " Why are the Irish using their moment of maximum leverage in the talks structure to pursue those self interests rather than ballsing up like we are ? ".

    I confess I'm stumped on both counts.

    No?
    The "win-win" outcome is cancelling Brexit.
    At a price of ignoring the democratic mandate of 17.5 million Brits?

    Personally I’d rather not see Nigel Farage holding the balance of power in the next Parliament.
    Then t
    So we ignore the so called democratic mandate. The evidence is now appearing that the election was rigged by the Russians and their puppets in the Leave campaign so that the UK would suffer long term damage. It won't take too much effort on behalf of a government showing what the Security Services have and the Electoral Commission throwing out a few lawsuits to provide them with enough to be able to show the public were deceived. If need be you rerun the referendum, only this time you provide fully costed options for, say, Remain, EEA or Leave. After all "you can fool all the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time but not all of the people all of the time".

    As for the Irish issue, its not trade that is most important to us, it is security. The various agreements that ended the troubles were based on there not being a border. Reinstate the border and, some say, the troubles will return. It isn't worth waiting for another Londonderry bombing to find out whether that is true.
    Yokel put it well when he described Putin as a chancer, nothing more.

    He's not Bloefeld. Nor is Russia anything like as powerful as the USSR in Stalin's time, when it had agents everywhere and had penetrated most Western agencies.

    Yes, he might run troll-farms on Facebook and Twitter. Yes, he might have a few hackers. Yes, he might have even conceivably funnelled tens of thousands via Aaron Banks via an intermediary, somehow.

    But, he did not control Gove, Boris, Cummings, Baker or Stuart. Nor did he devise the strategy, attend the debates, produce or deliver the leaflets, or hold public meetings, or brainwash people via a raygun.

    It's as ludicrous as suggesting that he actively had Craig Oliver under his spell, to deliberately run such a crap and ineffective Remain campaign.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 17,768
    DavidL said:

    The position that the EU have adopted on Ireland makes no sense whatsoever. How can we possibly resolve what our border with Ireland is going to be until we know what our relationship with the EU is going to be?

    At one time I thought this could be used as a backdoor way of discussing the nature of that relationship going forward but we now have the truly absurd position that they are threatening not to discuss that relationship until we agree the border arrangements with an EU member state.

    What we are saying is that we want a free trade deal with the EU with minimal disruption at the borders of the Customs Union. It is the EU who is trying to say that we can't have a FTA without freedom of movement because these things are supposedly indivisible (not sure how Canada feels about that).

    If we get what we want the Irish border should be a minor inconvenience. If the EU hold to their position (which of course they are entitled to do, however, irrational) then it will be much more of a problem for both sides of the border. These issues are resolvable but only if there is rapid negotiation on the practicalities and details now. The idea that Ireland may seek to prevent those discussions is just bonkers.

    I love the idea that Britain can proceed on a non-economic basis but when others do they're irrational or bonkers.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 17,321

    DavidL said:

    I am struggling with the idea that funding an employee for the DUP to allow the Conservatives to remain in office and give them a majority in Parliament would not be thought to be a proper use of Conservative party funds. What are those funds for if not to maintain the party in office?

    In fact I would go further. This is a lot more legitimate than using £1bn of public money to bribe the DUP into supporting the government. That was shameful, this is self interest.

    +1

    Some very prissy purists about (or maybe they just don’t like May)
    You think there might be a different agenda here? Surely not. Who could possibly be so underhand.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 22,049
    DavidL said:

    I am struggling with the idea that funding an employee for the DUP to allow the Conservatives to remain in office and give them a majority in Parliament would not be thought to be a proper use of Conservative party funds. What are those funds for if not to maintain the party in office?

    In fact I would go further. This is a lot more legitimate than using £1bn of public money to bribe the DUP into supporting the government. That was shameful, this is self interest.

    I remember similar controversies during the first bromance phase of the Coalition.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 11,318

    DavidL said:

    The position that the EU have adopted on Ireland makes no sense whatsoever. How can we possibly resolve what our border with Ireland is going to be until we know what our relationship with the EU is going to be?

    At one time I thought this could be used as a backdoor way of discussing the nature of that relationship going forward but we now have the truly absurd position that they are threatening not to discuss that relationship until we agree the border arrangements with an EU member state.

    What we are saying is that we want a free trade deal with the EU with minimal disruption at the borders of the Customs Union. It is the EU who is trying to say that we can't have a FTA without freedom of movement because these things are supposedly indivisible (not sure how Canada feels about that).

    If we get what we want the Irish border should be a minor inconvenience. If the EU hold to their position (which of course they are entitled to do, however, irrational) then it will be much more of a problem for both sides of the border. These issues are resolvable but only if there is rapid negotiation on the practicalities and details now. The idea that Ireland may seek to prevent those discussions is just bonkers.

    I love the idea that Britain can proceed on a non-economic basis but when others do they're irrational or bonkers.
    It’s a price worth paying for the EU. Didn’t you know?
  • OchEyeOchEye Posts: 865
    Ally_B said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    Does anyone understand what Ireland are up to here? It appears that the previous Irish administration under Enda Kenny were working with the British on an electronic goods customs system, but the new guy cancelled the project and says it’s entirely Britian’s problem if the EU insist on Ireland having a border - and doing it in such an antagonistic way that it puts the trade talks themselves in jeopardy. Either he got quickly housetrained by Junker, or there’s something else going on here.
    I think this was covered well last night but to summarise the UK has paid no attention to the implications of Brexit on the Irish border, preferring to kick it into the long grass as being insolvable, for this government anyway. The Irish know that if both discussions run in parallel the UK will continue to pay no attention to this 'local' difficulty. At this stage the Irish have a veto but if discussions run through to a trade agreement then that might be agreed under QV and the Irish voice has much less effect. Hence they put a road block here and only the UK government is to blame because they stuck their collective heads in the ground.
    Not in the ground, but it is what happens when you look at the world through your own navel....
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 16,177
    TOPPING said:

    DavidL said:

    The position that the EU have adopted on Ireland makes no sense whatsoever. How can we possibly resolve what our border with Ireland is going to be until we know what our relationship with the EU is going to be?

    At one time I thought this could be used as a backdoor way of discussing the nature of that relationship going forward but we now have the truly absurd position that they are threatening not to discuss that relationship until we agree the border arrangements with an EU member state.

    What we are saying is that we want a free trade deal with the EU with minimal disruption at the borders of the Customs Union. It is the EU who is trying to say that we can't have a FTA without freedom of movement because these things are supposedly indivisible (not sure how Canada feels about that).

    If we get what we want the Irish border should be a minor inconvenience. If the EU hold to their position (which of course they are entitled to do, however, irrational) then it will be much more of a problem for both sides of the border. These issues are resolvable but only if there is rapid negotiation on the practicalities and details now. The idea that Ireland may seek to prevent those discussions is just bonkers.

    I love the idea that Britain can proceed on a non-economic basis but when others do they're irrational or bonkers.
    It’s a price worth paying for the EU. Didn’t you know?
    so with the french annd germans now chasing your job remainers response is to blog about irrelevant stuff from people they dont know

    isnt that how you lost the referendum ?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 15,056

    Sandpit said:

    @Sandpit So in short your questions are " Why is the Irish government acting in it's own long term interests rather than making Brexit easier for the British government ? " and " Why are the Irish using their moment of maximum leverage in the talks structure to pursue those self interests rather than ballsing up like we are ? ".

    I confess I'm stumped on both counts.

    No, my question is why are the Irish government not working to effect a mutually beneficial “win-win” outcome to the trade talks, that both protects their largest trade routes and negates the need to do anything with the border?
    The "win-win" outcome is cancelling Brexit.
    Cancelling Brexit a win-win? Only if you want to unleash a shit-storm from the voters, who will (rightly) assume that our current crop of politicians are not up to the job of following one instruction: get us out of the EU that these politicians so carefully tried to enmesh us within such that Brexit was impossible.

    I really don't think that you would like the look of a post Brexit-walkaway House of Commons, following the election that would occur in short order and where one issue would dominate the campaign.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 17,801

    Charles said:

    On Ireland, Britain is entitled to interpret the referendum decision as a mandate to restrict freedom of movement and reimpose immigration controls. The EU in turn is entitled to insist that is inconsistent with Single Market membership. The Republic of Ireland is in turn entitled to press that both positions be reconciled with the Good Friday Agreement and their strong wish for no hard border with Northern Ireland.

    For some reason, Leavers don't seem to get past the first of these three.

    1. Agree
    2. Most leavers have accepted that FoM is part of the SM I believe? It's ususally the anti-Brexit camp that is pushing the SM case
    3. I don't think anyone has argued that Ireland isn't entitled to push for this. Criticism has focused on the fact they are playing politics with peace and that their tactics seem odd
    The Leaver position on 3 can usually on close examination be seen to be "how dare they?". I think the Republic of Ireland will probably cave eventually but I'm not certain they will and their position is considerably more logical than the British position which can be fairly transcribed as "we don't want to think about this".
    I think you are over-interpreting frustration.

    Kenny's government was working on a practical solution. The new team has stopped that work. That is frustrating because it's clear that the solution proposed by the UK (which is viable) needs a lot of detail to be worked through in a collaborative manner

    Instead, Ireland have chosen to throw their toys out of the pram. Now you can make an argument this is when their leverage is greatest but in demanding a separation between NI and Great Britain I think they are asking for something the UK government simply cannot deliver politically.

    In my mind it is very similar to the EU's original demand for perpetual oversight by the ECJ of the rights of EU citizens living in the UK: presumably a negotiating ploy but in stopping work on the alternative I think they are overplaying their hand
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 22,049

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    @Sandpit So in short your questions are " Why is the Irish government acting in it's own long term interests rather than making Brexit easier for the British government ? " and " Why are the Irish using their moment of maximum leverage in the talks structure to pursue those self interests rather than ballsing up like we are ? ".

    I confess I'm stumped on both counts.

    No, my question is why are the Irish government not working to effect a mutually beneficial “win-win” outcome to the trade talks, that both protects their largest trade routes and negates the need to do anything with the border?
    The "win-win" outcome is cancelling Brexit.
    At a price of ignoring the democratic mandate of 17.5 million Brits?

    Personally I’d rather not see Nigel Farage holding the balance of power in the next Parliament.
    This extraordinary and entirely new belief that voters are entitled to have something just because they voted for it is what got us Corbynism. The Referendum was last year and was a UK event. We're now in the actual implementation phase and dealing with a sovereign third party government. The idea the Irish should self immolate just because a narrow majority of Britons voted for an undeliverable fantasy is so absurd it shouldn't need discussion.

    The way the talks are structured Irish influence peaks at this stage and diminishes afterward. Of course they should make their move at their moment of maximum advantage. Good on them.
    The fact it's the Irish border now under intense discussion, with no mention of citizens rights or the money, tells us that those two issues are now settled for Phase 1, and is the last thing outstanding for Phase 2.

    The rhetoric is that the EU is full square behind EIRE but I very much doubt they will let Varakar threaten trade talks for the rest of the EU26, or a UK crash out, and will be pressured to accept a fudged form of words, pending clarification over future trading arrangements.

    Which is the only way it can be done since it hasn't even been discussed yet.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 17,321

    DavidL said:

    The position that the EU have adopted on Ireland makes no sense whatsoever. How can we possibly resolve what our border with Ireland is going to be until we know what our relationship with the EU is going to be?

    At one time I thought this could be used as a backdoor way of discussing the nature of that relationship going forward but we now have the truly absurd position that they are threatening not to discuss that relationship until we agree the border arrangements with an EU member state.

    What we are saying is that we want a free trade deal with the EU with minimal disruption at the borders of the Customs Union. It is the EU who is trying to say that we can't have a FTA without freedom of movement because these things are supposedly indivisible (not sure how Canada feels about that).

    If we get what we want the Irish border should be a minor inconvenience. If the EU hold to their position (which of course they are entitled to do, however, irrational) then it will be much more of a problem for both sides of the border. These issues are resolvable but only if there is rapid negotiation on the practicalities and details now. The idea that Ireland may seek to prevent those discussions is just bonkers.

    I love the idea that Britain can proceed on a non-economic basis but when others do they're irrational or bonkers.
    We proceed in what the majority thinks to be in our best interests. Ireland should do the same but I am really struggling to understand how preventing detailed talks about our future relationship with the EU is in their interests at all. It just isn't and it is pretty obvious their Taoiseach is having a go at the Brits to bolster his weak position. That may be in his personal interests but it is not in Ireland's.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 16,177
    edited November 27
    Something for everyone

    majority of NI population want no customs border in Ireland

    majority of NI ppopulation support border controls between Ireland and GB



    https://sluggerotoole.com/2017/11/26/exclusive-poll-unionist-supporters-content-with-east-west-post-brexit-border-controls/
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 1,157

    Reminers seem particularly tetchy this morning

    Monday blues chaps ?

    I dunno. I think seeing my country ruined just gets me down.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 11,318

    TOPPING said:

    DavidL said:

    The position that the EU have adopted on Ireland makes no sense whatsoever. How can we possibly resolve what our border with Ireland is going to be until we know what our relationship with the EU is going to be?

    At one time I thought this could be used as a backdoor way of discussing the nature of that relationship going forward but we now have the truly absurd position that they are threatening not to discuss that relationship until we agree the border arrangements with an EU member state.

    What we are saying is that we want a free trade deal with the EU with minimal disruption at the borders of the Customs Union. It is the EU who is trying to say that we can't have a FTA without freedom of movement because these things are supposedly indivisible (not sure how Canada feels about that).

    If we get what we want the Irish border should be a minor inconvenience. If the EU hold to their position (which of course they are entitled to do, however, irrational) then it will be much more of a problem for both sides of the border. These issues are resolvable but only if there is rapid negotiation on the practicalities and details now. The idea that Ireland may seek to prevent those discussions is just bonkers.

    I love the idea that Britain can proceed on a non-economic basis but when others do they're irrational or bonkers.
    It’s a price worth paying for the EU. Didn’t you know?
    so with the french annd germans now chasing your job remainers response is to blog about irrelevant stuff from people they dont know

    isnt that how you lost the referendum ?
    Nah the referendum was won by those who wanted to keep Turkish immigrants out of the UK.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 22,049

    Sandpit said:

    @Sandpit So in short your questions are " Why is the Irish government acting in it's own long term interests rather than making Brexit easier for the British government ? " and " Why are the Irish using their moment of maximum leverage in the talks structure to pursue those self interests rather than ballsing up like we are ? ".

    I confess I'm stumped on both counts.

    No, my question is why are the Irish government not working to effect a mutually beneficial “win-win” outcome to the trade talks, that both protects their largest trade routes and negates the need to do anything with the border?
    The "win-win" outcome is cancelling Brexit.
    Cancelling Brexit a win-win? Only if you want to unleash a shit-storm from the voters, who will (rightly) assume that our current crop of politicians are not up to the job of following one instruction: get us out of the EU that these politicians so carefully tried to enmesh us within such that Brexit was impossible.

    I really don't think that you would like the look of a post Brexit-walkaway House of Commons, following the election that would occur in short order and where one issue would dominate the campaign.
    Some people have learnt nothing and forgotten nothing.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 16,177

    Reminers seem particularly tetchy this morning

    Monday blues chaps ?

    I dunno. I think seeing my country ruined just gets me down.
    know what you mean, I felt like that every time I got up and remembered Blair was PM
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 8,837

    Something for everyone

    majority of NI population want no customs border in Ireland

    majority of NI ppopulation support border controls between Ireland and GB



    https://sluggerotoole.com/2017/11/26/exclusive-poll-unionist-supporters-content-with-east-west-post-brexit-border-controls/

    Except for the DUP.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 1,157

    Sandpit said:

    @Sandpit So in short your questions are " Why is the Irish government acting in it's own long term interests rather than making Brexit easier for the British government ? " and " Why are the Irish using their moment of maximum leverage in the talks structure to pursue those self interests rather than ballsing up like we are ? ".

    I confess I'm stumped on both counts.

    No, my question is why are the Irish government not working to effect a mutually beneficial “win-win” outcome to the trade talks, that both protects their largest trade routes and negates the need to do anything with the border?
    The "win-win" outcome is cancelling Brexit.
    Cancelling Brexit a win-win? Only if you want to unleash a shit-storm from the voters, who will (rightly) assume that our current crop of politicians are not up to the job of following one instruction: get us out of the EU that these politicians so carefully tried to enmesh us within such that Brexit was impossible.

    I really don't think that you would like the look of a post Brexit-walkaway House of Commons, following the election that would occur in short order and where one issue would dominate the campaign.
    The "win-win' referred specifically to the Irish border issue. I don't doubt there would be problems on the mainland if Brexit were cancelled.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 14,976
    What is it about Emma Dent Coad, that she only ever opens her mouth in order to insert her foot? Surely the residents of Kensington deserve better from their MP?
    image
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,328
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    DavidL said:

    The position that the EU have adopted on Ireland makes no sense whatsoever. How can we possibly resolve what our border with Ireland is going to be until we know what our relationship with the EU is going to be?

    At one time I thought this could be used as a backdoor way of discussing the nature of that relationship going forward but we now have the truly absurd position that they are threatening not to discuss that relationship until we agree the border arrangements with an EU member state.

    What we are saying is that we want a free trade deal with the EU with minimal disruption at the borders of the Customs Union. It is the EU who is trying to say that we can't have a FTA without freedom of movement because these things are supposedly indivisible (not sure how Canada feels about that).

    If we get what we want the Irish border should be a minor inconvenience. If the EU hold to their position (which of course they are entitled to do, however, irrational) then it will be much more of a problem for both sides of the border. These issues are resolvable but only if there is rapid negotiation on the practicalities and details now. The idea that Ireland may seek to prevent those discussions is just bonkers.

    I love the idea that Britain can proceed on a non-economic basis but when others do they're irrational or bonkers.
    It’s a price worth paying for the EU. Didn’t you know?
    so with the french annd germans now chasing your job remainers response is to blog about irrelevant stuff from people they dont know

    isnt that how you lost the referendum ?
    Nah the referendum was won by those who wanted to keep Turkish immigrants out of the UK.
    Result!

    Can we get back to business now?
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 5,190
    edited November 27
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    The position that the EU have adopted on Ireland makes no sense whatsoever. How can we possibly resolve what our border with Ireland is going to be until we know what our relationship with the EU is going to be?

    At one time I thought this could be used as a backdoor way of discussing the nature of that relationship going forward but we now have the truly absurd position that they are threatening not to discuss that relationship until we agree the border arrangements with an EU member state.

    What we are saying is that we want a free trade deal with the EU with minimal disruption at the borders of the Customs Union. It is the EU who is trying to say that we can't have a FTA without freedom of movement because these things are supposedly indivisible (not sure how Canada feels about that).

    If we get what we want the Irish border should be a minor inconvenience. If the EU hold to their position (which of course they are entitled to do, however, irrational) then it will be much more of a problem for both sides of the border. These issues are resolvable but only if there is rapid negotiation on the practicalities and details now. The idea that Ireland may seek to prevent those discussions is just bonkers.

    I love the idea that Britain can proceed on a non-economic basis but when others do they're irrational or bonkers.
    We proceed in what the majority thinks to be in our best interests. Ireland should do the same but I am really struggling to understand how preventing detailed talks about our future relationship with the EU is in their interests at all. It just isn't and it is pretty obvious their Taoiseach is having a go at the Brits to bolster his weak position. That may be in his personal interests but it is not in Ireland's.
    Our government has rejected Soft Brexit and wants Hard Brexit. The Irish want Soft Brexit and HATE Hard Brexit. Each side can prevent the other getting the deal they want, in which case they get No Deal, which is a lot like Hard Brexit, but worse.

    It's a classic prisoner's dilemma.
  • felixfelix Posts: 6,872

    Charles said:

    On Ireland, Britain is entitled to interpret the referendum decision as a mandate to restrict freedom of movement and reimpose immigration controls. The EU in turn is entitled to insist that is inconsistent with Single Market membership. The Republic of Ireland is in turn entitled to press that both positions be reconciled with the Good Friday Agreement and their strong wish for no hard border with Northern Ireland.

    For some reason, Leavers don't seem to get past the first of these three.

    1. Agree
    2. Most leavers have accepted that FoM is part of the SM I believe? It's ususally the anti-Brexit camp that is pushing the SM case
    3. I don't think anyone has argued that Ireland isn't entitled to push for this. Criticism has focused on the fact they are playing politics with peace and that their tactics seem odd
    The Leaver position on 3 can usually on close examination be seen to be "how dare they?". I think the Republic of Ireland will probably cave eventually but I'm not certain they will and their position is considerably more logical than the British position which can be fairly transcribed as "we don't want to think about this".
    Ando the Irish position is "we don't want a border so we'll stop the talks as a result of which there's going to be a hard border". You couldn't make it up. B-)
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 39,452
    Good morning, everyone.

    F1: post-race ramble here:
    http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2017/11/abu-dhabi-post-race-analysis-2017.html

    A few interesting things I noticed from my increased statistical collection this year (mostly around DNF rates and the like). If/when I do a post-season review I'll probably festoon it with graphs.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 25,806
    Sandpit said:

    What is it about Emma Dent Coad, that she only ever opens her mouth in order to insert her foot? Surely the residents of Kensington deserve better from their MP?
    image

    Imagine the response if a Tory had posted that about a female labour politician and a Tory man!
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 15,056

    Sandpit said:

    @Sandpit So in short your questions are " Why is the Irish government acting in it's own long term interests rather than making Brexit easier for the British government ? " and " Why are the Irish using their moment of maximum leverage in the talks structure to pursue those self interests rather than ballsing up like we are ? ".

    I confess I'm stumped on both counts.

    No, my question is why are the Irish government not working to effect a mutually beneficial “win-win” outcome to the trade talks, that both protects their largest trade routes and negates the need to do anything with the border?
    The "win-win" outcome is cancelling Brexit.
    Cancelling Brexit a win-win? Only if you want to unleash a shit-storm from the voters, who will (rightly) assume that our current crop of politicians are not up to the job of following one instruction: get us out of the EU that these politicians so carefully tried to enmesh us within such that Brexit was impossible.

    I really don't think that you would like the look of a post Brexit-walkaway House of Commons, following the election that would occur in short order and where one issue would dominate the campaign.
    The "win-win' referred specifically to the Irish border issue. I don't doubt there would be problems on the mainland if Brexit were cancelled.
    It wouldn't be Brexit cancelled. It would be Brexit delayed. And Brexit regardless. Those who DO end up taking us out won't give a fig for what Ireland wants. Nor Brussels.

    We had an ongoing dialogue with Ireland between grown-ups, trying to resolve what all the grown-ups know to be a very knotty issue. Then Ireland goes and gets Kevin the Teenager....
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 17,321
    FF43 said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    The position that the EU have adopted on Ireland makes no sense whatsoever. How can we possibly resolve what our border with Ireland is going to be until we know what our relationship with the EU is going to be?

    At one time I thought this could be used as a backdoor way of discussing the nature of that relationship going forward but we now have the truly absurd position that they are threatening not to discuss that relationship until we agree the border arrangements with an EU member state.

    What we are saying is that we want a free trade deal with the EU with minimal disruption at the borders of the Customs Union. It is the EU who is trying to say that we can't have a FTA without freedom of movement because these things are supposedly indivisible (not sure how Canada feels about that).

    If we get what we want the Irish border should be a minor inconvenience. If the EU hold to their position (which of course they are entitled to do, however, irrational) then it will be much more of a problem for both sides of the border. These issues are resolvable but only if there is rapid negotiation on the practicalities and details now. The idea that Ireland may seek to prevent those discussions is just bonkers.

    I love the idea that Britain can proceed on a non-economic basis but when others do they're irrational or bonkers.
    We proceed in what the majority thinks to be in our best interests. Ireland should do the same but I am really struggling to understand how preventing detailed talks about our future relationship with the EU is in their interests at all. It just isn't and it is pretty obvious their Taoiseach is having a go at the Brits to bolster his weak position. That may be in his personal interests but it is not in Ireland's.
    Our government has rejected Soft Brexit and wants Hard Brexit. The Irish want Soft Brexit and HATE Hard Brexit. Each side can prevent the other getting the deal they want, in which case they get No Deal, which is a lot like Hard Brexit, but worse.

    It's a classic prisoner's dilemma.
    Rubbish. We want a soft Brexit. If we didn't May wouldn't have doubled the money on offer. But we may end up with a hard Brexit if we don't get on with it.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 5,190
    felix said:

    Charles said:

    On Ireland, Britain is entitled to interpret the referendum decision as a mandate to restrict freedom of movement and reimpose immigration controls. The EU in turn is entitled to insist that is inconsistent with Single Market membership. The Republic of Ireland is in turn entitled to press that both positions be reconciled with the Good Friday Agreement and their strong wish for no hard border with Northern Ireland.

    For some reason, Leavers don't seem to get past the first of these three.

    1. Agree
    2. Most leavers have accepted that FoM is part of the SM I believe? It's ususally the anti-Brexit camp that is pushing the SM case
    3. I don't think anyone has argued that Ireland isn't entitled to push for this. Criticism has focused on the fact they are playing politics with peace and that their tactics seem odd
    The Leaver position on 3 can usually on close examination be seen to be "how dare they?". I think the Republic of Ireland will probably cave eventually but I'm not certain they will and their position is considerably more logical than the British position which can be fairly transcribed as "we don't want to think about this".
    Ando the Irish position is "we don't want a border so we'll stop the talks as a result of which there's going to be a hard border". You couldn't make it up. B-)
    That's not the Irish position. Their position is give us what we want or there's no deal. It might be an empty threat. The threat might blow up in their faces. But the main point at this stage, that many on this board don't get, and much more worryingly our government doesn't seem to get because they haven't paid the slightest attention to the Irish issue, is that the Irish are far from happy with what the British have come up with so far.
  • Sandpit said:

    @Sandpit So in short your questions are " Why is the Irish government acting in it's own long term interests rather than making Brexit easier for the British government ? " and " Why are the Irish using their moment of maximum leverage in the talks structure to pursue those self interests rather than ballsing up like we are ? ".

    I confess I'm stumped on both counts.

    No, my question is why are the Irish government not working to effect a mutually beneficial “win-win” outcome to the trade talks, that both protects their largest trade routes and negates the need to do anything with the border?
    The "win-win" outcome is cancelling Brexit.
    Take Back Control from Putin’s puppets.
  • FF43 said:

    felix said:

    Charles said:

    On Ireland, Britain is entitled to interpret the referendum decision as a mandate to restrict freedom of movement and reimpose immigration controls. The EU in turn is entitled to insist that is inconsistent with Single Market membership. The Republic of Ireland is in turn entitled to press that both positions be reconciled with the Good Friday Agreement and their strong wish for no hard border with Northern Ireland.

    For some reason, Leavers don't seem to get past the first of these three.

    1. Agree
    2. Most leavers have accepted that FoM is part of the SM I believe? It's ususally the anti-Brexit camp that is pushing the SM case
    3. I don't think anyone has argued that Ireland isn't entitled to push for this. Criticism has focused on the fact they are playing politics with peace and that their tactics seem odd
    The Leaver position on 3 can usually on close examination be seen to be "how dare they?". I think the Republic of Ireland will probably cave eventually but I'm not certain they will and their position is considerably more logical than the British position which can be fairly transcribed as "we don't want to think about this".
    Ando the Irish position is "we don't want a border so we'll stop the talks as a result of which there's going to be a hard border". You couldn't make it up. B-)
    That's not the Irish position. Their position is give us what we want or there's no deal. It might be an empty threat. The threat might blow up in their faces. But the main point at this stage, that many on this board don't get, and much more worryingly our government doesn't seem to get because they haven't paid the slightest attention to the Irish issue, is that the Irish are far from happy with what the British have come up with so far.

    The UK government has not come up with anything except that it will all be OK. When you are being told this by the likes of Boris Johnson, Liam Fox, David Davis and Theresa May, it is understandable if you are not entirely convinced and need something a bit more concrete.

  • FF43FF43 Posts: 5,190
    edited November 27
    DavidL said:

    FF43 said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    The position that the EU have adopted on Ireland makes no sense whatsoever. How can we possibly resolve what our border with Ireland is going to be until we know what our relationship with the EU is going to be?

    At one time I thought this could be used as a backdoor way of discussing the nature of that relationship going forward but we now have the truly absurd position that they are threatening not to discuss that relationship until we agree the border arrangements with an EU member state.

    What we are saying is that we want a free trade deal with the EU with minimal disruption at the borders of the Customs Union. It is the EU who is trying to say that we can't have a FTA without freedom of movement because these things are supposedly indivisible (not sure how Canada feels about that).

    If we get what we want the Irish border should be a minor inconvenience. If the EU hold to their position (which of course they are entitled to do, however, irrational) then it will be much more of a problem for both sides of the border. These issues are resolvable but only if there is rapid negotiation on the practicalities and details now. The idea that Ireland may seek to prevent those discussions is just bonkers.

    I love the idea that Britain can proceed on a non-economic basis but when others do they're irrational or bonkers.
    We proceed in what the majority thinks to be in our best interests. Ireland should do the same but I am really struggling to understand how preventing detailed talks about our future relationship with the EU is in their interests at all. It just isn't and it is pretty obvious their Taoiseach is having a go at the Brits to bolster his weak position. That may be in his personal interests but it is not in Ireland's.
    Our government has rejected Soft Brexit and wants Hard Brexit. The Irish want Soft Brexit and HATE Hard Brexit. Each side can prevent the other getting the deal they want, in which case they get No Deal, which is a lot like Hard Brexit, but worse.

    It's a classic prisoner's dilemma.
    Rubbish. We want a soft Brexit. If we didn't May wouldn't have doubled the money on offer. But we may end up with a hard Brexit if we don't get on with it.
    Our government pretending Hard Brexit is actually soft is a large part of the problem. The Irish don't buy it. The border is soft because we say it is, doesn't cut any ice. The Irish want substantive proposals
  • DavidL said:

    FF43 said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    The position that the EU have adopted on Ireland makes no sense whatsoever. How can we possibly resolve what our border with Ireland is going to be until we know what our relationship with the EU is going to be?

    At one time I thought this could be used as a backdoor way of discussing the nature of that relationship going forward but we now have the truly absurd position that they are threatening not to discuss that relationship until we agree the border arrangements with an EU member state.

    What we are saying is that we want a free trade deal with the EU with minimal disruption at the borders of the Customs Union. It is the EU who is trying to say that we can't have a FTA without freedom of movement because these things are supposedly indivisible (not sure how Canada feels about that).

    If we get what we want the Irish border should be a minor inconvenience. If the EU hold to their position (which of course they are entitled to do, however, irrational) then it will be much more of a problem for both sides of the border. These issues are resolvable but only if there is rapid negotiation on the practicalities and details now. The idea that Ireland may seek to prevent those discussions is just bonkers.

    I love the idea that Britain can proceed on a non-economic basis but when others do they're irrational or bonkers.
    We proceed in what the majority thinks to be in our best interests. Ireland should do the same but I am really struggling to understand how preventing detailed talks about our future relationship with the EU is in their interests at all. It just isn't and it is pretty obvious their Taoiseach is having a go at the Brits to bolster his weak position. That may be in his personal interests but it is not in Ireland's.
    Our government has rejected Soft Brexit and wants Hard Brexit. The Irish want Soft Brexit and HATE Hard Brexit. Each side can prevent the other getting the deal they want, in which case they get No Deal, which is a lot like Hard Brexit, but worse.

    It's a classic prisoner's dilemma.
    Rubbish. We want a soft Brexit. If we didn't May wouldn't have doubled the money on offer. But we may end up with a hard Brexit if we don't get on with it.

    We do not want to be in the Customs Union or the Single Market, so we are shooting for a Canada-style agreement. That is a hard Brexit - significantly reduced access to the Single Market.

  • DavidL said:

    FF43 said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    The position that the EU have adopted on Ireland makes no sense whatsoever. How can we possibly resolve what our border with Ireland is going to be until we know what our relationship with the EU is going to be?

    At one time I thought this could be used as a backdoor way of discussing the nature of that relationship going forward but we now have the truly absurd position that they are threatening not to discuss that relationship until we agree the border arrangements with an EU member state.

    What we are saying is that we want a free trade deal with the EU with minimal disruption at the borders of the Customs Union. It is the EU who is trying to say that we can't have a FTA without freedom of movement because these things are supposedly indivisible (not sure how Canada feels about that).

    If we get what we want the Irish border should be a minor inconvenience. If the EU hold to their position (which of course they are entitled to do, however, irrational) then it will be much more of a problem for both sides of the border. These issues are resolvable but only if there is rapid negotiation on the practicalities and details now. The idea that Ireland may seek to prevent those discussions is just bonkers.

    I love the idea that Britain can proceed on a non-economic basis but when others do they're irrational or bonkers.
    We proceed in what the majority thinks to be in our best interests. Ireland should do the same but their Taoiseach is having a go at the Brits to bolster his weak position. That may be in his personal interests but it is not in Ireland's.
    Our government has rejected Soft Brexit and wants Hard Brexit. The Irish want Soft Brexit and HATE Hard Brexit. Each side can prevent the other getting the deal they want, in which case they get No Deal, which is a lot like Hard Brexit, but worse.

    It's a classic prisoner's dilemma.
    Rubbish. We want a soft Brexit. If we didn't May wouldn't have doubled the money on offer. But we may end up with a hard Brexit if we don't get on with it.
    Who says we want a soft Brexit? Or a hard one? The voters said we want a Brexit. The kind of Brexit wasn't specified. The Government agreed to do what the voters said. So any kind of Brexit qualifies. What's to complain about?

    And if we didn't want borders - proper ones where people can be stopped and turned back - why did we vote for Brexit? Proper borders, properly controlled by ourselves as a sovereign and independent state, is surely the essence of Brexit. So surely we have to restore a hard border at our borders, which obviously means in Ireland, as in Gibraltar and other points of contact with the rest of the world.

    What's the problem?
  • Sandpit said:

    @Sandpit So in short your questions are " Why is the Irish government acting in it's own long term interests rather than making Brexit easier for the British government ? " and " Why are the Irish using their moment of maximum leverage in the talks structure to pursue those self interests rather than ballsing up like we are ? ".

    I confess I'm stumped on both counts.

    No, my question is why are the Irish government not working to effect a mutually beneficial “win-win” outcome to the trade talks, that both protects their largest trade routes and negates the need to do anything with the border?
    The "win-win" outcome is cancelling Brexit.
    Cancelling Brexit a win-win? Only if you want to unleash a shit-storm from the voters, who will (rightly) assume that our current crop of politicians are not up to the job of following one instruction: get us out of the EU that these politicians so carefully tried to enmesh us within such that Brexit was impossible.

    I really don't think that you would like the look of a post Brexit-walkaway House of Commons, following the election that would occur in short order and where one issue would dominate the campaign.
    The "win-win' referred specifically to the Irish border issue. I don't doubt there would be problems on the mainland if Brexit were cancelled.
    It wouldn't be Brexit cancelled. It would be Brexit delayed. And Brexit regardless. Those who DO end up taking us out won't give a fig for what Ireland wants. Nor Brussels.

    We had an ongoing dialogue with Ireland between grown-ups, trying to resolve what all the grown-ups know to be a very knotty issue. Then Ireland goes and gets Kevin the Teenager....

    Yep, it is outrageous that the Irish dare do what they feel is best for Ireland and refuse to take the words of Boris Johnson, David Davis, Liam Fox et al at face value.

  • Would such a payment be permitted under the Conservative party's constitutional arrangements?

    Ordinary members would be thrown out of the party if we helped another party like this.

    I think the leader and party board have some latitude though.

    They can do what they consider in the best interests in the party.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 3,546
    Sandpit said:

    What is it about Emma Dent Coad, that she only ever opens her mouth in order to insert her foot? Surely the residents of Kensington deserve better from their MP?
    image

    Ms Coad herself is hardly a profuse generator of sunbeams...
  • DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    The position that the EU have adopted on Ireland makes no sense whatsoever. How can we possibly resolve what our border with Ireland is going to be until we know what our relationship with the EU is going to be?

    At one time I thought this could be used as a backdoor way of discussing the nature of that relationship going forward but we now have the truly absurd position that they are threatening not to discuss that relationship until we agree the border arrangements with an EU member state.

    What we are saying is that we want a free trade deal with the EU with minimal disruption at the borders of the Customs Union. It is the EU who is trying to say that we can't have a FTA without freedom of movement because these things are supposedly indivisible (not sure how Canada feels about that).

    If we get what we want the Irish border should be a minor inconvenience. If the EU hold to their position (which of course they are entitled to do, however, irrational) then it will be much more of a problem for both sides of the border. These issues are resolvable but only if there is rapid negotiation on the practicalities and details now. The idea that Ireland may seek to prevent those discussions is just bonkers.

    I love the idea that Britain can proceed on a non-economic basis but when others do they're irrational or bonkers.
    We proceed in what the majority thinks to be in our best interests. Ireland should do the same but I am really struggling to understand how preventing detailed talks about our future relationship with the EU is in their interests at all. It just isn't and it is pretty obvious their Taoiseach is having a go at the Brits to bolster his weak position. That may be in his personal interests but it is not in Ireland's.

    I cannot imagine why this line of thinking would rile the Irish in any way at all. The Brits know what is best for the Irish, but the Irish are just too pig-headed to see it. That should work as a negotiating tactic. The fact that it isn't is all the Irish's fault.

  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 9,540
    I wonder what’s in it for Varadkar? Yes, he’s got a minoirity govenment but everything was working OK until Kenny had to go.
    If he’s picking a fight..... and worse, tearing up what was already done is it ‘just’ to dish the opposition? Or wave a flag to be rallied round?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 39,452
    On the Irish question: the border arrangement is contingent upon the trade/customs position. Varadkar refusing to talk about the latter makes sorting out the former impossible.
  • Who says we want a soft Brexit? Or a hard one? The voters said we want a Brexit. The kind of Brexit wasn't specified. The Government agreed to do what the voters said. So any kind of Brexit qualifies. What's to complain about?

    And if we didn't want borders - proper ones where people can be stopped and turned back - why did we vote for Brexit? Proper borders, properly controlled by ourselves as a sovereign and independent state, is surely the essence of Brexit. So surely we have to restore a hard border at our borders, which obviously means in Ireland, as in Gibraltar and other points of contact with the rest of the world.

    What's the problem?

    Migration control doesn't occur at the border.

    You can buy a ticket today to go to any of the USA, Canada or Australia without a visa. Good luck getting a job or permanent property without one though.
  • DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    The position that the EU have adopted on Ireland makes no sense whatsoever. How can we possibly resolve what our border with Ireland is going to be until we know what our relationship with the EU is going to be?

    At one time I thought this could be used as a backdoor way of discussing the nature of that relationship going forward but we now have the truly absurd position that they are threatening not to discuss that relationship until we agree the border arrangements with an EU member state.

    What we are saying is that we want a free trade deal with the EU with minimal disruption at the borders of the Customs Union. It is the EU who is trying to say that we can't have a FTA without freedom of movement because these things are supposedly indivisible (not sure how Canada feels about that).

    If we get what we want the Irish border should be a minor inconvenience. If the EU hold to their position (which of course they are entitled to do, however, irrational) then it will be much more of a problem for both sides of the border. These issues are resolvable but only if there is rapid negotiation on the practicalities and details now. The idea that Ireland may seek to prevent those discussions is just bonkers.

    I love the idea that Britain can proceed on a non-economic basis but when others do they're irrational or bonkers.
    We proceed in what the majority thinks to be in our best interests. Ireland should do the same but I am really struggling to understand how preventing detailed talks about our future relationship with the EU is in their interests at all. It just isn't and it is pretty obvious their Taoiseach is having a go at the Brits to bolster his weak position. That may be in his personal interests but it is not in Ireland's.

    I cannot imagine why this line of thinking would rile the Irish in any way at all. The Brits know what is best for the Irish, but the Irish are just too pig-headed to see it. That should work as a negotiating tactic. The fact that it isn't is all the Irish's fault.

    We tear up our membership card, and are then aghast that the remaining members don't give us what we want. Awesome!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 36,073
    The Conservative Party does stand a few candidates in Northern Ireland but I cannot think of one seat in Northern Ireland where the DUP's main rivals for a seat are the Tories rather than SF, the SDLP or the UUP.

    Indeed in 2010 the Tories and UUP stood on a joint ticket in Northern Ireland.
  • On the Irish question: the border arrangement is contingent upon the trade/customs position. Varadkar refusing to talk about the latter makes sorting out the former impossible.

    We know what kind of deal we can get given the parameters we have set. Not being in the single market or customs union means a Canada-style agreement. The EU has made that clear any number of times. Given that, we are very well placed to come up with the outline of a plan. We do not need a full one, just something that demonstrates progress has been made.

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 14,976

    Sandpit said:

    @Sandpit So in short your questions are " Why is the Irish government acting in it's own long term interests rather than making Brexit easier for the British government ? " and " Why are the Irish using their moment of maximum leverage in the talks structure to pursue those self interests rather than ballsing up like we are ? ".

    I confess I'm stumped on both counts.

    No, my question is why are the Irish government not working to effect a mutually beneficial “win-win” outcome to the trade talks, that both protects their largest trade routes and negates the need to do anything with the border?
    The "win-win" outcome is cancelling Brexit.
    Cancelling Brexit a win-win? Only if you want to unleash a shit-storm from the voters, who will (rightly) assume that our current crop of politicians are not up to the job of following one instruction: get us out of the EU that these politicians so carefully tried to enmesh us within such that Brexit was impossible.

    I really don't think that you would like the look of a post Brexit-walkaway House of Commons, following the election that would occur in short order and where one issue would dominate the campaign.
    The "win-win' referred specifically to the Irish border issue. I don't doubt there would be problems on the mainland if Brexit were cancelled.
    It wouldn't be Brexit cancelled. It would be Brexit delayed. And Brexit regardless. Those who DO end up taking us out won't give a fig for what Ireland wants. Nor Brussels.

    We had an ongoing dialogue with Ireland between grown-ups, trying to resolve what all the grown-ups know to be a very knotty issue. Then Ireland goes and gets Kevin the Teenager....
    LOL, that’s a good way of putting it, even though our diplomats may use slightly different language.
  • I wonder what’s in it for Varadkar? Yes, he’s got a minoirity govenment but everything was working OK until Kenny had to go.
    If he’s picking a fight..... and worse, tearing up what was already done is it ‘just’ to dish the opposition? Or wave a flag to be rallied round?

    He is doing what any Irish political leader would do. Anyone who thinks that Fianna Fail would behave differently really do know absolutely nothing about Irish politics.

  • DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    The position that the EU have adopted on Ireland makes no sense whatsoever. How can we possibly resolve what our border with Ireland is going to be until we know what our relationship with the EU is going to be?

    At one time I thought this could be used as a backdoor way of discussing the nature of that relationship going forward but we now have the truly absurd position that they are threatening not to discuss that relationship until we agree the border arrangements with an EU member state.

    What we are saying is that we want a free trade deal with the EU with minimal disruption at the borders of the Customs Union. It is the EU who is trying to say that we can't have a FTA without freedom of movement because these things are supposedly indivisible (not sure how Canada feels about that).

    If we get what we want the Irish border should be a minor inconvenience. If the EU hold to their position (which of course they are entitled to do, however, irrational) then it will be much more of a problem for both sides of the border. These issues are resolvable but only if there is rapid negotiation on the practicalities and details now. The idea that Ireland may seek to prevent those discussions is just bonkers.

    I love the idea that Britain can proceed on a non-economic basis but when others do they're irrational or bonkers.
    We proceed in what the majority thinks to be in our best interests. Ireland should do the same but I am really struggling to understand how preventing detailed talks about our future relationship with the EU is in their interests at all. It just isn't and it is pretty obvious their Taoiseach is having a go at the Brits to bolster his weak position. That may be in his personal interests but it is not in Ireland's.

    I cannot imagine why this line of thinking would rile the Irish in any way at all. The Brits know what is best for the Irish, but the Irish are just too pig-headed to see it. That should work as a negotiating tactic. The fact that it isn't is all the Irish's fault.

    We tear up our membership card, and are then aghast that the remaining members don't give us what we want. Awesome!
    Ireland's attitude is about as smart as a toddler saying they'll hold their breath until they get what they want.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 5,190

    I wonder what’s in it for Varadkar? Yes, he’s got a minoirity govenment but everything was working OK until Kenny had to go.
    If he’s picking a fight..... and worse, tearing up what was already done is it ‘just’ to dish the opposition? Or wave a flag to be rallied round?

    Varadkar upped the ante, but I don't think any Irish person involved in Brexit thought it was going OK. Kenny certainly didn't.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 9,540
    edited November 27
    HYUFD said:

    The Conservative Party does stand a few candidates in Northern Ireland but I cannot think of one seat in Northern Ireland where the DUP's main rivals for a seat are the Tories rather than SF, the SDLP or the UUP.

    Indeed in 2010 the Tories and UUP stood on a joint ticket in Northern Ireland.

    Tying oneself up to the UUP is a bit of a red rag to some at least DUP-ers. As I understand it, Protestant politics in N Ireland have more than a whiff of the Judean Peoples Front (et al) about them.
This discussion has been closed.