Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » On the third Thursday of May exactly a year ago Mrs May launch

1246

Comments

  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,545
    FF43 said:



    I'm not sure we will rejoin, although it is a logical position. The political inertia against rejoining will be huge. Brexit is going to be very uncomfortable in any scenario.

    It's hard to see Parliament accepting a withdrawal agreement on such unfavourable terms. And if the agreement is rejected with only a few months to go then anything could happen - from a collapse of the whole Brexit process on the one hand to a no-deal crash out on the other.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Nick, there are enough MPs who are slavishly pro-EU or genuinely worried that the alternative to a terrible deal is worse that a shit deal would get passed.

    Unless Grieve et al. felt that voting it down could lead to a snap second referendum whereby we end up remaining.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,542
    edited May 2018

    FF43 said:



    I'm not sure we will rejoin, although it is a logical position. The political inertia against rejoining will be huge. Brexit is going to be very uncomfortable in any scenario.

    It's hard to see Parliament accepting a withdrawal agreement on such unfavourable terms. And if the agreement is rejected with only a few months to go then anything could happen - from a collapse of the whole Brexit process on the one hand to a no-deal crash out on the other.
    Actually, I think a crash out is a small but real risk. But it is an absence of a solution and not a solution n and an end state. We will still need to sort things out. The EU will still demand the same things.
  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227

    Well that wasn't so hard in the end, was it?

    https://www.ft.com/content/8834c20a-59a1-11e8-b8b2-d6ceb45fa9d0

    British officials, however, argue that this is a problem of Mr Barnier’s own making.

    “How can you address the Irish backstop question without talking about customs?” said one British diplomat.


    Well, quite. As has been pointed out on here from the beginning......
    Where do we get our diplomats from ? This one is a class idiot. The whole idea of the "backstop" was precisely if no solution was found it would be in place. No regulatory divergence [ customs union , in other words ] is the default, unless other solutions are found.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,544

    Nigelb said:


    To prevent a border of some sort in Ireland we have to be in the Single Market. That is a given..

    Is it ?
    What would be the downsides of a de facto unpoliced North/South Irish border coupled with MaxFac at the ports, and would they be worse than any alternatives ?
    How can Ireland trust that the right regulations are in force in NI if it is not in the single market?
    Their problem, and a relatively minor one. I think they are rather more interested in an unpoliced border, and uninterrupted trade.

    From the EU's POV, enforcing tariffs etc is the point, and it meets those objections.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,951

    I was reading the other week that coke is very popular among Vegans....so they are so concerned about the suffering of animals and (in most Vegans opinions) the dangers of processed food...but happy to take coke, which is made using many disgusting and dangerous chemicals, destroys eco-systems and producers lives.
    Not to mention, leads to the sort of drug-gang knife-violence that causes them to mutter into their muesli "but something MUST be done....".

    Yeah, stop buying coke, you idiots.

    What's wrong with home-grown magic mushrooms?
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,401
    PClipp said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    The policy looked for a large alternative source of funding for social care. I personally find the view that people should have their personal care paid out of general taxation so that they can leave their £1m house to their children untouched genuinely immoral and repulsive. The premise that someone else should pay is far too deeply ingrained in our culture.

    But just maybe your GE manifesto was not the place to do it.

    I think such reforms can be done but they need to be heavily trailed and tested first, and public support slowly built.

    If you try and bounce them on the voters during an election campaign, they will smell a rat and vote accordingly.
    That is exactly right. The Dementia tax was good policy but poor politics. The manifesto should have given a hard commitment on increasing the legacy allowance to £100k and then given promised to consult on "measures to harmonise the financial burden placed on those with different forms of ongoing care".

    That could have led to a White Paper in the first year of the parliament and allowed for proposals to be tweaked in response to the consultation without it looking like headless-chicken syndrome, which it inevitably does in the hot-house of an election campaign. The new system could have been introduced around 2019 giving people time to get used to it before the next GE.

    But no, a couple of policy wonks thought they knew political campaigning better than Lynton Crosby does.
    The Dementia Tax was a bad policy and bad politics, sneeking it out mid Parliament would not work either, see the Poll Tax
    Why is it a bad policy to make people who can afford to pay for something that they receive? Particularly when other people, in an identical financial situation, pay to receive their similar care?
    It sounds like compulsion, Mr Herdson. It`s the Tory dictatorial streak in you.
    Payment for services is generally compulsory; it's in the nature of transactions.

    And your response still doesn't answer why there should be different payment policies for people with identical means and similar needs.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    edited May 2018
    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    That has been my central prediction since the referendum. The Brexit contradiction needs to b resolved somehow.

    But that central prediction is based on the assumption that it will not be resolved and we'll simply enter into purgatory, wondering what happened. That seems highly unlikely to me.
    Part of that contradiction is that the British people voted to leave the European Union. I think that's a bigger deal than I suspect you do. I don't think the contradiction can really be resolved either inside or outside the EU, but something has to occupy the vacuum.
    I do think it's a very big deal, which is why I've often spoken in terms of 'national humiliation' and 'Suez on steroids'. On the other hand, if we were talking about some other country, it wouldn't be seen as a reason why the logic of the situation won't play out as it will for us.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    edited May 2018
    surby said:

    Well that wasn't so hard in the end, was it?

    https://www.ft.com/content/8834c20a-59a1-11e8-b8b2-d6ceb45fa9d0

    British officials, however, argue that this is a problem of Mr Barnier’s own making.

    “How can you address the Irish backstop question without talking about customs?” said one British diplomat.


    Well, quite. As has been pointed out on here from the beginning......
    Where do we get our diplomats from ? This one is a class idiot. The whole idea of the "backstop" was precisely if no solution was found it would be in place. No regulatory divergence [ customs union , in other words ] is the default, unless other solutions are found.
    The “default” remains that we exit the EU to WTO terms on 29th March 2019, unless something else is agreed by everyone in the meantime.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,092
    Sandpit said:

    surby said:

    Well that wasn't so hard in the end, was it?

    https://www.ft.com/content/8834c20a-59a1-11e8-b8b2-d6ceb45fa9d0

    British officials, however, argue that this is a problem of Mr Barnier’s own making.

    “How can you address the Irish backstop question without talking about customs?” said one British diplomat.


    Well, quite. As has been pointed out on here from the beginning......
    Where do we get our diplomats from ? This one is a class idiot. The whole idea of the "backstop" was precisely if no solution was found it would be in place. No regulatory divergence [ customs union , in other words ] is the default, unless other solutions are found.
    The “default” remains that we exit the EU to WTO terms on 29th March 2019, unless something else is agreed by everyone in the meantime.
    Default looking better by the day.
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,571
    Elliot said:

    Elliot said:

    Elliot said:

    TOPPING said:

    Didn't it start 5,000 years ago? How many generations is that?

    Are you really stupid enough to claim Israel has the right to occupy land which has been majority Muslim Arab for centuries based on the state of play prior to the Roman Empire?
    Are you disputing Israel's right to hold territories it took off its attackers in 67 until a peace deal is reached?

    Or are you disputing Israel's right to exist at all? Like Hamas still does who control Gaza and are organising today's violence.
    The former. You do not have a right to permanently occupy land lived in by a majority that do not want to be part of your state.
    They're not permanently occupying land, they're temporarily doing so until a peace deal is reached.

    Unfortunately the current "leaders" in Gaza dispute Israel's right to even exist so peace doesn't seem close.
    A temporary period of 51 years. During which they demolish and evacuate Palestinians in that territory and legalise Israeli colonists. Countries that want to give the land back always engage in settlement of the occupied land. Your apologism is an obvious joke of a position.
    Indeed. And it is obvious that the Israeli government realises that it holds all the aces and is thus quite content for the status quo to continue for another 100 years or more if necessary. The Palestinians, as an utterly conquered people, have nothing to offer to an Israeli state which is devoid of any concept of humanity and is content to treat Palestinians as cattle whether or not they capitulate in totality.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,956

    Well that wasn't so hard in the end, was it?

    https://www.ft.com/content/8834c20a-59a1-11e8-b8b2-d6ceb45fa9d0

    British officials, however, argue that this is a problem of Mr Barnier’s own making.

    “How can you address the Irish backstop question without talking about customs?” said one British diplomat.


    Well, quite. As has been pointed out on here from the beginning......
    Take it up with David Davis, he agreed to the sequencing of these talks.

    Almost like he fell for his own hype and thought it was easy.
  • archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612
    FF43 said:


    Lawyers for Britain elide two things.

    A customs union is a WTO concept, concerning tariffs. A customs union applies tariffs on goods, once, as they enter the union, so you don't need to apply them again as they cross into the other constituent territory. Components are particularly complicated. When a car manufacturer in one territory imports a headlamp from outside both territories and then includes it in a car, does the car now attract import duties as it passes from one territory to the other? A customs union is a binary thing. You are either in one or not. If you are, you notify the WTO of the fact.

    The Single Market isn't a formal concept,unlike a customs union. It is an agreement between the EU countries, including a couple of non-EU members such as Norway, to apply a common regulatory system so goods sold in one territory are automatically compliant in the other.

    It is possible to be in a customs union but not the SIngle Market. In that case goods need to be tested for compliance at the border. The same personnel will do this as would apply customs duties but it is a different set of checks that applies to all goods coming from the other territory. Outside a customs union you check goods coming from outside both territories at the same border.

    If you want a frictionless border you need to be in both the Customs Union and the SIngle Market.

    You are correct. If you want a 'frictionless' border you have to be in the CU and SM.

    We should not be seeking a 'frictionless' border, either for the UK generally or NI. We should be seeking a customs border with as little friction as possible.

    You keep saying that there is no way to resolve the 'Brexit contradiction' but there is and always has been - create a border between NI and ROI and between the UK and EU based on Maxfac. This will involve some limited friction on goods and none on people (for NI).

    If May had not been so stupid as to agree that there can be 'no infrastructure' at the NI border this would be relatively easy. Nobody in Ireland really cares if their number plate is scanned at the border any more than people really care if their number plate is scanned entering Central London. As long as they don't have to stop, they won't care.

    With no border infrastructure at all, it is harder, but more than possible to create a customs border that does not require physical checks at the border.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,542
    Dura_Ace said:



    It’s quite funny that @archer101au - dismissed as a fruitcake by both Remainers and Leavers on here - seems to have called all of this right.

    He is the only leaver on here with an intellectually coherent synthesis, in the Hegelian sense, of Brexit.
    I agree. @archer101au makes an intellectually coherent case for a Brexit Britian that shuts itself off from the world and doesn't care about Project Fear style consequences. The problem, though, is that Brexit was sold on nothing important changing. We keep everything we have and can spend the membership fees on the NHS. That benign scenario depends on a close relationship with the EU that will be on the EU's terms. We could be members of the EU helping to shape the regulation that directly affects us, or we are rule takers of the EU doing what we are told. Problem is we rejected membership and influence on the basis that we would "take control" and instead end up as rule-takers and doing what we are told.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    geoffw said:

    Sandpit said:

    surby said:

    Well that wasn't so hard in the end, was it?

    https://www.ft.com/content/8834c20a-59a1-11e8-b8b2-d6ceb45fa9d0

    British officials, however, argue that this is a problem of Mr Barnier’s own making.

    “How can you address the Irish backstop question without talking about customs?” said one British diplomat.


    Well, quite. As has been pointed out on here from the beginning......
    Where do we get our diplomats from ? This one is a class idiot. The whole idea of the "backstop" was precisely if no solution was found it would be in place. No regulatory divergence [ customs union , in other words ] is the default, unless other solutions are found.
    The “default” remains that we exit the EU to WTO terms on 29th March 2019, unless something else is agreed by everyone in the meantime.
    Default looking better by the day.
    Indeed. We need to now be putting serious efforts into ‘No Deal” planning, making sure that existing third party trade deals with the EU can roll over and that the planes keep flying. And the EU need to see that we are doing this.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    FF43 said:


    Lawyers for Britain elide two things.

    A customs union is a WTO concept, concerning tariffs. A customs union applies tariffs on goods, once, as they enter the union, so you don't need to apply them again as they cross into the other constituent territory. Components are particularly complicated. When a car manufacturer in one territory imports a headlamp from outside both territories and then includes it in a car, does the car now attract import duties as it passes from one territory to the other? A customs union is a binary thing. You are either in one or not. If you are, you notify the WTO of the fact.

    The Single Market isn't a formal concept,unlike a customs union. It is an agreement between the EU countries, including a couple of non-EU members such as Norway, to apply a common regulatory system so goods sold in one territory are automatically compliant in the other.

    It is possible to be in a customs union but not the SIngle Market. In that case goods need to be tested for compliance at the border. The same personnel will do this as would apply customs duties but it is a different set of checks that applies to all goods coming from the other territory. Outside a customs union you check goods coming from outside both territories at the same border.

    If you want a frictionless border you need to be in both the Customs Union and the SIngle Market.

    You are correct. If you want a 'frictionless' border you have to be in the CU and SM.

    We should not be seeking a 'frictionless' border, either for the UK generally or NI. We should be seeking a customs border with as little friction as possible.

    You keep saying that there is no way to resolve the 'Brexit contradiction' but there is and always has been - create a border between NI and ROI and between the UK and EU based on Maxfac. This will involve some limited friction on goods and none on people (for NI).

    If May had not been so stupid as to agree that there can be 'no infrastructure' at the NI border this would be relatively easy. Nobody in Ireland really cares if their number plate is scanned at the border any more than people really care if their number plate is scanned entering Central London. As long as they don't have to stop, they won't care.

    With no border infrastructure at all, it is harder, but more than possible to create a customs border that does not require physical checks at the border.
    Except that no-one seems to have noticed the ANPR cameras already all over the NI border region.
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4awGC8tfuBo&feature=youtu.be
  • agingjbagingjb Posts: 76
    Do all remainers want to shut down libraries?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,956
    Sandpit said:

    geoffw said:

    Sandpit said:

    surby said:

    Well that wasn't so hard in the end, was it?

    https://www.ft.com/content/8834c20a-59a1-11e8-b8b2-d6ceb45fa9d0

    British officials, however, argue that this is a problem of Mr Barnier’s own making.

    “How can you address the Irish backstop question without talking about customs?” said one British diplomat.


    Well, quite. As has been pointed out on here from the beginning......
    Where do we get our diplomats from ? This one is a class idiot. The whole idea of the "backstop" was precisely if no solution was found it would be in place. No regulatory divergence [ customs union , in other words ] is the default, unless other solutions are found.
    The “default” remains that we exit the EU to WTO terms on 29th March 2019, unless something else is agreed by everyone in the meantime.
    Default looking better by the day.
    Indeed. We need to now be putting serious efforts into ‘No Deal” planning, making sure that existing third party trade deals with the EU can roll over and that the planes keep flying. And the EU need to see that we are doing this.
    The problem with rolling over those trade deals is that it ain't happening with a no deal Brexit.

    It's not in their interests, and we don't have the 'bandwith' to cope with it, especially in such a short space of time.

    If it is no deal then the planes aren't flying (it'll be in violation of their insurance) and ditto food coming into the UK.

    I suspect the government will not last a week in that scenario and the likes of Boris and Gove are dragged into the street.

    Leavers will be asked to recant or be fired into the Irish Sea via trebuchet.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    FF43 said:

    Dura_Ace said:



    It’s quite funny that @archer101au - dismissed as a fruitcake by both Remainers and Leavers on here - seems to have called all of this right.

    He is the only leaver on here with an intellectually coherent synthesis, in the Hegelian sense, of Brexit.
    I agree. @archer101au makes an intellectually coherent case for a Brexit Britian that shuts itself off from the world and doesn't care about Project Fear style consequences. The problem, though, is that Brexit was sold on nothing important changing. We keep everything we have and can spend the membership fees on the NHS. That benign scenario depends on a close relationship with the EU that will be on the EU's terms. We could be members of the EU helping to shape the regulation that directly affects us, or we are rule takers of the EU doing what we are told. Problem is we rejected membership and influence on the basis that we would "take control" and instead end up as rule-takers and doing what we are told.
    No it doesn't. This is why all of your analysis is completely and utterly flawed. You may want it to be true but the EU accounts for just 14% of global GDP, extracting further economic gain out of that 14% to the exclusion of the rest has never made any sense. Staying in the customs union guarantees that outcome.

    At the end of the day, the UK has its own currency and has the monetary tools to see off a recession, there really are very few scenarios in which even a WTO crash out will result in the doom and gloom you regularly predict.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    edited May 2018

    Elliot said:

    Elliot said:

    Elliot said:

    TOPPING said:

    Didn't it start 5,000 years ago? How many generations is that?

    Are you really stupid enough to claim Israel has the right to occupy land which has been majority Muslim Arab for centuries based on the state of play prior to the Roman Empire?
    Are you disputing Israel's right to hold territories it took off its attackers in 67 until a peace deal is reached?

    Or are you disputing Israel's right to exist at all? Like Hamas still does who control Gaza and are organising today's violence.
    The former. You do not have a right to permanently occupy land lived in by a majority that do not want to be part of your state.
    They're not permanently occupying land, they're temporarily doing so until a peace deal is reached.

    Unfortunately the current "leaders" in Gaza dispute Israel's right to even exist so peace doesn't seem close.
    A temporary period of 51 years. During which they demolish and evacuate Palestinians in that territory and legalise Israeli colonists. Countries that want to give the land back always engage in settlement of the occupied land. Your apologism is an obvious joke of a position.
    Indeed. And it is obvious that the Israeli government realises that it holds all the aces and is thus quite content for the status quo to continue for another 100 years or more if necessary. The Palestinians, as an utterly conquered people, have nothing to offer to an Israeli state which is devoid of any concept of humanity and is content to treat Palestinians as cattle whether or not they capitulate in totality.
    You are right, the Israeli government does hold all the aces.

    Thing is, it needs to, because the ideology that it faces from those against them who wield power (Hamas, Hezbollah), is exactly the same ideology that sent eg. Khalid Masood onto Westminster Bridge, and Khuram Shazad Butt, Rachid Redouane, and Youssef Zaghba onto London Bridge.

    cf. Egypt (where of course there is also a Gaza border).
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,542

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    That has been my central prediction since the referendum. The Brexit contradiction needs to b resolved somehow.

    But that central prediction is based on the assumption that it will not be resolved and we'll simply enter into purgatory, wondering what happened. That seems highly unlikely to me.
    Part of that contradiction is that the British people voted to leave the European Union. I think that's a bigger deal than I suspect you do. I don't think the contradiction can really be resolved either inside or outside the EU, but something has to occupy the vacuum.
    I do think it's a very big deal, which is why I've often spoken in terms of 'national humiliation' and 'Suez on steroids'. On the other hand, if we were talking about some other country, it wouldn't be seen as a reason why the logic of the situation won't play out as it will for us.
    I do agree with you that Brexit is Suez on steroids. Brexit is the most interesting thing that has happened in Europe since the collapse of the Soviet Union. It's a shame we'll get the fallout.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    MaxPB said:

    FF43 said:

    Dura_Ace said:



    It’s quite funny that @archer101au - dismissed as a fruitcake by both Remainers and Leavers on here - seems to have called all of this right.

    He is the only leaver on here with an intellectually coherent synthesis, in the Hegelian sense, of Brexit.
    I agree. @archer101au makes an intellectually coherent case for a Brexit Britian that shuts itself off from the world and doesn't care about Project Fear style consequences. The problem, though, is that Brexit was sold on nothing important changing. We keep everything we have and can spend the membership fees on the NHS. That benign scenario depends on a close relationship with the EU that will be on the EU's terms. We could be members of the EU helping to shape the regulation that directly affects us, or we are rule takers of the EU doing what we are told. Problem is we rejected membership and influence on the basis that we would "take control" and instead end up as rule-takers and doing what we are told.
    No it doesn't. This is why all of your analysis is completely and utterly flawed. You may want it to be true but the EU accounts for just 14% of global GDP, extracting further economic gain out of that 14% to the exclusion of the rest has never made any sense. Staying in the customs union guarantees that outcome.

    At the end of the day, the UK has its own currency and has the monetary tools to see off a recession, there really are very few scenarios in which even a WTO crash out will result in the doom and gloom you regularly predict.
    At the end of the day, the UK is a post-imperial relic which would shatter if it went to a WTO terms relationship with the EU.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    FF43 said:

    Dura_Ace said:



    It’s quite funny that @archer101au - dismissed as a fruitcake by both Remainers and Leavers on here - seems to have called all of this right.

    He is the only leaver on here with an intellectually coherent synthesis, in the Hegelian sense, of Brexit.
    I agree. @archer101au makes an intellectually coherent case for a Brexit Britian that shuts itself off from the world and doesn't care about Project Fear style consequences. The problem, though, is that Brexit was sold on nothing important changing. We keep everything we have and can spend the membership fees on the NHS. That benign scenario depends on a close relationship with the EU that will be on the EU's terms. We could be members of the EU helping to shape the regulation that directly affects us, or we are rule takers of the EU doing what we are told. Problem is we rejected membership and influence on the basis that we would "take control" and instead end up as rule-takers and doing what we are told.
    It was always clear that the closest thing that exists in the real world that meets the actual demands of the different strands of Leaver opinion was EU membership. That meant that from the outset the negotiations were not in substance about leaving the EU but just a continuation of Cameron's renegotiation by other means. When contagion proved to be an illusion and Brexit failed to become an existential threat to the EU, it could only end one way.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603

    MaxPB said:

    FF43 said:

    Dura_Ace said:



    It’s quite funny that @archer101au - dismissed as a fruitcake by both Remainers and Leavers on here - seems to have called all of this right.

    He is the only leaver on here with an intellectually coherent synthesis, in the Hegelian sense, of Brexit.
    I agree. @archer101au makes an intellectually coherent case for a Brexit Britian that shuts itself off from the world and doesn't care about Project Fear style consequences. The problem, though, is that Brexit was sold on nothing important changing. We keep everything we have and can spend the membership fees on the NHS. That benign scenario depends on a close relationship with the EU that will be on the EU's terms. We could be members of the EU helping to shape the regulation that directly affects us, or we are rule takers of the EU doing what we are told. Problem is we rejected membership and influence on the basis that we would "take control" and instead end up as rule-takers and doing what we are told.
    No it doesn't. This is why all of your analysis is completely and utterly flawed. You may want it to be true but the EU accounts for just 14% of global GDP, extracting further economic gain out of that 14% to the exclusion of the rest has never made any sense. Staying in the customs union guarantees that outcome.

    At the end of the day, the UK has its own currency and has the monetary tools to see off a recession, there really are very few scenarios in which even a WTO crash out will result in the doom and gloom you regularly predict.
    At the end of the day, the UK is a post-imperial relic which would shatter if it went to a WTO terms relationship with the EU.
    Again, your hopes and dreams are not close to reality.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    MaxPB said:

    the EU accounts for just 14% of global GDP, extracting further economic gain out of that 14% to the exclusion of the rest has never made any sense. Staying in the customs union guarantees that outcome.

    No it doesn't. This is why all of your analysis is completely and utterly flawed.

    The EU is signing trade deals with the rest of the World, and as members we get our share of that.

    Being a member gives us more clout in the negotiations, and always has.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    MaxPB said:

    FF43 said:

    Dura_Ace said:



    It’s quite funny that @archer101au - dismissed as a fruitcake by both Remainers and Leavers on here - seems to have called all of this right.

    He is the only leaver on here with an intellectually coherent synthesis, in the Hegelian sense, of Brexit.
    I agree. @archer101au makes an intellectually coherent case for a Brexit Britian that shuts itself off from the world and doesn't care about Project Fear style consequences. The problem, though, is that Brexit was sold on nothing important changing. We keep everything we have and can spend the membership fees on the NHS. That benign scenario depends on a close relationship with the EU that will be on the EU's terms. We could be members of the EU helping to shape the regulation that directly affects us, or we are rule takers of the EU doing what we are told. Problem is we rejected membership and influence on the basis that we would "take control" and instead end up as rule-takers and doing what we are told.
    No it doesn't. This is why all of your analysis is completely and utterly flawed. You may want it to be true but the EU accounts for just 14% of global GDP, extracting further economic gain out of that 14% to the exclusion of the rest has never made any sense. Staying in the customs union guarantees that outcome.

    At the end of the day, the UK has its own currency and has the monetary tools to see off a recession, there really are very few scenarios in which even a WTO crash out will result in the doom and gloom you regularly predict.
    @FF43's central premise is correct. People were promised the upside with no downside.

    You, meanwhile, are also correct in that there will be an imperceptible diminution of wealth in the country which few will notice, and with our own currency, we are insulated to a certain extent from the worst of the global winds. Funny, however, to see you agreeing with eg. Krugman et al who want the UK to use that position to stimulate our economy.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    Sandpit said:

    geoffw said:

    Sandpit said:

    surby said:

    Well that wasn't so hard in the end, was it?

    https://www.ft.com/content/8834c20a-59a1-11e8-b8b2-d6ceb45fa9d0

    British officials, however, argue that this is a problem of Mr Barnier’s own making.

    “How can you address the Irish backstop question without talking about customs?” said one British diplomat.


    Well, quite. As has been pointed out on here from the beginning......
    Where do we get our diplomats from ? This one is a class idiot. The whole idea of the "backstop" was precisely if no solution was found it would be in place. No regulatory divergence [ customs union , in other words ] is the default, unless other solutions are found.
    The “default” remains that we exit the EU to WTO terms on 29th March 2019, unless something else is agreed by everyone in the meantime.
    Default looking better by the day.
    Indeed. We need to now be putting serious efforts into ‘No Deal” planning, making sure that existing third party trade deals with the EU can roll over and that the planes keep flying. And the EU need to see that we are doing this.
    I suspect the government will not last a week in that scenario

    How long will other EU governments last in that scenario ?

    Which is why it wont happen.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    TGOHF said:

    How long will other EU governments last in that scenario ?

    Which is why it wont happen.

    That's just a rehash of "the German carmakers will come to our aid"

    The "citizens of Europe" would rise up.

    Bollocks.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    Scott_P said:

    MaxPB said:

    the EU accounts for just 14% of global GDP, extracting further economic gain out of that 14% to the exclusion of the rest has never made any sense. Staying in the customs union guarantees that outcome.

    No it doesn't. This is why all of your analysis is completely and utterly flawed.

    The EU is signing trade deals with the rest of the World, and as members we get our share of that.

    Being a member gives us more clout in the negotiations, and always has.
    It doesn't and never has. In every single major trade deal UK interests have taken a back seat to German automakers and French agriculture. The former still holds some benefit for the UK given we have a fairly strong auto sector (though in some cases it has resulted in lost jobs) but the latter holds absolutely no economic benefit to the UK.

    Additionally, as a member we would continue to be forced to abide by the CAP and CFP, both of which are economically and environmentally damaging.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,846

    To prevent a border of some sort in Ireland we have to be in the Single Market. That is a given.

    If we are in the Single Market then there is freedom of movement. Agreeing to stay in a CU simply sets the stage for remaining in the SM whether you, Corbyn or May want it or not.

    Neither the single market nor the customs union alone are sufficient to avoid a border. It's true that if you had to pick one, the single market gets you further than the customs union, but we need both. The only way round this is to jettison Northern Ireland.
    Or accept there will be some sort of border as far as technology allows.

    Now personally I am in favour of a united Ireland but not by imposition. I return to my previous position which is if Ireland and the EU want a hard border then that is their affair. We should simply proceed as if there is no need for one and let them play catch up.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,542
    edited May 2018
    MaxPB said:

    FF43 said:

    Dura_Ace said:



    It’s quite funny that @archer101au - dismissed as a fruitcake by both Remainers and Leavers on here - seems to have called all of this right.

    He is the only leaver on here with an intellectually coherent synthesis, in the Hegelian sense, of Brexit.
    I agree. @archer101au makes an intellectually coherent case for a Brexit Britian that shuts itself off from the world and doesn't care about Project Fear style consequences. The problem, though, is that Brexit was sold on nothing important changing. We keep everything we have and can spend the membership fees on the NHS. That benign scenario depends on a close relationship with the EU that will be on the EU's terms. We could be members of the EU helping to shape the regulation that directly affects us, or we are rule takers of the EU doing what we are told. Problem is we rejected membership and influence on the basis that we would "take control" and instead end up as rule-takers and doing what we are told.
    No it doesn't. This is why all of your analysis is completely and utterly flawed. You may want it to be true but the EU accounts for just 14% of global GDP, extracting further economic gain out of that 14% to the exclusion of the rest has never made any sense. Staying in the customs union guarantees that outcome.

    At the end of the day, the UK has its own currency and has the monetary tools to see off a recession, there really are very few scenarios in which even a WTO crash out will result in the doom and gloom you regularly predict.
    Certainly the UK can cut itself off. My hypothesis is that it won't. Third countries also work through the European Union. The idea that third countries would be a substitute for a "declining Europe" was another of the false assumptions behind the Leave vote - along with the assumption that OF COURSE the EU would give us a deal on our terms.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    edited May 2018

    Sandpit said:

    geoffw said:

    Sandpit said:

    surby said:

    Well that wasn't so hard in the end, was it?

    https://www.ft.com/content/8834c20a-59a1-11e8-b8b2-d6ceb45fa9d0

    British officials, however, argue that this is a problem of Mr Barnier’s own making.

    “How can you address the Irish backstop question without talking about customs?” said one British diplomat.


    Well, quite. As has been pointed out on here from the beginning......
    Where do we get our diplomats from ? This one is a class idiot. The whole idea of the "backstop" was precisely if no solution was found it would be in place. No regulatory divergence [ customs union , in other words ] is the default, unless other solutions are found.
    The “default” remains that we exit the EU to WTO terms on 29th March 2019, unless something else is agreed by everyone in the meantime.
    Default looking better by the day.
    Indeed. We need to now be putting serious efforts into ‘No Deal” planning, making sure that existing third party trade deals with the EU can roll over and that the planes keep flying. And the EU need to see that we are doing this.
    The problem with rolling over those trade deals is that it ain't happening with a no deal Brexit.

    It's not in their interests, and we don't have the 'bandwith' to cope with it, especially in such a short space of time.

    If it is no deal then the planes aren't flying (it'll be in violation of their insurance) and ditto food coming into the UK.

    I suspect the government will not last a week in that scenario and the likes of Boris and Gove are dragged into the street.

    Leavers will be asked to recant or be fired into the Irish Sea via trebuchet.
    Keeping the planes flying is relatively easy, and doesn’t rely on the EU for the most part. We can use the mechanisms of the ICAO and WTO to deal with most of the regulatory problems that Brexit would bring with regard to aviation.

    As an aside, I saw a comment the other day that a majority of EASA staff are British, which will give them no end of problems if we are forced to leave that organisation. One doesn’t just find hundreds of experts overnight if forced to make all the Brits redundant from EASA - to be immediately rehired by own own CAA.

    I imagine that a situation that leads to widespread disruption can be pinned on the EU’s intransigence as much as the British government. Industry will quickly be on the side of getting a trade agreement signed rather than slavish devotion to the institutions of the EU.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    We should simply proceed as if there is no need for one

    TAKE BACK CONTROL OF OUR BORDERS !!!!

    (no, not that one...)
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    edited May 2018
    Scott_P said:

    TGOHF said:

    How long will other EU governments last in that scenario ?

    Which is why it wont happen.

    That's just a rehash of "the German carmakers will come to our aid"

    The "citizens of Europe" would rise up.

    Bollocks.
    Your disparagement of the impact of the spending power of the Uk is what makes remainia so unappealing.

    Your dream of a hard Brexit only having massive implications for the Uk is for the birds.

    Flights grounded, hard Irish borders and once in a generation slumps are simply fantasy porn for Europhiles.

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    edited May 2018
    Talking of flights, @TSE did you manage to sort a ticket for the match?
    I’m in Kiev at the moment, and the going rate seems to be around €1000. The Ukrainians are really getting into it, posters and flags everywhere, should be a fantastic night.
    Sadly it looks like I’m gonna have to go back to Dubai next week and not be able to make it :cry:

    Edit: and Ramadan Kareem, to yourself and other PBers of the Islamic faith.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    FF43 said:

    Dura_Ace said:



    It’s quite funny that @archer101au - dismissed as a fruitcake by both Remainers and Leavers on here - seems to have called all of this right.

    He is the only leaver on here with an intellectually coherent synthesis, in the Hegelian sense, of Brexit.
    I agree. @archer101au makes an intellectually coherent case for a Brexit Britian that shuts itself off from the world and doesn't care about Project Fear style consequences. The problem, though, is that Brexit was sold on nothing important changing. We keep everything we have and can spend the membership fees on the NHS. That benign scenario depends on a close relationship with the EU that will be on the EU's terms. We could be members of the EU helping to shape the regulation that directly affects us, or we are rule takers of the EU doing what we are told. Problem is we rejected membership and influence on the basis that we would "take control" and instead end up as rule-takers and doing what we are told.
    No it doesn't. This is why all of your analysis is completely and utterly flawed. You may want it to be true but the EU accounts for just 14% of global GDP, extracting further economic gain out of that 14% to the exclusion of the rest has never made any sense. Staying in the customs union guarantees that outcome.

    At the end of the day, the UK has its own currency and has the monetary tools to see off a recession, there really are very few scenarios in which even a WTO crash out will result in the doom and gloom you regularly predict.
    @FF43's central premise is correct. People were promised the upside with no downside.

    You, meanwhile, are also correct in that there will be an imperceptible diminution of wealth in the country which few will notice, and with our own currency, we are insulated to a certain extent from the worst of the global winds. Funny, however, to see you agreeing with eg. Krugman et al who want the UK to use that position to stimulate our economy.
    I don't think people were promised that at all. In fact we had months of being told that a vote to leave would end up in the worst recession of all time. People still voted to leave. As for the £350m claims I said before the election the government should have delivered it, instead we campaigned on a policy to steal people's houses if they got dementia.

    It's important to remember I hold no dogmatic attachment to monetarism or even "free markets". You know my policies on the housing market and certain utilities are probably not in step with current centre right thinking.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    TGOHF said:

    Sandpit said:

    geoffw said:

    Sandpit said:

    surby said:

    Well that wasn't so hard in the end, was it?

    https://www.ft.com/content/8834c20a-59a1-11e8-b8b2-d6ceb45fa9d0

    British officials, however, argue that this is a problem of Mr Barnier’s own making.

    “How can you address the Irish backstop question without talking about customs?” said one British diplomat.


    Well, quite. As has been pointed out on here from the beginning......
    Where do we get our diplomats from ? This one is a class idiot. The whole idea of the "backstop" was precisely if no solution was found it would be in place. No regulatory divergence [ customs union , in other words ] is the default, unless other solutions are found.
    The “default” remains that we exit the EU to WTO terms on 29th March 2019, unless something else is agreed by everyone in the meantime.
    Default looking better by the day.
    Indeed. We need to now be putting serious efforts into ‘No Deal” planning, making sure that existing third party trade deals with the EU can roll over and that the planes keep flying. And the EU need to see that we are doing this.
    I suspect the government will not last a week in that scenario

    How long will other EU governments last in that scenario ?

    Which is why it wont happen.
    In the scenario where we start preparing for no deal they will simply enjoy the economic boost from companies shifting operations. If we want to inflict any actual economic pain we have to go off the cliff ourselves, but the UK government would feel the heat well before we got that far.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516
    MaxPB said:

    Scott_P said:

    MaxPB said:

    the EU accounts for just 14% of global GDP, extracting further economic gain out of that 14% to the exclusion of the rest has never made any sense. Staying in the customs union guarantees that outcome.

    No it doesn't. This is why all of your analysis is completely and utterly flawed.

    The EU is signing trade deals with the rest of the World, and as members we get our share of that.

    Being a member gives us more clout in the negotiations, and always has.
    It doesn't and never has. In every single major trade deal UK interests have taken a back seat to German automakers and French agriculture. The former still holds some benefit for the UK given we have a fairly strong auto sector (though in some cases it has resulted in lost jobs) but the latter holds absolutely no economic benefit to the UK.

    Additionally, as a member we would continue to be forced to abide by the CAP and CFP, both of which are economically and environmentally damaging.
    Exactly right. The most influence we ever had in trade was under Blair when he got Mandelson as trade commissioner. Years of work in a new WTO deal collapsed when the French briefed against him to other non-EU countries.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    TGOHF said:

    Your disparagement of the impact of the spending power of the Uk is what makes remainia so unappealing.

    We have massive spending power, as a full member of the EU.

    Your failure to recognise the threat is what makes Leaving so intellectually bankrupt.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,544
    The introduction of another bargaining chip:
    https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/960897/Brexit-news-Gavin-Williamson-US-American-military-jets-European-aircrafts

    (Which we'll probably make a mess of, given the players involved.)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,706

    MaxPB said:

    FF43 said:

    Dura_Ace said:



    It’s quite funny that @archer101au - dismissed as a fruitcake by both Remainers and Leavers on here - seems to have called all of this right.

    He is the only leaver on here with an intellectually coherent synthesis, in the Hegelian sense, of Brexit.
    I agree. @archer101au makes an intellectually coherent case for a Brexit Britian that shuts itself off from the world and doesn't care about Project Fear style consequences. The problem, though, is that Brexit was sold on nothing important changing. We keep everything we have and can spend the membership fees on the NHS. That benign scenario depends on a close relationship with the EU that will be on the EU's terms. We could be members of the EU helping to shape the regulation that directly affects us, or we are rule takers of the EU doing what we are told. Problem is we rejected membership and influence on the basis that we would "take control" and instead end up as rule-takers and doing what we are told.
    No it doesn't. This is why all of your analysis is completely and utterly flawed. You may want it to be true but the EU accounts for just 14% of global GDP, extracting further economic gain out of that 14% to the exclusion of the rest has never made any sense. Staying in the customs union guarantees that outcome.

    At the end of the day, the UK has its own currency and has the monetary tools to see off a recession, there really are very few scenarios in which even a WTO crash out will result in the doom and gloom you regularly predict.
    At the end of the day, the UK is a post-imperial relic which would shatter if it went to a WTO terms relationship with the EU.
    The UK has been around for far longer than the EU has and you could equally argue the EU is mainly just a post WW2 externally protectionist relic trying to create a new superpower to rival the US
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    But is it conceivable that some of the shenanigans over customs are the product of a brain fade?

    One Tory insider suggests, "nothing would surprise me".


    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-44154035
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    edited May 2018

    To prevent a border of some sort in Ireland we have to be in the Single Market. That is a given.

    If we are in the Single Market then there is freedom of movement. Agreeing to stay in a CU simply sets the stage for remaining in the SM whether you, Corbyn or May want it or not.

    Neither the single market nor the customs union alone are sufficient to avoid a border. It's true that if you had to pick one, the single market gets you further than the customs union, but we need both. The only way round this is to jettison Northern Ireland.
    Or accept there will be some sort of border as far as technology allows.

    Now personally I am in favour of a united Ireland but not by imposition. I return to my previous position which is if Ireland and the EU want a hard border then that is their affair. We should simply proceed as if there is no need for one and let them play catch up.
    The lack of political nous in saying so what if there is a border in Ireland is astounding. To be so unaware of what happened in Ireland over the past 10, 40, 400+ years is extraordinary. And all in the pursuit of your blessed Brexit.

    How many different ways do you need to be told: there will be no border on or around the island of Ireland. If you really think the UK government is going to fuck with this issue you are more clueless than even your daily posts suggest.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    TGOHF said:

    Sandpit said:

    geoffw said:

    Sandpit said:

    surby said:

    Well that wasn't so hard in the end, was it?

    https://www.ft.com/content/8834c20a-59a1-11e8-b8b2-d6ceb45fa9d0

    British officials, however, argue that this is a problem of Mr Barnier’s own making.

    “How can you address the Irish backstop question without talking about customs?” said one British diplomat.


    Well, quite. As has been pointed out on here from the beginning......
    Where do we get our diplomats from ? This one is a class idiot. The whole idea of the "backstop" was precisely if no solution was found it would be in place. No regulatory divergence [ customs union , in other words ] is the default, unless other solutions are found.
    The “default” remains that we exit the EU to WTO terms on 29th March 2019, unless something else is agreed by everyone in the meantime.
    Default looking better by the day.
    Indeed. We need to now be putting serious efforts into ‘No Deal” planning, making sure that existing third party trade deals with the EU can roll over and that the planes keep flying. And the EU need to see that we are doing this.
    I suspect the government will not last a week in that scenario

    How long will other EU governments last in that scenario ?

    Which is why it wont happen.
    In the scenario where we start preparing for no deal they will simply enjoy the economic boost from companies shifting operations.
    Spanish hotels will relocate to Newquay to scoop up Uk based tourist trade which can't fly to Spain ?

    It's a view.

  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,846

    Sorry but as has already been quoted by Barnesian it does mean exactly that.

    While I agree the EU will likely interpret it that way for the UK, since when has Turkey had Freedom of Movement?
    Turkey has a hard border with the EU. A very very hard border.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,706

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    Mr. HYUFD, disagree. Held the view for years that there's a broad spectrum of acceptable leaving options. My only firm red line, which I've held, is that being in the customs union whilst leaving the EU is insane.

    With the greatest of respect, your red line is very unrepresentative of the bulk of the people who voted Leave. This would be abundantly clear to anyone who canvassed for it door to door.

    As others have pointed out, it took us 7 years to transition into the CU. The intensity of our EU trade is much higher than Commonwealth trade was before 1973, so we can’t afford to get it wrong.

    Eurosceptics kept the flame burning for 41 years before June 2016. We should have a little more patience.
    Sorry, Morris_Dancer is completely correct. There is no sensible economic basis whatsoever for the UK to join the CU if it wants to leave the SM. It is, indeed, insane.

    The only reason that CU is being raised is that it would require the UK to align with SM regulations - it is a straw man for continued membership of the SM.
    Neither May nor Corbyn support continued membership of the SM, both now support staying in a CU though for a number of years
    And the Single Market is next. If we are outside the Single Market we still need that Irexit.
    No it is not as neither May nor Corbyn back the single market and both are absolutely firm on that.

    Using alignment to the CU to negate an Irish hard border is the North and Midlands
    If they do not concede on the SM then the whole debate over the CU with regard to the Irish border is pointless.
    No it isn't as there is no need to concede on the SM over ee Canada
    To prevent a border of some sort in Ireland we have to be in the u, Corbyn or May want it or not.
    No, regulatory alignment to avoid a hard border in Ireland does not technically require staying in the Single Market nor does it require freedom of movement.

    The basis of that principle was already agreed with the EU in December to progress to FTA talks
    Sorry but as has already been quoted by Barnesian it does mean exactly that.
    No it doesn't, the Customs Union does not require FoM only full membership of the Single Market does
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516
    FF43 said:

    MaxPB said:

    FF43 said:

    Dura_Ace said:



    It’s quite funny that @archer101au - dismissed as a fruitcake by both Remainers and Leavers on here - seems to have called all of this right.

    He is the only leaver on here with an intellectually coherent synthesis, in the Hegelian sense, of Brexit.
    I agree. @archer101au makes an intellectually coherent case for a Brexit Britian that shuts itself off from the world and doesn't care about Project Fear style consequences. The problem, though, is that Brexit was sold on nothing important changing. We keep everything we have and can spend the membership fees on the NHS. That benign scenario depends on a close relationship with the EU that will be on the EU's terms. We could be members of the EU helping to shape the regulation that directly affects us, or we are rule takers of the EU doing what we are told. Problem is we rejected membership and influence on the basis that we would "take control" and instead end up as rule-takers and doing what we are told.
    No it doesn't. This is why all of your analysis is completely and utterly flawed. You may want it to be true but the EU accounts for just 14% of global GDP, extracting further economic gain out of that 14% to the exclusion of the rest has never made any sense. Staying in the customs union guarantees that outcome.

    At the end of the day, the UK has its own currency and has the monetary tools to see off a recession, there really are very few scenarios in which even a WTO crash out will result in the doom and gloom you regularly predict.
    Certainly the UK can cut itself off. My hypothesis is that it won't. Third countries also work through the European Union. The idea that third countries would be a substitute for a "declining Europe" was another of the false assumptions behind the Leave vote - along with the assumption that OF COURSE the EU would give us a deal on our terms.
    Remainers have to constantly misrepresent the past. I remember very clearly that Remainers argued the EU would 100% set the terms, while Leavers said it would be a negotiation in the middle. As we have seen the EU has already backed down from free movement and permanent ECJ law over its citizens in the UK.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,956
    Sandpit said:


    Keeping the planes flying is relatively easy, and doesn’t rely on the EU for the most part. We can use the mechanisms of the ICAO and WTO to deal with most of the regulatory problems that Brexit would bring with regard to aviation.

    As an aside, I saw a comment the other day that a majority of EASA staff are British, which will give them no end of problems if we are forced to leave that organisation. One doesn’t just find hundreds of experts overnight if forced to make all the Brits redundant from EASA - to be immediately rehired by own own CAA.

    I imagine that a situation that leads to widespread disruption can be pinned on the EU’s intransigence as much as the British government. Industry will quickly be on the side of getting a trade agreement signed rather than slavish devotion to the institutions of the EU.

    European Medicines Agency and the European Banking Authority staff were mostly British and that disruption has been managed to the UK's detriment.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    TGOHF said:

    TGOHF said:

    Sandpit said:

    geoffw said:

    Sandpit said:

    surby said:

    Well that wasn't so hard in the end, was it?

    https://www.ft.com/content/8834c20a-59a1-11e8-b8b2-d6ceb45fa9d0

    British officials, however, argue that this is a problem of Mr Barnier’s own making.

    “How can you address the Irish backstop question without talking about customs?” said one British diplomat.


    Well, quite. As has been pointed out on here from the beginning......
    Where do we get our diplomats from ? This one is a class idiot. The whole idea of the "backstop" was precisely if no solution was found it would be in place. No regulatory divergence [ customs union , in other words ] is the default, unless other solutions are found.
    The “default” remains that we exit the EU to WTO terms on 29th March 2019, unless something else is agreed by everyone in the meantime.
    Default looking better by the day.
    Indeed. We need to now be putting serious efforts into ‘No Deal” planning, making sure that existing third party trade deals with the EU can roll over and that the planes keep flying. And the EU need to see that we are doing this.
    I suspect the government will not last a week in that scenario

    How long will other EU governments last in that scenario ?

    Which is why it wont happen.
    In the scenario where we start preparing for no deal they will simply enjoy the economic boost from companies shifting operations.
    Spanish hotels will relocate to Newquay to scoop up Uk based tourist trade which can't fly to Spain ?

    It's a view.

    No, it's a straw man. As I said, to get to the point where planes are grounded you actually have to go off the cliff. The preparation comes before then, and British businesses won't just sit there egging you on.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    TGOHF said:

    TGOHF said:

    Sandpit said:

    geoffw said:

    Sandpit said:

    surby said:

    Well that wasn't so hard in the end, was it?

    https://www.ft.com/content/8834c20a-59a1-11e8-b8b2-d6ceb45fa9d0

    British officials, however, argue that this is a problem of Mr Barnier’s own making.

    “How can you address the Irish backstop question without talking about customs?” said one British diplomat.


    Well, quite. As has been pointed out on here from the beginning......
    Where do we get our diplomats from ? This one is a class idiot. The whole idea of the "backstop" was precisely if no solution was found it would be in place. No regulatory divergence [ customs union , in other words ] is the default, unless other solutions are found.
    The “default” remains that we exit the EU to WTO terms on 29th March 2019, unless something else is agreed by everyone in the meantime.
    Default looking better by the day.
    Indeed. We need to now be putting serious efforts into ‘No Deal” planning, making sure that existing third party trade deals with the EU can roll over and that the planes keep flying. And the EU need to see that we are doing this.
    I suspect the government will not last a week in that scenario

    How long will other EU governments last in that scenario ?

    Which is why it wont happen.
    In the scenario where we start preparing for no deal they will simply enjoy the economic boost from companies shifting operations.
    Spanish hotels will relocate to Newquay to scoop up Uk based tourist trade which can't fly to Spain ?

    It's a view.

    No, it's a straw man. As I said, to get to the point where planes are grounded you actually have to go off the cliff. The preparation comes before then, and British businesses won't just sit there egging you on.
    It's a straw man to suggest the Spanish tourist trade would take up pitchforks if there was the possibility of flights being canned from Britain ? It wouldn't be Downing Street they would be marching on.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,706

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    The policy looked for a large alternative source of funding for social care. I personally find the view that people should have their personal care paid out of general taxation so that they can leave their £1m house to their children untouched genuinely immoral and repulsive. The premise that someone else should pay is far too deeply ingrained in our culture.

    But just maybe your GE manifesto was not the place to do it.

    I think such reforms can be done but they need to be heavily trailed and tested first, and public support slowly built.

    If you try and bounce them on the voters during an election campaign, they will smell a rat and vote accordingly.
    That is exactly right. The Dementia tax was good policy but poor politics. The manifesto should have given a hard commitment on increasing the legacy allowance to £100k and then given promised to consult on "measures to harmonise the financial burden placed on those with different forms of ongoing care".

    That could have led to a White Paper in the first year of the parliament and allowed for proposals to be tweaked in response to the consultation without it looking like headless-chicken syndrome, which it inevitably does in the hot-house of an election campaign. The new system could have been introduced around 2019 giving people time to get used to it before the next GE.

    But no, a couple of policy wonks thought they knew political campaigning better than Lynton Crosby does.
    The Dementia Tax was a bad policy and bad politics, sneeking it out mid Parliament would not work either, see the Poll Tax
    Why is it a bad policy to make people who can afford to pay for something that they receive? Particularly when other people, in an identical financial situation, pay to receive their similar care?
    As it would negate the benefit of Osborne's inheritance tax cut for many with relatives needing personal at home care.

    As I said NI and council tax will be the primary source of funds going forward for social care
    just because something increases someone's tax bill, it doesn't necessarily mean that it's bad policy. On that basis, why shouldn't the state pay for people's care home fees?
    That would certainly be a popular policy though given the significant extra cost of residential care compared to at home personal care is very unlikely ever to be proposed
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,956
    Sandpit said:

    Talking of flights, @TSE did you manage to sort a ticket for the match?
    I’m in Kiev at the moment, and the going rate seems to be around €1000. The Ukrainians are really getting into it, posters and flags everywhere, should be a fantastic night.
    Sadly it looks like I’m gonna have to go back to Dubai next week and not be able to make it :cry:

    Edit: and Ramadan Kareem, to yourself and other PBers of the Islamic faith.

    My friend sourced me a ticket through one of the sponsors.

    The price, I have to eat a pizza with pineapple on it this weekend.

    The logistics of getting to Kyiv is a nightmare, it literally is planes, trains, and automobiles, watch the Solo film next Thursday morning in Sheffield, then haul ass.

    Accommodation wise I'm still not sorted.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,542
    Elliot said:

    Remainers have to constantly misrepresent the past. I remember very clearly that Remainers argued the EU would 100% set the terms, while Leavers said it would be a negotiation in the middle. As we have seen the EU has already backed down from free movement and permanent ECJ law over its citizens in the UK.

    That might actually be the way through the mess. Have Leavers believe they really got something out of the "negotiations" - symbolic things like blue passports are key here - and get Jacob Rees-Mogg and our own @archer101au to shut up about "vassal states" etc. Everyone is sort of happy.

  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,880
    Nigelb said:

    The introduction of another bargaining chip:
    https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/960897/Brexit-news-Gavin-Williamson-US-American-military-jets-European-aircrafts

    (Which we'll probably make a mess of, given the players involved.)

    The total Typhoon UK program cost for a 160 jet fleet is just north of 40bn quid. The idea that Eurofighter II is going to be cheaper than F-35 is fanciful.

    The RAF will be 100% F-35 by 2030. They cannot afford the logistics and training overhead demanded by a mixed fast jet fleet.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    edited May 2018

    Sandpit said:

    Talking of flights, @TSE did you manage to sort a ticket for the match?
    I’m in Kiev at the moment, and the going rate seems to be around €1000. The Ukrainians are really getting into it, posters and flags everywhere, should be a fantastic night.
    Sadly it looks like I’m gonna have to go back to Dubai next week and not be able to make it :cry:

    Edit: and Ramadan Kareem, to yourself and other PBers of the Islamic faith.

    My friend sourced me a ticket through one of the sponsors.

    The price, I have to eat a pizza with pineapple on it this weekend.

    The logistics of getting to Kyiv is a nightmare, it literally is planes, trains, and automobiles, watch the Solo film next Thursday morning in Sheffield, then haul ass.

    Accommodation wise I'm still not sorted.
    Lucky bastard!

    How many of you are going? Looking at the bonkers accommodation costs (Kev’s hotels are clearly looking to make their whole annual profit in one weekend) it might work out cheaper for a group of you to charter a bizjet, to fly in on the Saturday morning then back out shortly after the match.

    I would offer you my in-laws’ place 50 miles from the city, but sleeping on the street is probably preferable to that! Next year I’ll have my own place there, but sadly they’re still building it at the moment!

    Good luck with the pineapple pizza! :tongue:
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    FF43 said:

    Elliot said:

    Remainers have to constantly misrepresent the past. I remember very clearly that Remainers argued the EU would 100% set the terms, while Leavers said it would be a negotiation in the middle. As we have seen the EU has already backed down from free movement and permanent ECJ law over its citizens in the UK.

    That might actually be the way through the mess. Have Leavers believe they really got something out of the "negotiations" - symbolic things like blue passports are key here - and get Jacob Rees-Mogg and our own @archer101au to shut up about "vassal states" etc. Everyone is sort of happy.
    From conversations I've had, a lot of people would response well to simple gestures that show "they want us". Not so much symbolic concessions or opt-outs but things that show we're respected.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    RobD said:

    Dark times. I do agree that it was bold, and work does need to be done in that area. Trying to do it without either side screaming about the other stealing people's houses is going to be tough.

    The policy needed work, but that May was sermingly willing to take on her base on it in an effort to tackle the problem I appreciated. Of course it was only risked as they probably thought they could take the hot and win big, and for various reasons they could not.
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,545
    edited May 2018

    TGOHF said:

    TGOHF said:

    Sandpit said:

    geoffw said:

    Sandpit said:

    surby said:

    Well that wasn't so hard in the end, was it?

    https://www.ft.com/content/8834c20a-59a1-11e8-b8b2-d6ceb45fa9d0

    British officials, however, argue that this is a problem of Mr Barnier’s own making.

    “How can you address the Irish backstop question without talking about customs?” said one British diplomat.


    Well, quite. As has been pointed out on here from the beginning......
    Where do we get our diplomats from ? This one is a class idiot. The whole idea of the "backstop" was precisely if no solution was found it would be in place. No regulatory divergence [ customs union , in other words ] is the default, unless other solutions are found.
    The “default” remains that we exit the EU to WTO terms on 29th March 2019, unless something else is agreed by everyone in the meantime.
    Default looking better by the day.
    Indeed. We need to now be putting serious efforts into ‘No Deal” planning, making sure that existing third party trade deals with the EU can roll over and that the planes keep flying. And the EU need to see that we are doing this.
    I suspect the government will not last a week in that scenario

    How long will other EU governments last in that scenario ?

    Which is why it wont happen.
    In the scenario where we start preparing for no deal they will simply enjoy the economic boost from companies shifting operations.
    Spanish hotels will relocate to Newquay to scoop up Uk based tourist trade which can't fly to Spain ?

    It's a view.

    No, it's a straw man. As I said, to get to the point where planes are grounded you actually have to go off the cliff. The preparation comes before then, and British businesses won't just sit there egging you on.
    At the moment business and the currency markets assume that nothing much will change in the UK's economic relationship with the EU next March. If it looks like we are going over the cliff there will be panic in all quarters - the value of sterling will come under severe pressure and dire predictions of imminent food shortages and factory closures will fill the airwaves. This will cause a political crisis the outcome of which is very hard to forsee.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,956
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Talking of flights, @TSE did you manage to sort a ticket for the match?
    I’m in Kiev at the moment, and the going rate seems to be around €1000. The Ukrainians are really getting into it, posters and flags everywhere, should be a fantastic night.
    Sadly it looks like I’m gonna have to go back to Dubai next week and not be able to make it :cry:

    Edit: and Ramadan Kareem, to yourself and other PBers of the Islamic faith.

    My friend sourced me a ticket through one of the sponsors.

    The price, I have to eat a pizza with pineapple on it this weekend.

    The logistics of getting to Kyiv is a nightmare, it literally is planes, trains, and automobiles, watch the Solo film next Thursday morning in Sheffield, then haul ass.

    Accommodation wise I'm still not sorted.
    Lucky bastard!

    How many of you are going? Looking at the bonkers accommodation costs (Kev’s hotels are clearly looking to make their whole annual profit in one weekend) it might work out cheaper for a group of you to charter a bizjet, to fly in on the Saturday morning then back out shortly after the match.

    I would offer you my in-laws’ place 50 miles from the city, but sleeping on the street is probably preferable to that! Next year I’ll have my own place there, but sadly they’re still building it at the moment!

    Good luck with the pineapple pizza! :tongue:
    There's 4 of us.

    If the match goes to extra time/penalties then there's no point in staying anywhere. We'll leave our stuff at the left luggage at the airport.

    Is going to be a bit like Istanbul, with the time difference, the match went into the next day, with the lack of transport back to the centre and Taksim Square being rammed, having the hotel for the night of the match turned out to be pointless and a waste of money.

    One of the places we looked at are charging €1,400 per night of the final, this Saturday, they are charging €79 per night.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    Because I've had nothing better to do I've been looking at why Swiss railways are so much better than ours. The revenue split is not that different to ours, just on a smaller scale. They get 27% of total revenue from public funding, in the UK it's currently 36% of all revenue from public funding. Our subsidy levels are higher overall.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,956
    Do you think I should attend this?

    Labour MP Jared O’Mara, who sang about “smashing” women “in the face”, called a constituent an “ugly bitch”, asked Girls Aloud for an “orgy”, said fat women don’t “deserve our respect”, talked about “taking your mum’s virginity” and “receiving fellatio” from Angelina Jolie, wrote about “sexy little slags” being “fingered” and told a woman “I’d lay on your rack any day”, is hosting a coffee and cake party celebrating female equality in his Sheffield Hallam constituency next month.

    https://order-order.com/2018/05/17/jared-omara-hosting-women-equality-cake-coffee-party/
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    edited May 2018

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Lucky bastard!

    How many of you are going? Looking at the bonkers accommodation costs (Kev’s hotels are clearly looking to make their whole annual profit in one weekend) it might work out cheaper for a group of you to charter a bizjet, to fly in on the Saturday morning then back out shortly after the match.

    I would offer you my in-laws’ place 50 miles from the city, but sleeping on the street is probably preferable to that! Next year I’ll have my own place there, but sadly they’re still building it at the moment!

    Good luck with the pineapple pizza! :tongue:
    There's 4 of us.

    If the match goes to extra time/penalties then there's no point in staying anywhere. We'll leave our stuff at the left luggage at the airport.

    Is going to be a bit like Istanbul, with the time difference, the match went into the next day, with the lack of transport back to the centre and Taksim Square being rammed, having the hotel for the night of the match turned out to be pointless and a waste of money.

    One of the places we looked at are charging €1,400 per night of the final, this Saturday, they are charging €79 per night.
    Kickoff is 21:45 local time, so if it runs to penalties it could well be after 1am before you clear the stadium. Public transport tends to shut down around midnight and there’s no indication it will run late if the match does - not that it matters much because the two airports that serve the city aren’t on any of the train or metro lines! There will be plenty of bars, cafes and shops open all night in the city though, and by 5am it will be daylight again.

    Watch for pickpockets at night though, it’s a bit like Barcelona in that regard - don’t carry a pile of cash or cards in your back pocket and don’t flash fancy watches or phones around in public. The average wage in Ukraine is around $300 a month.

    Try TAG Aviation https://www.tagaviation.com/en/charter-services/ for the charter services option, although I’m guessing that finding parking for aircraft in Kiev isn’t going to be easy that night.
  • rural_voterrural_voter Posts: 2,038
    MaxPB said:

    Because I've had nothing better to do I've been looking at why Swiss railways are so much better than ours. The revenue split is not that different to ours, just on a smaller scale. They get 27% of total revenue from public funding, in the UK it's currently 36% of all revenue from public funding. Our subsidy levels are higher overall.

    That suggests they've achieved what the UK regards as 'impossible', i.e.

    they've electrified either 99% or 100% of the lines
    most trains run on time
    fares are similar to our 'off-peak' tickets
    their subsidy isn't huge.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,544
    Dura_Ace said:

    Nigelb said:

    The introduction of another bargaining chip:
    https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/960897/Brexit-news-Gavin-Williamson-US-American-military-jets-European-aircrafts

    (Which we'll probably make a mess of, given the players involved.)

    The total Typhoon UK program cost for a 160 jet fleet is just north of 40bn quid. The idea that Eurofighter II is going to be cheaper than F-35 is fanciful.

    The RAF will be 100% F-35 by 2030. They cannot afford the logistics and training overhead demanded by a mixed fast jet fleet.
    I think you might be underestimating the ability of the MOD to screw things up ?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,544
    TOPPING said:

    To prevent a border of some sort in Ireland we have to be in the Single Market. That is a given.

    If we are in the Single Market then there is freedom of movement. Agreeing to stay in a CU simply sets the stage for remaining in the SM whether you, Corbyn or May want it or not.

    Neither the single market nor the customs union alone are sufficient to avoid a border. It's true that if you had to pick one, the single market gets you further than the customs union, but we need both. The only way round this is to jettison Northern Ireland.
    Or accept there will be some sort of border as far as technology allows.

    Now personally I am in favour of a united Ireland but not by imposition. I return to my previous position which is if Ireland and the EU want a hard border then that is their affair. We should simply proceed as if there is no need for one and let them play catch up.
    The lack of political nous in saying so what if there is a border in Ireland is astounding. To be so unaware of what happened in Ireland over the past 10, 40, 400+ years is extraordinary. And all in the pursuit of your blessed Brexit.

    How many different ways do you need to be told: there will be no border on or around the island of Ireland. If you really think the UK government is going to fuck with this issue you are more clueless than even your daily posts suggest.
    Why would MaxFac at all significant UK ports (including in NI), with no significant Irish border infrastructure, not work ?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,951

    MaxPB said:

    Because I've had nothing better to do I've been looking at why Swiss railways are so much better than ours. The revenue split is not that different to ours, just on a smaller scale. They get 27% of total revenue from public funding, in the UK it's currently 36% of all revenue from public funding. Our subsidy levels are higher overall.

    That suggests they've achieved what the UK regards as 'impossible', i.e.

    they've electrified either 99% or 100% of the lines
    most trains run on time
    fares are similar to our 'off-peak' tickets
    their subsidy isn't huge.
    Talking of most trains running on time:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-44149791
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,879

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Talking of flights, @TSE did you manage to sort a ticket for the match?
    I’m in Kiev at the moment, and the going rate seems to be around €1000. The Ukrainians are really getting into it, posters and flags everywhere, should be a fantastic night.
    Sadly it looks like I’m gonna have to go back to Dubai next week and not be able to make it :cry:

    Edit: and Ramadan Kareem, to yourself and other PBers of the Islamic faith.

    My friend sourced me a ticket through one of the sponsors.

    The price, I have to eat a pizza with pineapple on it this weekend.

    The logistics of getting to Kyiv is a nightmare, it literally is planes, trains, and automobiles, watch the Solo film next Thursday morning in Sheffield, then haul ass.

    Accommodation wise I'm still not sorted.
    Lucky bastard!

    How many of you are going? Looking at the bonkers accommodation costs (Kev’s hotels are clearly looking to make their whole annual profit in one weekend) it might work out cheaper for a group of you to charter a bizjet, to fly in on the Saturday morning then back out shortly after the match.

    I would offer you my in-laws’ place 50 miles from the city, but sleeping on the street is probably preferable to that! Next year I’ll have my own place there, but sadly they’re still building it at the moment!

    Good luck with the pineapple pizza! :tongue:
    There's 4 of us.

    If the match goes to extra time/penalties then there's no point in staying anywhere. We'll leave our stuff at the left luggage at the airport.

    Is going to be a bit like Istanbul, with the time difference, the match went into the next day, with the lack of transport back to the centre and Taksim Square being rammed, having the hotel for the night of the match turned out to be pointless and a waste of money.

    One of the places we looked at are charging €1,400 per night of the final, this Saturday, they are charging €79 per night.
    I went to the euros in Kiev in 2012, accommodation was clearly more than normal but not crazy money like that. Perhaps as it's just 1 night they can charge extra - but there must have been a lot more fans in town for the tournament rather than a one-off game?
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,880
    I lived in Kiev for 14 weeks when I was learning Russian. The crappy hotel had an on premises "model agency". Happy days.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603

    MaxPB said:

    Because I've had nothing better to do I've been looking at why Swiss railways are so much better than ours. The revenue split is not that different to ours, just on a smaller scale. They get 27% of total revenue from public funding, in the UK it's currently 36% of all revenue from public funding. Our subsidy levels are higher overall.

    That suggests they've achieved what the UK regards as 'impossible', i.e.

    they've electrified either 99% or 100% of the lines
    most trains run on time
    fares are similar to our 'off-peak' tickets
    their subsidy isn't huge.
    I think it's partly because their rail usage is much higher than in the UK so in terms of revenue generated from passenger journeys they do a lot better per track KM.

    I think the other factor is that SBB continually upgrades and updates the system with new tunnels and trains. Recently a new tunnel opened which helped cut a journey down by more than an hour. The cost was massive per KM, but now the train is much faster than driving so people are encouraged to use the train.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    .
    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    To prevent a border of some sort in Ireland we have to be in the Single Market. That is a given.

    If we are in the Single Market then there is freedom of movement. Agreeing to stay in a CU simply sets the stage for remaining in the SM whether you, Corbyn or May want it or not.

    Neither the single market nor the customs union alone are sufficient to avoid a border. It's true that if you had to pick one, the single market gets you further than the customs union, but we need both. The only way round this is to jettison Northern Ireland.
    Or accept there will be some sort of border as far as technology allows.

    Now personally I am in favour of a united Ireland but not by imposition. I return to my previous position which is if Ireland and the EU want a hard border then that is their affair. We should simply proceed as if there is no need for one and let them play catch up.
    The lack of political nous in saying so what if there is a border in Ireland is astounding. To be so unaware of what happened in Ireland over the past 10, 40, 400+ years is extraordinary. And all in the pursuit of your blessed Brexit.

    How many different ways do you need to be told: there will be no border on or around the island of Ireland. If you really think the UK government is going to fuck with this issue you are more clueless than even your daily posts suggest.
    Why would MaxFac at all significant UK ports (including in NI), with no significant Irish border infrastructure, not work ?
    Fianna Fail seems against it as they perceive it would lead to a border.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    TOPPING said:

    .

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    To prevent a border of some sort in Ireland we have to be in the Single Market. That is a given.

    If we are in the Single Market then there is freedom of movement. Agreeing to stay in a CU simply sets the stage for remaining in the SM whether you, Corbyn or May want it or not.

    Neither the single market nor the customs union alone are sufficient to avoid a border. It's true that if you had to pick one, the single market gets you further than the customs union, but we need both. The only way round this is to jettison Northern Ireland.
    Or accept there will be some sort of border as far as technology allows.

    Now personally I am in favour of a united Ireland but not by imposition. I return to my previous position which is if Ireland and the EU want a hard border then that is their affair. We should simply proceed as if there is no need for one and let them play catch up.
    The lack of political nous in saying so what if there is a border in Ireland is astounding. To be so unaware of what happened in Ireland over the past 10, 40, 400+ years is extraordinary. And all in the pursuit of your blessed Brexit.

    How many different ways do you need to be told: there will be no border on or around the island of Ireland. If you really think the UK government is going to fuck with this issue you are more clueless than even your daily posts suggest.
    Why would MaxFac at all significant UK ports (including in NI), with no significant Irish border infrastructure, not work ?
    Fianna Fail seems against it as they perceive it would lead to a border.
    A similar system hasn't lead to that in Switzerland. Their concerns should be noted and ignored.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,755

    Do you think I should attend this?

    Labour MP Jared O’Mara, who sang about “smashing” women “in the face”, called a constituent an “ugly bitch”, asked Girls Aloud for an “orgy”, said fat women don’t “deserve our respect”, talked about “taking your mum’s virginity” and “receiving fellatio” from Angelina Jolie, wrote about “sexy little slags” being “fingered” and told a woman “I’d lay on your rack any day”, is hosting a coffee and cake party celebrating female equality in his Sheffield Hallam constituency next month.

    https://order-order.com/2018/05/17/jared-omara-hosting-women-equality-cake-coffee-party/

    That is surreal.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516
    TOPPING said:

    .

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    To prevent a border of some sort in Ireland we have to be in the Single Market. That is a given.

    If we are in the Single Market then there is freedom of movement. Agreeing to stay in a CU simply sets the stage for remaining in the SM whether you, Corbyn or May want it or not.

    Neither the single market nor the customs union alone are sufficient to avoid a border. It's true that if you had to pick one, the single market gets you further than the customs union, but we need both. The only way round this is to jettison Northern Ireland.
    Or accept there will be some sort of border as far as technology allows.

    Now personally I am in favour of a united Ireland but not by imposition. I return to my previous position which is if Ireland and the EU want a hard border then that is their affair. We should simply proceed as if there is no need for one and let them play catch up.
    The lack of political nous in saying so what if there is a border in Ireland is astounding. To be so unaware of what happened in Ireland over the past 10, 40, 400+ years is extraordinary. And all in the pursuit of your blessed Brexit.

    How many different ways do you need to be told: there will be no border on or around the island of Ireland. If you really think the UK government is going to fuck with this issue you are more clueless than even your daily posts suggest.
    Why would MaxFac at all significant UK ports (including in NI), with no significant Irish border infrastructure, not work ?
    Fianna Fail seems against it as they perceive it would lead to a border.
    Fianna Fail are aginst it because they want BINO.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    If we do get a deal with the EU on brexit in name only,which of the brexit ministers Davis,Fox or Johnson will disown it first ?
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,846
    TOPPING said:

    To prevent a border of some sort in Ireland we have to be in the Single Market. That is a given.

    If we are in the Single Market then there is freedom of movement. Agreeing to stay in a CU simply sets the stage for remaining in the SM whether you, Corbyn or May want it or not.

    Neither the single market nor the customs union alone are sufficient to avoid a border. It's true that if you had to pick one, the single market gets you further than the customs union, but we need both. The only way round this is to jettison Northern Ireland.
    Or accept there will be some sort of border as far as technology allows.

    Now personally I am in favour of a united Ireland but not by imposition. I return to my previous position which is if Ireland and the EU want a hard border then that is their affair. We should simply proceed as if there is no need for one and let them play catch up.
    The lack of political nous in saying so what if there is a border in Ireland is astounding. To be so unaware of what happened in Ireland over the past 10, 40, 400+ years is extraordinary. And all in the pursuit of your blessed Brexit.

    How many different ways do you need to be told: there will be no border on or around the island of Ireland. If you really think the UK government is going to fuck with this issue you are more clueless than even your daily posts suggest.
    And you are in for a big letdown.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    TOPPING said:

    To prevent a border of some sort in Ireland we have to be in the Single Market. That is a given.

    If we are in the Single Market then there is freedom of movement. Agreeing to stay in a CU simply sets the stage for remaining in the SM whether you, Corbyn or May want it or not.

    Neither the single market nor the customs union alone are sufficient to avoid a border. It's true that if you had to pick one, the single market gets you further than the customs union, but we need both. The only way round this is to jettison Northern Ireland.
    Or accept there will be some sort of border as far as technology allows.

    Now personally I am in favour of a united Ireland but not by imposition. I return to my previous position which is if Ireland and the EU want a hard border then that is their affair. We should simply proceed as if there is no need for one and let them play catch up.
    The lack of political nous in saying so what if there is a border in Ireland is astounding. To be so unaware of what happened in Ireland over the past 10, 40, 400+ years is extraordinary. And all in the pursuit of your blessed Brexit.

    How many different ways do you need to be told: there will be no border on or around the island of Ireland. If you really think the UK government is going to fuck with this issue you are more clueless than even your daily posts suggest.
    And you are in for a big letdown.
    You think I will be let down if there is any hint of a return to a troubled island of Ireland? What kind of idiot are you?

    I am saying two things: first, that it would be a huge mistake to fuck with the border; and secondly that precisely because it would be a huge mistake, no UK government will indeed fuck with it.

    My personal feelings have nothing whatsoever to do with it. Meanwhile, your desire for Brexit at any price, would happily see a return of one of the most troubling elements in our society in recent, and not so recent history.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    Elliot said:

    TOPPING said:

    .

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    To prevent a border of some sort in Ireland we have to be in the Single Market. That is a given.

    If we are in the Single Market then there is freedom of movement. Agreeing to stay in a CU simply sets the stage for remaining in the SM whether you, Corbyn or May want it or not.

    Neither the single market nor the customs union alone are sufficient to avoid a border. It's true that if you had to pick one, the single market gets you further than the customs union, but we need both. The only way round this is to jettison Northern Ireland.
    Or accept there will be some sort of border as far as technology allows.

    Now personally I am in favour of a united Ireland but not by imposition. I return to my previous position which is if Ireland and the EU want a hard border then that is their affair. We should simply proceed as if there is no need for one and let them play catch up.
    The lack of political nous in saying so what if there is a border in Ireland is astounding. To be so unaware of what happened in Ireland over the past 10, 40, 400+ years is extraordinary. And all in the pursuit of your blessed Brexit.

    How many different ways do you need to be told: there will be no border on or around the island of Ireland. If you really think the UK government is going to fuck with this issue you are more clueless than even your daily posts suggest.
    Why would MaxFac at all significant UK ports (including in NI), with no significant Irish border infrastructure, not work ?
    Fianna Fail seems against it as they perceive it would lead to a border.
    Fianna Fail are aginst it because they want BINO.
    Who cares why they are against it. They are against it.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    edited May 2018
    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    .

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    To prevent a border of some sort in Ireland we have to be in the Single Market. That is a given.

    If we are in the Single Market then there is freedom of movement. Agreeing to stay in a CU simply sets the stage for remaining in the SM whether you, Corbyn or May want it or not.

    Neither the single market nor the customs union alone are sufficient to avoid a border. It's true that if you had to pick one, the single market gets you further than the customs union, but we need both. The only way round this is to jettison Northern Ireland.
    Or accept there will be some sort of border as far as technology allows.

    Now personally I am in favour of a united Ireland but not by imposition. I return to my previous position which is if Ireland and the EU want a hard border then that is their affair. We should simply proceed as if there is no need for one and let them play catch up.
    The lack of political nous in saying so what if there is a border in Ireland is astounding. To be so unaware of what happened in Ireland over the past 10, 40, 400+ years is extraordinary. And all in the pursuit of your blessed Brexit.

    How many different ways do you need to be told: there will be no border on or around the island of Ireland. If you really think the UK government is going to fuck with this issue you are more clueless than even your daily posts suggest.
    Why would MaxFac at all significant UK ports (including in NI), with no significant Irish border infrastructure, not work ?
    Fianna Fail seems against it as they perceive it would lead to a border.
    A similar system hasn't lead to that in Switzerland. Their concerns should be noted and ignored.
    Another one either oblivious to our recent history or unpatriotic enough not to give a fuck. That said you are young, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,164
    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    .

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    To prevent a border of some sort in Ireland we have to be in the Single Market. That is a given.

    If we are in the Single Market then there is freedom of movement. Agreeing to stay in a CU simply sets the stage for remaining in the SM whether you, Corbyn or May want it or not.

    Neither the single market nor the customs union alone are sufficient to avoid a border. It's true that if you had to pick one, the single market gets you further than the customs union, but we need both. The only way round this is to jettison Northern Ireland.
    Or accept there will be some sort of border as far as technology allows.

    Now personally I am in favour of a united Ireland but not by imposition. I return to my previous position which is if Ireland and the EU want a hard border then that is their affair. We should simply proceed as if there is no need for one and let them play catch up.
    The lack of political nous in saying so what if there is a border in Ireland is astounding. To be so unaware of what happened in Ireland over the past 10, 40, 400+ years is extraordinary. And all in the pursuit of your blessed Brexit.

    How many different ways do you need to be told: there will be no border on or around the island of Ireland. If you really think the UK government is going to fuck with this issue you are more clueless than even your daily posts suggest.
    Why would MaxFac at all significant UK ports (including in NI), with no significant Irish border infrastructure, not work ?
    Fianna Fail seems against it as they perceive it would lead to a border.
    A similar system hasn't lead to that in Switzerland. Their concerns should be noted and ignored.
    Another one either oblivious to our recent history or unpatriotic enough not to give a fuck. That said you are young, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
    What is it they say of people who bring patriotism into an argument?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    tlg86 said:

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    .

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    To prevent a border of some sort in Ireland we have to be in the Single Market. That is a given.

    If we are in the Single Market then there is freedom of movement. Agreeing to stay in a CU simply sets the stage for remaining in the SM whether you, Corbyn or May want it or not.

    Neither the single market nor the customs union alone are sufficient to avoid a border. It's true that if you had to pick one, the single market gets you further than the customs union, but we need both. The only way round this is to jettison Northern Ireland.
    Or accept there will be some sort of border as far as technology allows.

    Now personally I am in favour of a united Ireland but not by imposition. I return to my previous position which is if Ireland and the EU want a hard border then that is their affair. We should simply proceed as if there is no need for one and let them play catch up.
    The lack of political nous in saying so what if there is a border in Ireland is astounding. To be so unaware of what happened in Ireland over the past 10, 40, 400+ years is extraordinary. And all in the pursuit of your blessed Brexit.

    How many different ways do you need to be told: there will be no border on or around the island of Ireland. If you really think the UK government is going to fuck with this issue you are more clueless than even your daily posts suggest.
    Why would MaxFac at all significant UK ports (including in NI), with no significant Irish border infrastructure, not work ?
    Fianna Fail seems against it as they perceive it would lead to a border.
    A similar system hasn't lead to that in Switzerland. Their concerns should be noted and ignored.
    Another one either oblivious to our recent history or unpatriotic enough not to give a fuck. That said you are young, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
    What is it they say of people who bring patriotism into an argument?
    Yeah fair enough - let me define patriotism as not wanting to see citizens of our country and our neighbouring country murdered on the streets.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,951

    Do you think I should attend this?

    Labour MP Jared O’Mara, who sang about “smashing” women “in the face”, called a constituent an “ugly bitch”, asked Girls Aloud for an “orgy”, said fat women don’t “deserve our respect”, talked about “taking your mum’s virginity” and “receiving fellatio” from Angelina Jolie, wrote about “sexy little slags” being “fingered” and told a woman “I’d lay on your rack any day”, is hosting a coffee and cake party celebrating female equality in his Sheffield Hallam constituency next month.

    https://order-order.com/2018/05/17/jared-omara-hosting-women-equality-cake-coffee-party/

    Yeah - you could discover he is an equally disgusting piece of low-life scum to blokes as well....
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    .

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    To prevent a border of some sort in Ireland we have to be in the Single Market. That is a given.

    If we are in the Single Market then there is freedom of movement. Agreeing to stay in a CU simply sets the stage for remaining in the SM whether you, Corbyn or May want it or not.

    Neither the single market nor the customs union alone are sufficient to avoid a border. It's true that if you had to pick one, the single market gets you further than the customs union, but we need both. The only way round this is to jettison Northern Ireland.
    Or accept there will be some sort of border as far as technology allows.

    Now personally I am in favour of a united Ireland but not by imposition. I return to my previous position which is if Ireland and the EU want a hard border then that is their affair. We should simply proceed as if there is no need for one and let them play catch up.
    The lack of political nous in saying so what if there is a border in Ireland is astounding. To be so unaware of what happened in Ireland over the past 10, 40, 400+ years is extraordinary. And all in the pursuit of your blessed Brexit.

    How many different ways do you need to be told: there will be no border on or around the island of Ireland. If you really think the UK government is going to fuck with this issue you are more clueless than even your daily posts suggest.
    Why would MaxFac at all significant UK ports (including in NI), with no significant Irish border infrastructure, not work ?
    Fianna Fail seems against it as they perceive it would lead to a border.
    A similar system hasn't lead to that in Switzerland. Their concerns should be noted and ignored.
    Another one either oblivious to our recent history or unpatriotic enough not to give a fuck. That said you are young, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
    I cross the Swiss/German border a lot. I've never been stopped and I've never had to make a customs declaration, that's both on foot or in a car.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    TOPPING said:

    I am saying two things: first, that it would be a huge mistake to fuck with the border; and secondly that precisely because it would be a huge mistake, no UK government will indeed fuck with it.

    I think you misunderstand what the Tory party is prepared to sacrifice on the off-chance that it can heal its internal divisions and avoid a damaging split. I have no doubt that the PM will act in the best interests of her party.
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,545
    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    To prevent a border of some sort in Ireland we have to be in the Single Market. That is a given.

    If we are in the Single Market then there is freedom of movement. Agreeing to stay in a CU simply sets the stage for remaining in the SM whether you, Corbyn or May want it or not.

    Neither the single market nor the customs union alone are sufficient to avoid a border. It's true that if you had to pick one, the single market gets you further than the customs union, but we need both. The only way round this is to jettison Northern Ireland.
    Or accept there will be some sort of border as far as technology allows.

    Now personally I am in favour of a united Ireland but not by imposition. I return to my previous position which is if Ireland and the EU want a hard border then that is their affair. We should simply proceed as if there is no need for one and let them play catch up.
    The lack of political nous in saying so what if there is a border in Ireland is astounding. To be so unaware of what happened in Ireland over the past 10, 40, 400+ years is extraordinary. And all in the pursuit of your blessed Brexit.

    How many different ways do you need to be told: there will be no border on or around the island of Ireland. If you really think the UK government is going to fuck with this issue you are more clueless than even your daily posts suggest.
    Why would MaxFac at all significant UK ports (including in NI), with no significant Irish border infrastructure, not work ?
    Probably because the technology to make it work does not exist.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    TOPPING said:

    I am saying two things: first, that it would be a huge mistake to fuck with the border; and secondly that precisely because it would be a huge mistake, no UK government will indeed fuck with it.

    I think you misunderstand what the Tory party is prepared to sacrifice on the off-chance that it can heal its internal divisions and avoid a damaging split. I have no doubt that the PM will act in the best interests of her party.
    On this, and not underestimating the fuckwhittery of the Brexiters, I think they, she, will stop short of that.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,956

    If we do get a deal with the EU on brexit in name only,which of the brexit ministers Davis,Fox or Johnson will disown it first ?

    None of them.

    If Gove didn’t resign after betraying the fishermen then you’ll be in for a long wait.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    .

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    To prevent a border of some sort in Ireland we have to be in the Single Market. That is a given.

    If we are in the Single Market then there is freedom of movement. Agreeing to stay in a CU simply sets the stage for remaining in the SM whether you, Corbyn or May want it or not.

    Neither the single market nor the customs union alone are sufficient to avoid a border. It's true that if you had to pick one, the single market gets you further than the customs union, but we need both. The only way round this is to jettison Northern Ireland.
    Or accept there will be some sort of border as far as technology allows.

    Now personally I am in favour of a united Ireland but not by imposition. I return to my previous position which is if Ireland and the EU want a hard border then that is their affair. We should simply proceed as if there is no need for one and let them play catch up.
    The lack of political nous in saying so what if there is a border in Ireland is astounding. To be so unaware of what happened in Ireland over the past 10, 40, 400+ years is extraordinary. And all in the pursuit of your blessed Brexit.

    How many different ways do you need to be told: there will be no border on or around the island of Ireland. If you really think the UK government is going to fuck with this issue you are more clueless than even your daily posts suggest.
    Why would MaxFac at all significant UK ports (including in NI), with no significant Irish border infrastructure, not work ?
    Fianna Fail seems against it as they perceive it would lead to a border.
    A similar system hasn't lead to that in Switzerland. Their concerns should be noted and ignored.
    Another one either oblivious to our recent history or unpatriotic enough not to give a fuck. That said you are young, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
    I cross the Swiss/German border a lot. I've never been stopped and I've never had to make a customs declaration, that's both on foot or in a car.
    That's cool. As I said, too young to remember, and long may you never need to swot up on it all.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,164
    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    .

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    To prevent a border of some sort in Ireland we have to be in the Single Market. That is a given.

    If we are in the Single Market then there is freedom of movement. Agreeing to stay in a CU simply sets the stage for remaining in the SM whether you, Corbyn or May want it or not.

    Neither the single market nor the customs union alone are sufficient to avoid a border. It's true that if you had to pick one, the single market gets you further than the customs union, but we need both. The only way round this is to jettison Northern Ireland.
    Or accept there will be some sort of border as far as technology allows.

    Now personally I am in favour of a united Ireland but not by imposition. I return to my previous position which is if Ireland and the EU want a hard border then that is their affair. We should simply proceed as if there is no need for one and let them play catch up.
    The lack of political nous in saying so what if there is a border in Ireland is astounding. To be so unaware of what happened in Ireland over the past 10, 40, 400+ years is extraordinary. And all in the pursuit of your blessed Brexit.

    How many different ways do you need to be told: there will be no border on or around the island of Ireland. If you really think the UK government is going to fuck with this issue you are more clueless than even your daily posts suggest.
    Why would MaxFac at all significant UK ports (including in NI), with no significant Irish border infrastructure, not work ?
    Fianna Fail seems against it as they perceive it would lead to a border.
    A similar system hasn't lead to that in Switzerland. Their concerns should be noted and ignored.
    Another one either oblivious to our recent history or unpatriotic enough not to give a fuck. That said you are young, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
    I cross the Swiss/German border a lot. I've never been stopped and I've never had to make a customs declaration, that's both on foot or in a car.
    That's cool. As I said, too young to remember, and long may you never need to swot up on it all.
    How long until it all becomes ancient history? Presumably you have no problem being in a political union with a country that dropped bombs on us and killed thousands of our people.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,909
    tlg86 said:

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    .

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    Or accept there will be some sort of border as far as technology allows.

    Now personally I am in favour of a united Ireland but not by imposition. I return to my previous position which is if Ireland and the EU want a hard border then that is their affair. We should simply proceed as if there is no need for one and let them play catch up.
    The lack of political nous in saying so what if there is a border in Ireland is astounding. To be so unaware of what happened in Ireland over the past 10, 40, 400+ years is extraordinary. And all in the pursuit of your blessed Brexit.

    How many different ways do you need to be told: there will be no border on or around the island of Ireland. If you really think the UK government is going to fuck with this issue you are more clueless than even your daily posts suggest.
    Why would MaxFac at all significant UK ports (including in NI), with no significant Irish border infrastructure, not work ?
    Fianna Fail seems against it as they perceive it would lead to a border.
    A similar system hasn't lead to that in Switzerland. Their concerns should be noted and ignored.
    Another one either oblivious to our recent history or unpatriotic enough not to give a fuck. That said you are young, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
    What is it they say of people who bring patriotism into an argument?
    Enlightenment thinkers also criticized what they saw as the excess of patriotism. In 1774, Samuel Johnson published The Patriot, a critique of what he viewed as false patriotism. On the evening of 7 April 1775, he made the famous statement, "Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel."[8] James Boswell, who reported this comment in his Life of Johnson, does not provide context for the quote, and it has therefore been argued that Johnson was in fact attacking the false use of the term "patriotism" by contemporaries such as John Stuart, 3rd Earl of Bute (the patriot-minister) and his supporters; Johnson spoke elsewhere in favor of what he considered "true" patriotism.[9] However, there is no direct evidence to contradict the widely held to belief that Johnson's famous remark was a criticism of patriotism itself.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriotism
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    tlg86 said:

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    .

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    To prevent a border of some sort in Ireland we have to be in the Single Market. That is a given.

    If we are in the Single Market then there is freedom of movement. Agreeing to stay in a CU simply sets the stage for remaining in the SM whether you, Corbyn or May want it or not.

    Neither the single market reland.
    Or accept there will be some sort of border as far as technology allows.

    Now personally I am in favour of a united Ireland but not by imposition. I return to my previous position which is if Ireland and the EU want a hard border then that is their affair. We should simply proceed as if there is no need for one and let them play catch up.
    The lack of political nous in saying so what if there is a border in Ireland is astounding. To be so unaware of what happened in Ireland over the past 10, 40, 400+ years is extraordinary. And all in the pursuit of your blessed Brexit.

    How many different ways do you need to be told: there will be no border on or around the island of Ireland. If you really think the UK government is going to fuck with this issue you are more clueless than even your daily posts suggest.
    Why would MaxFac at all significant UK ports (including in NI), with no significant Irish border infrastructure, not work ?
    Fianna Fail seems against it as they perceive it would lead to a border.
    A similar system hasn't lead to that in Switzerland. Their concerns should be noted and ignored.
    Another one either oblivious to our recent history or unpatriotic enough not to give a fuck. That said you are young, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
    I cross the Swiss/German border a lot. I've never been stopped and I've never had to make a customs declaration, that's both on foot or in a car.
    That's cool. As I said, too young to remember, and long may you never need to swot up on it all.
    How long until it all becomes ancient history? Presumably you have no problem being in a political union with a country that dropped bombs on us and killed thousands of our people.
    We're getting there. I don't know offhand of any dissident Nazi groups in Germany carrying out raids on the UK. Do you?
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    tlg86 said:


    How long until it all becomes ancient history? Presumably you have no problem being in a political union with a country that dropped bombs on us and killed thousands of our people.

    And what about Dresden? Are we guiltless?
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516

    If we do get a deal with the EU on brexit in name only,which of the brexit ministers Davis,Fox or Johnson will disown it first ?

    None of them.

    If Gove didn’t resign after betraying the fishermen then you’ll be in for a long wait.
    A delay of a windfall by three years is in no way a "betrayal" compared to no windfall at all. You are deliberately pushing a narrative you know to be untrue.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,542
    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    To prevent a border of some sort in Ireland we have to be in the Single Market. That is a given.

    If we are in the Single Market then there is freedom of movement. Agreeing to stay in a CU simply sets the stage for remaining in the SM whether you, Corbyn or May want it or not.

    Neither the single market nor the customs union alone are sufficient to avoid a border. It's true that if you had to pick one, the single market gets you further than the customs union, but we need both. The only way round this is to jettison Northern Ireland.
    Or accept there will be some sort of border as far as technology allows.

    Now personally I am in favour of a united Ireland but not by imposition. I return to my previous position which is if Ireland and the EU want a hard border then that is their affair. We should simply proceed as if there is no need for one and let them play catch up.
    The lack of political nous in saying so what if there is a border in Ireland is astounding. To be so unaware of what happened in Ireland over the past 10, 40, 400+ years is extraordinary. And all in the pursuit of your blessed Brexit.

    How many different ways do you need to be told: there will be no border on or around the island of Ireland. If you really think the UK government is going to fuck with this issue you are more clueless than even your daily posts suggest.
    Why would MaxFac at all significant UK ports (including in NI), with no significant Irish border infrastructure, not work ?
    It depends what you mean by "work". MaxFac doesn't remove the infrastructure. It just means some people get through infrastructure quicker. It is actually more useful at Dover (and at any potential Irish Sea customs posts) than on the Irish land border.

    Bottom line, though, MaxFac doesn't work if the EU says it doesn't.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679
    Scott_P said:

    MaxPB said:

    the EU accounts for just 14% of global GDP, extracting further economic gain out of that 14% to the exclusion of the rest has never made any sense. Staying in the customs union guarantees that outcome.

    No it doesn't. This is why all of your analysis is completely and utterly flawed.

    The EU is signing trade deals with the rest of the World, and as members we get our share of that.

    Being a member gives us more clout in the negotiations, and always has.
    Exactly.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,544
    edited May 2018
    FF43 said:

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    To prevent a border of some sort in Ireland we have to be in the Single Market. That is a given.

    If we are in the Single Market then there is freedom of movement. Agreeing to stay in a CU simply sets the stage for remaining in the SM whether you, Corbyn or May want it or not.

    Neither the single market nor the customs union alone are sufficient to avoid a border. It's true that if you had to pick one, the single market gets you further than the customs union, but we need both. The only way round this is to jettison Northern Ireland.
    Or accept there will be some sort of border as far as technology allows.

    Now personally I am in favour of a united Ireland but not by imposition. I return to my previous position which is if Ireland and the EU want a hard border then that is their affair. We should simply proceed as if there is no need for one and let them play catch up.
    The lack of political nous in saying so what if there is a border in Ireland is astounding. To be so unaware of what happened in Ireland over the past 10, 40, 400+ years is extraordinary. And all in the pursuit of your blessed Brexit.

    How many different ways do you need to be told: there will be no border on or around the island of Ireland. If you really think the UK government is going to fuck with this issue you are more clueless than even your daily posts suggest.
    Why would MaxFac at all significant UK ports (including in NI), with no significant Irish border infrastructure, not work ?
    It depends what you mean by "work". MaxFac doesn't remove the infrastructure. It just means some people get through infrastructure quicker. It is actually more useful at Dover (and at any potential Irish Sea customs posts) than on the Irish land border...
    Precisely.
    I was suggesting >nothing< at the border.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    To prevent a border of some sort in Ireland we have to be in the Single Market. That is a given.

    If we are in the Single Market then there is freedom of movement. Agreeing to stay in a CU simply sets the stage for remaining in the SM whether you, Corbyn or May want it or not.

    Neither the single market nor the customs union alone are sufficient to avoid a border. It's true that if you had to pick one, the single market gets you further than the customs union, but we need both. The only way round this is to jettison Northern Ireland.
    Or accept there will be some sort of border as far as technology allows.

    Now personally I am in favour of a united Ireland but not by imposition. I return to my previous position which is if Ireland and the EU want a hard border then that is their affair. We should simply proceed as if there is no need for one and let them play catch up.
    The lack of political nous in saying so what if there is a border in Ireland is astounding. To be so unaware of what happened in Ireland over the past 10, 40, 400+ years is extraordinary. And all in the pursuit of your blessed Brexit.

    How many different ways do you need to be told: there will be no border on or around the island of Ireland. If you really think the UK government is going to fuck with this issue you are more clueless than even your daily posts suggest.
    And you are in for a big letdown.
    You think I will be let down if there is any hint of a return to a troubled island of Ireland? What kind of idiot are you?

    I am saying two things: first, that it would be a huge mistake to fuck with the border; and secondly that precisely because it would be a huge mistake, no UK government will indeed fuck with it.

    My personal feelings have nothing whatsoever to do with it. Meanwhile, your desire for Brexit at any price, would happily see a return of one of the most troubling elements in our society in recent, and not so recent history.
    The people of Northern Ireland have moved on from the toxic attitudes of paramilitarism. I don't see why the rest of us should be held to ransom by a handful of religious bigots that get upset at flags.
  • rural_voterrural_voter Posts: 2,038
    tlg86 said:

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    .

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    [del.]

    [del.]
    Or accept there will be some sort of border as far as technology allows.

    Now personally I am in favour of a united Ireland but not by imposition. I return to my previous position which is if Ireland and the EU want a hard border then that is their affair. We should simply proceed as if there is no need for one and let them play catch up.
    The lack of political nous in saying so what if there is a border in Ireland is astounding. To be so unaware of what happened in Ireland over the past 10, 40, 400+ years is extraordinary. And all in the pursuit of your blessed Brexit.

    How many different ways do you need to be told: there will be no border on or around the island of Ireland. If you really think the UK government is going to fuck with this issue you are more clueless than even your daily posts suggest.
    Why would MaxFac at all significant UK ports (including in NI), with no significant Irish border infrastructure, not work ?
    Fianna Fail seems against it as they perceive it would lead to a border.
    A similar system hasn't lead to that in Switzerland. Their concerns should be noted and ignored.
    Another one either oblivious to our recent history or unpatriotic enough not to give a fuck. That said you are young, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
    I cross the Swiss/German border a lot. I've never been stopped and I've never had to make a customs declaration, that's both on foot or in a car.
    That's cool. As I said, too young to remember, and long may you never need to swot up on it all.
    How long until it all becomes ancient history? Presumably you have no problem being in a political union with a country that dropped bombs on us and killed thousands of our people.
    Monnet and Schuman began the ECSC to ensure that such events would never happen again.
    The ECSC became the EEC and later the EU. One could equally well say that for these reasons a lot of countries seem happy to pool sovereignty with a country that occupied them and deported their Jewish population to Auschwitz. I think most of the EU comes under this heading except Sweden, Ireland, Spain and Portugal, which stayed out of the war.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,909

    MaxPB said:

    Because I've had nothing better to do I've been looking at why Swiss railways are so much better than ours. The revenue split is not that different to ours, just on a smaller scale. They get 27% of total revenue from public funding, in the UK it's currently 36% of all revenue from public funding. Our subsidy levels are higher overall.

    That suggests they've achieved what the UK regards as 'impossible', i.e.

    they've electrified either 99% or 100% of the lines
    most trains run on time
    fares are similar to our 'off-peak' tickets
    their subsidy isn't huge.
    Talking of most trains running on time:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-44149791
    Only 25 seconds? What is the world coming to?!!
This discussion has been closed.