Brexit Schmexit

[ThomThomDrum]

Just now, eFestivals said:

 

wasn't your dep PM caught up in a corruption thingy, and stood down because of it?

 

Yep but she is in the same party as Leo. Thats why your "dodgy fuck coalition" comment confused me...........

[eFestivals]

Just now, ThomThomDrum said:

Yep but she is in the same party as Leo. Thats why your "dodgy fuck coalition" comment confused me...........

ahh, apols. 

[zahidf]

24 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

One of the main reasons brexit is a bad idea is because of the arse that is article 50.

Designed to be like that or not (I've no idea), it pretty-much locks countries in forever, by making it practically impossible to leave in an organised manner.

Yesterday, Ireland discovered they don't have tax sovereignty. In that instance they're probably happy (£13Bn to the good), but if it were the other way round they might be so pissed off they'd leave. They weren't happy to find out they didn't have banking sovereignty either. 

It's a personal choice for how much any citizen might want to give up their nation's sovereignty, and a true social justice programme couldn't happen within the EU. It's not necessarily a bad idea, it's just a view.

 

Jez wants to do it too. It's why he voted with the brexiters for 4 decades.

 

May had options. She chose to implement Art 50 when they werent ready and then wasting 3 months on election was all on her. Art 50 has an option to amend it: she could have asked for it to be amended to allow longer than 2 years to negotiate it. She didnt.

She chose not to square the issue with the Irish. Davis chose to decieve parliament. These are all choices they made

[zahidf]

25 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

so why all the blame thrown towards the DUP for acting in the self-interest? As i've pointed out, whatever the DUP's other faults, it's not an unreasonable self-interest in this instance.

I used a phrase. I stuck the '(are)' in to show what i think.

wasn't your dep PM caught up in a corruption thingy, and stood down because of it?

Someone near the top stood down over something. Apols if I've got the reason wrong.

Lots of people don't know what she was trying to do. According to at least one poster of this parish, she wanted a majority to have the hardest of brexits.

Yup, I agree that what happens with Ireland is likely to define what the final deal might be - which is why I said the (failed) agreement was 2/3rds of the way there.

In fact, i read something since that suggested that the way it's been done (minus the DUP fuck-up) was specifically about tying down the EU to have to satisfy Ireland with what it agrees with the UK. That Ireland becomes the UK's inside agent by the UK and Ireland having a deal that the EU then has to fulfil.

And that the surprise of brexiters to May conceding to some EU regulation for whole-UK could be covered off by there being a deal for Ireland and it looking good for a decent deal with the EU.

It sounds unlikely, i know, because May agreeing to some EU regulation seems to have surprised everyone. The thing which suddenly makes it seem like it might have been a plan is that DD didn't seem at all surprised at May suddenly agreeing to some EU regulation.

Id argue (as much as i dislike the DUP)  the UK govt probably should habe squared it with them beforehand, before agreeing it with the EU. 

[LJS]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

 

 

Jez wants to do it too. It's why he voted with the brexiters for 4 decades.

 

why do you keep going on about history?

[LJS]

1 hour ago, pink_triangle said:

The SNP or lib dems could have come to an agreement with the torys which would have made DUP votes unnecessary. Do they shoulder any of the blame for the influence of the DUP?

The SNP can no more go into a coalition with the Tories than Labour could . Both are politically impossible.

The Libdems could ... but it didn't work out too well for them the last time & in the unlikely event of them even thinking about it,  I'm guessing their price would have been a second referendum which is a higher price then £9bn.

[LJS]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

Nothing different could be said for the DUP. They've indicated that they'll accept the status quo in Ireland for the border.

One of the problems is that there's no status quo to be had, because by accepting EU regs forever-more, Dublin gets say over NI while NI gets no say at all.

Care to say where the GTA says that?

So not really the integrity of the GTA. It can't be had, unless the UK stays in the EU.

What's Grant Theft Auto got to do with it?

Or do you know about a secret agreement made the day before the good Friday one?

[eFestivals]

30 minutes ago, zahidf said:

May had options. She chose to implement Art 50 when they werent ready and then wasting 3 months on election was all on her. Art 50 has an option to amend it: she could have asked for it to be amended to allow longer than 2 years to negotiate it. She didnt.

i don't think that's a bad move. Negotiations by nature tend to drag on to the deadline.

It would also stop the UK making new trade deals for longer than the UK will be stopped from making new trade deals.

30 minutes ago, zahidf said:

She chose not to square the issue with the Irish. Davis chose to decieve parliament. These are all choices they made

Yep, like Jez likes to play the hoky-coky or just be vague and meaningless. He doesn't have to be shit either.

As for May, just stop a minute and ask yourself how come DD wasn't surprised to discover that the whole-UK is going to under EU regs.

I don't doubt there's plenty of fuck-ups going on, but I also don't doubt there's better relevant planning than you're crediting.

[eFestivals]

5 minutes ago, LJS said:

The SNP can no more go into a coalition with the Tories than Labour could . Both are politically impossible.

they're not (tho I wouldn't expect either party to). That's a political choice.

Labour and the tories have already been on coalition at govt level several times.

And the SNP were effectively in a coalition with the tories from 2007-12

[eFestivals]

6 minutes ago, LJS said:

What's Grant Theft Auto got to do with it?

Or do you know about a secret agreement made the day before the good Friday one?

It's cos DD's got a habit of drinking down by the waterside and hanging out with prossies.

I'll go correct my dumb error. 

[LJS]

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

they're not (tho I wouldn't expect either party to). That's a political choice.

Labour and the tories have already been on coalition at govt level several times.

And the SNP were effectively in a coalition with the tories from 2007-12

"effectively" means "not"

They made it crystal clear that, under no circumstances, would they do a deal with the Tories. and they certainly could not be part of a government that delivered Brexit.

I'm sure Theresa would have given them an indyref in return for their support and according to you that 's all they want so it looks like you're wrong yet again. 

[eFestivals]

15 minutes ago, LJS said:

why do you keep going on about history?

because if you haven't noticed - and people are trying very VERY hard not to notice - it's also the here & now.

 

 

[eFestivals]

Just now, LJS said:

"effectively" means "not"

it just so happened that the tories and the SNP were in agreement on so very many things. Yeah, I know.

 

Just now, LJS said:

They made it crystal clear that, under no circumstances, would they do a deal with the Tories. and they certainly could not be part of a government that delivered Brexit.

I'm sure Theresa would have given them an indyref in return for their support and according to you that 's all they want so it looks like you're wrong yet again. 

As I said, I wouldn't expect them to do a deal.

But to do a deal or not is a choice, and the choice the SNP (and others) made allowed the DUP to have the influence they do, and not another party. Choices like that have consequences attached at them.

[pink_triangle]

1 hour ago, LJS said:

The SNP can no more go into a coalition with the Tories than Labour could . Both are politically impossible.

The Libdems could ... but it didn't work out too well for them the last time & in the unlikely event of them even thinking about it,  I'm guessing their price would have been a second referendum which is a higher price then £9bn.

I dont think its politically impossible for either SNP or Lib Dems. I think it would be politically challenging for both. I dont necessarily think either made the wrong decision not being willing to prop up the tory government. However I think when people moan about the conservatives getting into bed with the evil DUP,, the reality is that political decisions (whether correct or incorrect) by other parties meant there werent any other options.

[zahidf]

Why ruin the surprise?

 

[eFestivals]

5 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Why ruin the surprise?

 

You've gotta admire May's bottle, agreeing what she did without everything ironed out with everyone.

 

[zahidf]

11 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

You've gotta admire May's bottle, agreeing what she did without everything ironed out with everyone.

 

and she would have gotten away with it to, if not for those peaky DUP

[ThomThomDrum]

Really cant believe May tried to agree something with the EU without first running it by the DUP properly. Why the hell is there not someone from the DUP working close with May on this and accompanying her on her trips to Europe? Where is the partnership? Where is the united front of the union?

Foster by the looks of it wont even bother taking a trip to London to chat to May face to face at the mo. The optics of that dont look good and it may not bode well.

And of course the DUP are screaming that all this shite and the collapse of the once pending agreement was all Dublin's fault  

[eFestivals]

27 minutes ago, ThomThomDrum said:

Really cant believe May tried to agree something with the EU without first running it by the DUP properly. Why the hell is there not someone from the DUP working close with May on this and accompanying her on her trips to Europe? Where is the partnership? Where is the united front of the union?

There is no partnership possible for brexit. That's the bleedin' point here.

It doesn't mean May didn't fuck up, but the sort of expectations you have just aren't there. I reckon she's got as close to a deal as any tory is going to get by springing it in the way she has done. 

Just read this piece:-
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/dec/06/dup-brexit-deeply-divided-hard-border-ireland-arlene-foster-theresa-may

... which includes some quotes of Foster's. Definitely looks like the deal May offered can be done with the DUP and EU and Ireland, providing the face-saving around it can be a bit less exclusive than it's been so far. (I read a quote earlier from your opposition leader I think, who said much the same).

If may can swing the DUP behind it, she can probably get the tory MPs behind it too. 

 

27 minutes ago, ThomThomDrum said:

Foster by the looks of it wont even bother taking a trip to London to chat to May face to face at the mo. The optics of that dont look good and it may not bode well.

she's just not jumping to westminster in the way she feels westminster jumped for ireland. Childish, but there's been a bit of that all round.

There's got to be face saving moves more than there has changes in the agreement, i think. 

 

27 minutes ago, ThomThomDrum said:

And of course the DUP are screaming that all this shite and the collapse of the once pending agreement was all Dublin's fault  

Not Dublin's fault, but Dublin hasn't helped. Making the claim that you've got everything you want - which means at the other's expense - was never going to play well in Belfast.

Even if May had got the DUP on side beforehand that might have crashed it. 

(those sorts of sensitivities are of course a crock of shit, but me thinking them a crock of shit doesn't mean they're not there; they have to be worked with).

[ThomThomDrum]

What expectations do o have Neil? Please tell me....

Btw Foster is blaming Dublin. She said Dublin told the Tories not to tell the DUP what was in the agreement which looks to but total bullshit. No wonder the likes of her can partner up with the likes of DD et al... 

[zahidf]

Bye Bye Dodgy Deceitful Dave?

 

[LJS]

 

 

[zahidf]

ha ha ha ha

https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/938539189251002369

 

[eFestivals]

13 hours ago, ThomThomDrum said:

What expectations do o have Neil? Please tell me....

that if "one Ireland" is so very important to Ireland, that Ireland should be acting for that 'one Ireland' and not only for itself?

It's an outrageous idea, I know.

 

13 hours ago, ThomThomDrum said:

Btw Foster is blaming Dublin. She said Dublin told the Tories not to tell the DUP what was in the agreement which looks to but total bullshit. No wonder the likes of her can partner up with the likes of DD et al... 

Foster is pissed off with the "even if no deal" part, which is hardly a surprise.

May was a fool to include it. It's quite possibly going to make things intractable, cos Ireland probably won't now accept anything less and the DUP won't accept it.

[eFestivals]

10 hours ago, zahidf said:

Bye Bye Dodgy Deceitful Dave?

 

when even Peston can't be consistent with what he says in less than 200 characters, what's DD done wrong?

BTW, not idea if it's true, but DD claims he never used the words "impact assessments". If he didn't, he's already half-way to being cleared about this. 

Whether he did or didn't, half the problem around this issue is what opponents self-invented for what was in the supposed reports.