|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Shake it all about: Brexit thread II
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
There's no upside for Labour in voting against article 50: it just leaves them open to being painted as out-of-touch opposers of the people's democratically-expressed will, or something.
You don't get brownie points at the next election for "well, we didn't want it but lost the vote." It's probably true that their best tactic is now to stay out of the way completely on Brexit, let the Conservatives own the process, and make them own the consequences in 2020.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
The problem for Labour is that if they come out solidly in favour of Brexit they alienate half the electorate, and will really struggle in 2020. If they come out solidly against Brexit they alienate the other half of the electorate, and will struggle in 2020. One of those options will result in losing more votes than the other (my guess solid support for Brexit would be the worst option). On the other hand, if they just sit and play lap dog to the Tories they risk alienating the entire electorate.
Where they really need to be is having a solid plan for Brexit that is clearly identifiable as their own, and then work tirelessly to try and push the government in that direction at every turn. At the moment the SNP and LibDems have pitched very strongly for maintaining access to the single market at all costs, with staying in the EU an option if that is the only way of staying in the single market. So, Labour need to find another position - what will appeal to their traditional voters would include maintaining all the employment and environmental regulations of the EU, and probably single market access (but leaning to Brexit even if that can't be achieved to put some clear space from the SNP/LibDems).
At the moment Labour seem to be selecting the worst possible option.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Even so, it's never going to work as smoothly as a system where UK people write and make UK laws specifically for the UK, using UK terminology and referring to UK institutions.
Yep, they can now proceed to strip the NHS much more efficiently. Can use the Snooper's Charter to erode personal freedoms with much more ease...
That's what Parliamentary Sovereignty, which the people who want Parliament involved in withdrawal from the EU keep banging on about, actually means. Because it certainly doesn't mean the EU being in control and overriding decisions of the UK Parliament.
The EU has relevance to personal freedoms, but how does the EU protect the NHS?
[ 24. January 2017, 20:10: Message edited by: orfeo ]
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
I'm not sure that it would, but the government in power has those goals and any vote in their favour strengthens their sense of mandate. BTW efficiency isn't necessarily a blessing as far as government is concerned. Smooth roads speed the journey to Hell more oft than heaven.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
The whole point of devolution is that you give the area in question independent control over certain things, but not over everything. This is one of the things they don't have independent control over.
Yes, but in making the judgment in this way the justices have now made it clear that the whole basis upon which devolution is based is at the whim of Westminster.
So, for example, flood planning is devolved in Wales. But should it be decided that flood planning in Wales needs to take of the flood risk in the upper Severn - in England - presumably the UK government could decide to "undevolve" that power.
And this becomes a particular problem in laws written by the Scottish Parliament which appear to assume that the Sewell Convention is more-or-less settled to the extent of being mentioned explicitly in the laws they've written, and yet the Supreme Court says that it isn't. Devolved administrations can't operate like that.
And it is even more serious and important in Northern Ireland where the devolved settlement is predictated on the fact that both sides of the border had certain rights due to membership of the EU. The whole thing hinges on the fact that there isn't much point in fighting over who "owns the land" if it makes very little difference if you are a passport holder of the Republic in the North or vice versa.
If that is taken away then the whole peace process folds. The Supreme Court justices (bizarrely, in my view) seem to have decided that this is no biggie because NI is British, ignoring the very thing that the Republicans have been protesting and fighting about this whole time.
quote:
As for not being able to vote on it: the Scottish people had as much of a vote as anyone else in the UK during the referendum, and 59 of the 650 MPs who will now vote on Article 50 are from Scottish constituencies - most of them being SNP members.
That's a bit of an odd thing to say given that we live in a devolved settlement where we recognise that the devolved areas of Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland are not the same as England - even to the extent of those areas having some law-making powers. It seems to me to be strange to say on the one hand that those places can have enough self-determination to make laws and set priorities but not enough to decide for themselves about something that will affect each region differently.
A majority of Scotland and Northern Ireland voted Remain, why should they be forced to Leave just because they're numerically smaller than England and Wales?
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
BTW efficiency isn't necessarily a blessing as far as government is concerned. Smooth roads speed the journey to Hell more oft than heaven.
This is true. However, the primary "efficiency" I have in mind from my own experience is being able to work out what the fuck the law of a jurisdiction actually is. Whether you like the law or not is not the question I was thinking about.
At one conference, someone from Wales explained the issues they have with figuring out what law applies in Wales. Wales not really being a separate legal jurisdiction from England, except occasionally when a law made in Westminster says it is... or when the Welsh Assembly pipes up... the first version of the Welsh Assembly not really being an actual legislative assembly...
People have a right to know the laws that apply to them. Having multiple sources of law without a really, really clear hierarchy can get in the way of that quite severely.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
It is interesting to note that the Lib Dems are still stuck on about 10%, slightly behind UKIP and well behind Labour. So their pitch for the 48% does not seem to be succeeding yet.
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tukai
Shipmate
# 12960
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
I can't find the full text of the judgement, only the court summary.
[snip]
Having said that, the patches of the full judgement I've seen do already strike me as better than the decision of the lower court, as they do a better job of addressing the fact that the current situation depends not just on Parliament's Act but on treaties.
Surely it was a foregone conclusion that any UK court would rule that parliament has more power than the "royal prerogative", in light of the outcomes of the Civil War and the Glorious revolution of 1688. Or as Justice Neuberger put it "centuries of constitutional practice". I was surprised that there were anydissenting judges.
--------------------
A government that panders to the worst instincts of its people degrades the whole country for years to come.
Posts: 594 | From: Oz | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Whether you like the law or not is not the question I was thinking about.
My personal preference was not what I was thinking about, either.
I was more referencing the general process with the sentence you reference.
[ 24. January 2017, 21:38: Message edited by: lilBuddha ]
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
A majority of Scotland and Northern Ireland voted Remain, why should they be forced to Leave just because they're numerically smaller than England and Wales?
Because they aren't nation states. Scotland, in 2014, specifically voted that it isn't an independent country. It's like trying to separate London from England or Ceredigion from Wales, both areas which voted Remain. The UK, which IS a nation state narrowly voted Leave. In any election regions vote differently. Scotland's old argument that it has never voted for a Tory government is balanced by the fact that almost every Labour government (except 1945 and 1997) has only managed to govern England by relying on its Scottish members.
No countries of the EU are showing any interest in Nicola Sturgeon's take on Brexit for that reason: it has no constitutional right to act alone. Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland have the most to lose, but there's been no evidence that there's any major shift in NI's wish to remain part of the UK. If there is, it can be put to a vote as part of the Good Friday Agreement. There are always regions of any state who feel disenfranchised because other, perhaps more powerful regions vote them down, but democracy works on national majorities, and in this case, the nation is the UK.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
The problem for Labour is that if they come out solidly in favour of Brexit they alienate half the electorate, and will really struggle in 2020. If they come out solidly against Brexit they alienate the other half of the electorate, and will struggle in 2020.
Labour will be able to better judge the mood after the Stoke-on-Trent by-election. The right wing press is crowing that UKIP's Paul Nuttall is set to win it. If he does then Jeremy Corbyn's game is up, especially in knowing which way to turn over Brexit. His working class constituencies in the midlands and north mostly voted for Brexit, while his London base was strongly Remain. I don't envy him trying to balance his concerns.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
The decision by the Tories not to stand in Stoke is going to cloud the issues a bit. If a large portion of the Conservative vote shifts to UKIP then Nuttall has a very good chance of winning. Especially if the Labour vote doesn't hold up. Stoke was very solidly Leave in the referendum, so the LibDem candidate is unlikely to cause an upset. The main question is how strong an anti-UKIP vote can be organised, and if so behind which candidate - presumably it has to be the Labour candidate.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Tukai:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
I can't find the full text of the judgement, only the court summary.
[snip]
Having said that, the patches of the full judgement I've seen do already strike me as better than the decision of the lower court, as they do a better job of addressing the fact that the current situation depends not just on Parliament's Act but on treaties.
Surely it was a foregone conclusion that any UK court would rule that parliament has more power than the "royal prerogative", in light of the outcomes of the Civil War and the Glorious revolution of 1688. Or as Justice Neuberger put it "centuries of constitutional practice". I was surprised that there were anydissenting judges.
But the royal prerogative has involved control of treaties. For centuries after the events you're referring to.
This isn't some general assertion of executive power over Parliament, this is an area of power that Parliament has been perfectly happy for the executive to exercise.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Louise
Shipmate
# 30
|
Posted
According to Parliaments of Autonomous Nations, edited by Guy Laforest, André Lecours, 2016
quote:
On only two occasions since 1945 has the UK Government's overall parliamentary majority depended on Scottish (or Scottish and Welsh) MPs – two Labour governments one elected in October 1964 with a fourseat majority, and the minority government elected in February 1974 Both were replaced by majority Labour governments within a short while (in March 1966 and October 1974 respectively).
[ 24. January 2017, 23:24: Message edited by: Louise ]
--------------------
Now you need never click a Daily Mail link again! Kittenblock replaces Mail links with calming pics of tea and kittens! http://www.teaandkittens.co.uk/ Click under 'other stuff' to find it.
Posts: 6918 | From: Scotland | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
This isn't some general assertion of executive power over Parliament, this is an area of power that Parliament has been perfectly happy for the executive to exercise.
If it's a power that Parliament has let the executive exercise, is it not also a power that Parliament can also take back from the executive?
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
This isn't some general assertion of executive power over Parliament, this is an area of power that Parliament has been perfectly happy for the executive to exercise.
If it's a power that Parliament has let the executive exercise, is it not also a power that Parliament can also take back from the executive?
There's no taking back involved. The Parliament has not tried to take the power. Well, until now.
And that was a fundamental point of the case. It wasn't necessary for the government to show an exception to the treaty making power. It was necessary for the opponents to argue that there was something special about the EU legislation that meant, on this specific occasion, Parliament had taken the power when it hadn't otherwise done so.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
The decision by the Tories not to stand in Stoke is going to cloud the issues a bit.
Erm, are you sure about this bit...?
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Because they aren't nation states. Scotland, in 2014, specifically voted that it isn't an independent country. It's like trying to separate London from England or Ceredigion from Wales, both areas which voted Remain. The UK, which IS a nation state narrowly voted Leave. In any election regions vote differently.
But that's to do with the fragile constitutional arrangement in the UK - which incidentally in at least part is settled because of the EU memberships - and only tangentially to do with the fact that they're not "nation states".
The parliaments in Belgium are not nation states, and yet their co-operation was needed to validate the EU-Canada trade agreement.
Which seems strange to our eyes; but why should a fairly small group of Belgians get to decide whether the whole of the EU accepts a trade agreement but Scotland can't decide whether to accept the earthquake of Brexit?
The Channel Islands and Man are not nation states, and yet they have self-determination in some areas independent of the UK.
This thing is only the way you say it is because Westminster has all the political power weighted in favour of the majority in England.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
The decision by the Tories not to stand in Stoke is going to cloud the issues a bit.
Erm, are you sure about this bit...?
It has been reported, and the list of candidates do not include a Conservative (though, Labour haven't named their candidate yet either).
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
The decision by the Tories not to stand in Stoke is going to cloud the issues a bit.
Erm, are you sure about this bit...?
It has been reported, and the list of candidates do not include a Conservative (though, Labour haven't named their candidate yet either).
I don't think that article (which in any event is in the Huffington Post and is anonymously sourced) says what you're interpreting it as saying.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
From what I can gather from ConservativeHome, the debate within the Tory party is the extent to which they should be putting resources into fighting Stoke.
I can't see anything anywhere that has suggested they've decided not to stand a candidate at all.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
Posted by PaulTH:
quote:
there's been no evidence that there's any major shift in NI's wish to remain part of the UK.
I think that if Scotland did manage independence the question of what happens in NI would be very pertinent. Although I do think that a united Ireland is ultimately inevitable I honestly never thought it would appear as likely within my lifetime, but that opinion is shifting. The current Assembly crisis marks the beginning of what will perhaps be a long and turbulent period that I hope and pray doesn't mark a return to the troubles. If they can manage to keep a cap on that, if Scotland gains it's independence and if the UK isn't the promised utopia out of the EU they all said it would be, then I can see a remarkable sea change on the way very rapidly. The biggest problem will be the most ironic; namely, the Irish government and people won't really want a united Ireland. We certainly live in interesting political times.
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
If they can manage to keep a cap on that, if Scotland gains it's independence and if the UK isn't the promised utopia out of the EU they all said it would be, then I can see a remarkable sea change on the way very rapidly. The biggest problem will be the most ironic; namely, the Irish government and people won't really want a united Ireland.
Explain the final sentence in the quote above to me.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
If they can manage to keep a cap on that, if Scotland gains it's independence and if the UK isn't the promised utopia out of the EU they all said it would be, then I can see a remarkable sea change on the way very rapidly. The biggest problem will be the most ironic; namely, the Irish government and people won't really want a united Ireland.
Explain the final sentence in the quote above to me.
I'll have a go, based on my Irish relatives. The North is a sea of troubles, angst and a massive benefits bill.
While romantics long for a united Ireland, and most Irish would want it in the best of all possible worlds, it actually suits many in the Republic to give all that lip service while being quietly grateful that Norn Iron and all its baggage and bills are primarily London's problem.
No one ever said nationalism was straightforward.
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
What Betjemaniac said.
Also; the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland are poles apart politically, culturally and socially. The disparity grows greater all the time. When Sinn Fein first entered the political arena in the Republic they initially really struggled because they just didn't 'get' the south, which in itself was painfully and yet deeply and satisfyingly ironic. But essentially the Republic doesn't want the economic basket case that NI in all likelihood will become (and to some extent already is - just look at the two most recent crises). It has little to no experience of handling delicate community tensions first hand and I doubt that they would be capable, practically speaking, of bringing along the hardline unionists whose boat is already beginning to sink even in the UK and the hardline republicans whose cause has already been seriously eroded. There is no real and genuine understanding of the plight of unionism in the Republic (why should there be, it's a different country) and there are still so many hundreds of thousands of people (if not millions) in the north that have no understanding of the Republic and still feed themselves on the fat of the lies of radical republicanism and unionist rhetoric about what the Republic is and what it's like having lived for decades in their own little insular bubble. You can't really blame them either seeing that the same rumour and innuendo about Ireland is still hissed in the corridors of power in London by those who should really know better. In fact, you donut even need to go to the corridors of power, its posted openly enough on these boards. That is to name but a few of the immediate issues.
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
The problem for Labour is that if they come out solidly in favour of Brexit they alienate half the electorate, and will really struggle in 2020. If they come out solidly against Brexit they alienate the other half of the electorate, and will struggle in 2020.
Labour will be able to better judge the mood after the Stoke-on-Trent by-election. The right wing press is crowing that UKIP's Paul Nuttall is set to win it. If he does then Jeremy Corbyn's game is up, especially in knowing which way to turn over Brexit. His working class constituencies in the midlands and north mostly voted for Brexit, while his London base was strongly Remain. I don't envy him trying to balance his concerns.
I think Labour are trying to face two ways, it's true, not a very comfortable position.
I suppose also they may believe that Mrs May has made a terrible mistake by going for hard Brexit, if that's what she has gone for.
Corbyn has nothing to lose really; if she has, and the economy crashes, Labour could win an election. If all goes well for her, then he will be out, and Labour will have to get over their nervous breakdown. Or suicide is an option.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I suppose also they may believe that Mrs May has made a terrible mistake by going for hard Brexit, if that's what she has gone for.
Corbyn has nothing to lose really; if she has, and the economy crashes, Labour could win an election.
But the supposedly 'hard' Brexit is just Brexit, isn't it?
Besides, today at PMQs Mr Corbyn offered his condolences to the family of a dead police officer who is, in fact, very much alive. No matter what happens, I don't think there's any danger of Labour romping home to victory any time soon.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
If Nicola Sturgeon can persuade the rest of the EU to allow Scotland to seamlessly retain the membership rights it enjoys as part of the UK, or if it can claim membership of the EEA or EFTA, then I think she will succeed in taking Scotland to the Promised Land of independence and full nationhood. And she would deserve full honours for achieving it. It may still not be economically sensible, given Scotland's huge ties to the rest of the UK, but it would be the jewel of her lifelong ambition. I wouldn't begrudge her it. But if all the other countries involved refuse to take Scottish claims seriously, I think independence will become less attractive post Brexit than it is now. Ms Sturgeon accuses the UK government of leading us off a cliff edge. There could be no greater cliff edge than an independent Scotland outside both the EU and UK markets.
To me, Ireland is the biggest Brexit challenge. Prior to our membership of the EU, the ROI was so economically dependent on Britain that it was an independent country in name only. Its economy was literally dependent on the British shopper. The EU has done wonders for Ireland. It has allowed it to finally emerge from the shadow of its bigger neighbour and strut the world stage as an equal. But although its economy has successfully diversified, the economies of the UK and Ireland remain joined at the hip. With the dying off of the 1916 political class and Tony Blair's greatest achievement, the Good Friday Agreement, relations between the countries have finally been normalised (relatively) culminating in the Queen's visit to Ireland and the Irish President's reciprocal visit to the UK. In the EU, the UK and Ireland usually, but not always, find themselves on the same side of any voting divisions.
This is all at enormous risk because it depends on the open border and free movement across the island. In my opinion now would be the right time for a United Ireland to get round these problems, but it has to be by consent, not coercion, terrorist or otherwise. It seems there's still little appetite for it even given NI's strong Remain vote. The citizens of the South have a long term romantic dream of a UI, but tell them that their taxes would increase exponentially in order to finance the North and they'd run a mile. In any event, the Republic needs to make clear to its EU partners that a special bilateral deal between them and the UK must be respected by the rest of the EU. The Common Travel Area, in force since 1922, and the historical, cultural and economic ties which bind the two countries can't be sacrificed to EU bureaucreatic wrangling.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
In any event, the Republic needs to make clear to its EU partners that a special bilateral deal between them and the UK must be respected by the rest of the EU. The Common Travel Area, in force since 1922, and the historical, cultural and economic ties which bind the two countries can't be sacrificed to EU bureaucreatic wrangling.
These arrangements are far more likely - at present - to pose a problem for the UK than the rest of the EU.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
But the supposedly 'hard' Brexit is just Brexit, isn't it?
This is what so many British Remainers seem to overlook. Mrs May has judged, and I think she'd be proved right if she called a general election, is that the British people voted for control of out borders and laws, and knew very well that leaving the EU would entail leaving the Single Market. Nick Clegg who is now touting a Norway style deal said, rightly during the campaign, that it's the worst of all worlds. That is even assuming that it's possible for the UK to acquire EEA membership. Hard Brexit is on the basis of finding it impossible to secure a satisfactory deal with 27 countries all of which have their own agendas.
The Eastern countries, for example, love free movement of people when it allows them to export their unemployment. But they don't want to take in any refugees, and they would howl murder if a million Romanian gypsies settled within their borders. Given the unlikelihood of securing an agreement across such a wide diversity of opinions, the Prime Minister has simply said the is willing to walk away. Not that she plans for a hard Brexit. Of course she wants as much access to the single market as possible, when it's compatible with what Brexit actually means.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
These arrangements are far more likely - at present - to pose a problem for the UK than the rest of the EU.
Not if the two countries put in measures to prevent EU citizens using Ireland as a back door to the UK.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I suppose also they may believe that Mrs May has made a terrible mistake by going for hard Brexit, if that's what she has gone for.
Corbyn has nothing to lose really; if she has, and the economy crashes, Labour could win an election.
But the supposedly 'hard' Brexit is just Brexit, isn't it?
Besides, today at PMQs Mr Corbyn offered his condolences to the family of a dead police officer who is, in fact, very much alive. No matter what happens, I don't think there's any danger of Labour romping home to victory any time soon.
I think that is one of the reasons that the Brexiteers are comparatively relaxed about the consequences of leaving the Single Market. Governments can screw things up pretty comprehensively as long as the electorate are convinced that the Opposition would do worse, given the chance.
Biggest crisis since World War 2 and we have a Leader of the Opposition with the brains of a rocking horse.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
In any event, the Republic needs to make clear to its EU partners that a special bilateral deal between them and the UK must be respected by the rest of the EU. The Common Travel Area, in force since 1922, and the historical, cultural and economic ties which bind the two countries can't be sacrificed to EU bureaucreatic wrangling.
These arrangements are far more likely - at present - to pose a problem for the UK than the rest of the EU.
The Common Travel Area, will as you say be a UK problem. For the rest of the EU, since UK passport holders leaving Ireland will still need to pass through the "non-EU citizen" gates at immigration that's simply the same as any other non-EU citizen transiting through Ireland. The potential problem for the UK is that EU citizens can freely enter Ireland, and then cross into the UK via the open land border. But, the UK already has all the powers needed to control immigration from the EU, powers granted by the EU treaties - it's just that the UK government has chosen not to use those powers to control immigration from the EU (while telling porkies about "uncontrolled immigration from the EU"). So, the issue is one of UK government competance - which, I grant would seem to be insurmountable.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
These arrangements are far more likely - at present - to pose a problem for the UK than the rest of the EU.
Not if the two countries put in measures to prevent EU citizens using Ireland as a back door to the UK.
People keep saying this. Kindly set out exactly what measures would allow the RoI to simultaneously maintain free movement, as per their treaty obligations with the EU and implement British immigration policy and allow Irish and UK nationals to travel freely between North and South.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
These arrangements are far more likely - at present - to pose a problem for the UK than the rest of the EU.
Not if the two countries put in measures to prevent EU citizens using Ireland as a back door to the UK.
People keep saying this. Kindly set out exactly what measures would allow the RoI to simultaneously maintain free movement, as per their treaty obligations with the EU and implement British immigration policy and allow Irish and UK nationals to travel freely between North and South.
The RoI doesn't need to implement British immigration policy. The British government would implement British immigration policy.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
These arrangements are far more likely - at present - to pose a problem for the UK than the rest of the EU.
Not if the two countries put in measures to prevent EU citizens using Ireland as a back door to the UK.
As above; outline the measures that can be used to prevent this.
Furthermore, you mentioned 'economic ties'. How will this work once the UK is out of the customs union?
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
In my opinion now would be the right time for a United Ireland to get round these problems, but it has to be by consent, not coercion, terrorist or otherwise. It seems there's still little appetite for it even given NI's strong Remain vote.
Well - that is hardly surprising, given that Brexit, like everything else in Northern Ireland, is a sectarian issue. Nationalists voted Remain by a large majority. Unionists voted Leave by a (not quite so) large majority. So any move towards a United Ireland on these grounds will be interpreted (as normal, and not without some justification) by the Unionists as "another convenient excuse to sell us down the river".
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
Posted by P{aulTH:
quote:
It seems there's still little appetite for it even given NI's strong Remain vote. The citizens of the South have a long term romantic dream of a UI, but tell them that their taxes would increase exponentially in order to finance the North and they'd run a mile.
I think you might be wrong on both counts.
Some political analysts outside of NI (in other parts of the UK) tried to claim the remain vote as an indicator of there being no appetite for a united Ireland. Part of this might be government spin to be fair in a time of instability and concerns about what might happen in the future for NI. The remain vote in NI marked the beginning of a possible sea change of voting tactics. For the first time in four decades the people of NI refused to vote on the basis of what their favoured party declared as their wish for the vote. The majority of unionists actually voted against what their favoured party politicians posited. This event has sent the political analysts in NI into a tail spin of excitement because it is entirely unprecedented. The unionist parties were for a leave vote because they believed that this would strengthen the union further and make the possibility of a untied Ireland less likely or more difficult and weaken the power sharing, cross border agreements and the political agreements with the RofI. In short, the vast majority of unionists voted the wrong way. This may (or may not) indicate that NI is moving into new political territory. There is an election coming up, but it's a bit too soon after the Brexit vote to be taking it as a marker of anything. In the next two years I think we might get a better picture. Looking at it from the outside and as someone who lived there and still has family there, I can say that the last five to seven years has seen the arrival of an entirely new sense of self understanding for NI, which given enough time and stability would/may have fed into a seismic shift.
To your second point - I can assure you that tax concern isn't top of the agenda for Irish citizens in this race. Tax that isn't 'stealth tax' here more often than not hits the middle income earners, but their greatest concern about NI lies in the political and cultural realm first. Taxes as a result of taking on a failed part of the UK may well be high on the agenda, but it is certainly not on the top.
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
These arrangements are far more likely - at present - to pose a problem for the UK than the rest of the EU.
Not if the two countries put in measures to prevent EU citizens using Ireland as a back door to the UK.
As above; outline the measures that can be used to prevent this.
Furthermore, you mentioned 'economic ties'. How will this work once the UK is out of the customs union?
Here are some unrealistic plans!
1. RoI leaves the EU
2. Internal border between NI and rest of UK
3. Independent Scotland has NI foisted off on it, rejoins EU
4. Independent NI rejoins EU on its own account
5. Special deal from EU along lines of "we know this is against all the rules, but hey, it's Northern Ireland and we all know what those guys are like"
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
The remain vote in NI marked the beginning of a possible sea change of voting tactics. For the first time in four decades the people of NI refused to vote on the basis of what their favoured party declared as their wish for the vote. The majority of unionists actually voted against what their favoured party politicians posited. This event has sent the political analysts in NI into a tail spin of excitement because it is entirely unprecedented. The unionist parties were for a leave vote because they believed that this would strengthen the union further and make the possibility of a untied Ireland less likely or more difficult and weaken the power sharing, cross border agreements and the political agreements with the RofI. In short, the vast majority of unionists voted the wrong way.
Aha! That is very interesting and I was unaware of those Unionist voting patterns. Are we really really sure about this - are the polls reliable? Indeed it would be unprecedented if true!
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
I still think a United Celtic Nations in the EU would be great fun. Ireland will accept Scotland, NI (so long as they play nice and stop being naughty), perhaps a little bit of Cornwall, the Isle of Man (so long as the TT keeps running - this would be a non-negotiable clause) and perhaps a few small areas of northern France. Wales can't come.
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
Hmm. Here is some analysis from Queen's University Belfast. It seems to lie somewhere between what I previously thought and what fletcher proposes. See what you think.
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
I would point to Tables 1, 2 and 11 as largely backing up my interpretation.
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
As above; outline the measures that can be used to prevent this.Furthermore, you mentioned 'economic ties'. How will this work once the UK is out of the customs union?
Of Turquoise Tastic's 5 points, the first 4 are unlikely, but the 5th has possibilities.
quote:
5. Special deal from EU along lines of "we know this is against all the rules, but hey, it's Northern Ireland and we all know what those guys are like"
The EU makes exceptions to its rules when it suits. Tiny Lichtenstein has an immigration cap of 90 people per year and retains access to the single market. Even tinier Jersey sells its potatoes and milk freely while having a very strict immigration policy. A special deal, even if against the rules, is needed to maintain the stability of the Irish peace process. No one, not least the EU negotiators, will want to be seen to undermine a fragile peace with bureaucratic rules.
A bilateral free trade deal between the ROI and the UK would solve trade issues, although the EU may want something in place to prevent the UK using Ireland as a back door to the EU for its produce. But let's face it. Wouldn't it be easier for everyone if we just maintain the free trade which already exists, which is what the UK government will be asking for?
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
I fear that my only contribution to this discussion is based on much cycling in Counties Armagh, Fermanagh, and Derry, in the 1970s. There are literally hundreds of crossing points; the border runs through fields and, at one spot (IIRC) it weaves in and along a country road for miles. Just putting up a series of markers, let alone a wire fence....
To maintain any sort of immigration control, you will need to properly staff about 6 major, a dozen intermediate, and 40-50 smaller control posts. My back-of-envelope figures suggest an annual expenditure of 50 million sterling on top of the initial capital outlay. And, like the Québec/New England frontier, you will be missing a few hundred other crossing points, some of which are going to be used.
While, in my experience, the north and south are different countries, with each society built on a solid and willing ignorance of each other (the churches are an honourable exception, as they have always maintained all-Ireland structures, with much cross-border exchange and discussion), the communities in the border areas have a studied disregard for the frontier.
The UK cannot have an effective immigration policy without frontier controls, and you cannot have that with the open Irish border envisaged by the peace agreements.
Irish Unity Tangent: When Jack Lynch was Taoiseach, he joked about his reluctance to call for Britain to leave Northern Ireland for fear that Margaret Thatcher would take him at his word and reply: "Right. We're going Tuesday."
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Turquoise Tastic:
I would point to Tables 1, 2 and 11 as largely backing up my interpretation
The figures entirely back up your assertion. I've never previously seen a breakdown of how different groups voted in the referendum. They show that NI society is as divided as ever along ethnic (pro British vs pro Irish) lines, albeit that things are infinitely better than in the awful times of the Troubles. All parties to negotiations about the UK's future relations with the EU need to make an absolute priority of maintaining the stability of Northern Ireland.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Wouldn't it be easier for everyone if we just maintain the free trade which already exists, which is what the UK government will be asking for?
I agree it would be easier. And, maintain current provision for free movement between the UK and EU. Both would be simpler and make sound economic sense. But, I see no evidence for the UK government to be asking for either.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Wouldn't it be easier for everyone if we just maintain the free trade which already exists, which is what the UK government will be asking for?
That is not what the UK government is asking for at all. The current UK government has a desire for a free trade agreement of some sort, but has already rejected the current mechanisms for ensuring common regulation that make this possible as well as the mechanism for resolving disputes.
The example of Jersey that you give is somewhat irrelevant - because it covers a limited amount of agricultural products, rather than the kinds of interwoven supply lines that a lot of UK manufacturing output feeds into.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
Irish Unity Tangent: When Jack Lynch was Taoiseach, he joked about his reluctance to call for Britain to leave Northern Ireland for fear that Margaret Thatcher would take him at his word and reply: "Right. We're going Tuesday."
Had I been alive a hundred years ago, I would have supported the partition of Ireland on the grounds of "Home Rule means Rome Rule" which De Valera's Free State proved. During the Troubles I supported the democratic right of NI to remain in the UK if it chose to. While I still support that democratic principle, I no longer see the point of the border. A UI would solve so many problems.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
The UK cannot have an effective immigration policy without frontier controls,
Why not?
If we assume immigrants are travelling for the purpose of work, then current requirements to demonstrate residence status (eg: to obtain a valid NI number) would suffice. Likewise for registering with a GP, or applying for benefits etc.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
