Did I hear Liam Fox correctly earlier ?? Discussing TM's deal & the (very hopefull) changes /clarifications that she is seeking.....I thought he said if the deal came back with no changes then Cabinet MIGHT agree to not put it to the HOC for a vote.Can they do that ?? And if so, what happens next .....exit with no deal ??
Nope either HOC or a referendum is what was inferred earlier today on LBC but then JO'B does spout some shit on there.
He really does... I listen to him every day to see what the real headbangers must be hearing, and my god does he love himself, and has unbelievable anchoring bias, where he only puts forward opinions and facts that support his own view, as opposed to facts that support both sides... He has made his career out of Brexit to be fair to him though so good for him can't blame him for being a bit over the top with it.
Someone like Majid Nawaz is a strong Remainer but is much better in terms of allowing people that don't have their tongue up his arse to speak rather than just cutting them off or incessantly talking over them, and Andrew Castle probably represents the "Remainer but let's just get on with it because of this weird thing called democracy" (like me) attitude.
Love a bit of Majid, between he, Ferrari and Dale it makes LBC listenable.
I hope that in addition to debating this issue on here all of you are getting in touch (frequently) with your MPs to make your views known.
I would, but as Orflaith Begley (far too young to be an MP) won't be voting, there's not really any point...
Especially as I'm never likely to vote for anyone representing her party..
She's a good looking lady though 😀
Not the sort of comment I could make....
What with being old enough to be her father's older brother and all that (to say nothing of the big local GAA rivalry between my team and hers, with her being from Carrickmore).
She is actually really quite effective as a media operator, though some might not love the Tyrone accent.
Either they make the backstop unilateral or they time limit it, nothing else will observe the sovereignty issue in my view
If the UK can come up with a formulation for the border that makes the backstop no longer necessary then the backstop fades away into the obscure reaches of history, that's unilateral enough for me.
The people complaining most loudly about the backstop are also the ones who have said most loudly that there is no border issue - the inherent contradiction of their positions does cause a degree of scepticism about their honesty in the matter.
Unless and until such a time as something can be put in place that does not infringe upon the all-Ireland elements of the GFA, or unless and until the UK decides to abrogate its Treaty responsibilities, the backstop, as the insurance policy that preserves the status quo must remain. That's respecting sovereignty for both state actors that are parties to the GFA, IMHO quite important because we live in a multilateral world.
Funniest thing for me last night was the cameraman catching Boris Johnson skulking away and having trouble undoing the lock on his bike. He wasn’t a happy fellow😀
Sadly, I missed that. The funniest for me was hearing Ken Clarke go into one about Boris on yesterday's PM: "Boris wouldn't lead me. The idea that I would faithfully accept the instructions of Boris Johnson on anything to do with economic, trade or foreign policy, I'd regard as faintly ridiculous. Boris is great fun and so on, but he couldn't run a whelk stall". To which Evan Davis responded, "Don't hold back". I did also enjoy Andrew Neil telling Rees-Mogg that he had a busy day ahead of him with all the plotting that he's got to do.
Austrian chancellor says it is hard to know what will satisfy Brexiters because their arguments aren't rational As Sebastian Kurz, the Austrian chancellor, was arriving at the EU summit (see 2.16pm), he was asked what concessions might succeed in winning over Theresa May’s domestic critics. He replied:
'It is difficult to judge, because many of the sceptics do not argue in a way that is really rational.'
Austrian chancellor says it is hard to know what will satisfy Brexiters because their arguments aren't rational As Sebastian Kurz, the Austrian chancellor, was arriving at the EU summit (see 2.16pm), he was asked what concessions might succeed in winning over Theresa May’s domestic critics. He replied:
'It is difficult to judge, because many of the sceptics do not argue in a way that is really rational.'
Well, perhaps I can help.
Brexit meanings leaving the EU. This means leaving the Customs Unions & with it, Free Movement of Trade, People & Services. Also it means leaving the jurisdiction of the ECJ. Its not really that hard to understand. This is why I don't get this "Norway +" option...........and that means staying in the CU and paying money to the EU (unless I'm missing something). No backstop or any other "insurances" after the transition/implementation period.
For me, its No deal & leave on the 29th March on WTO terms.
Austrian chancellor says it is hard to know what will satisfy Brexiters because their arguments aren't rational As Sebastian Kurz, the Austrian chancellor, was arriving at the EU summit (see 2.16pm), he was asked what concessions might succeed in winning over Theresa May’s domestic critics. He replied:
'It is difficult to judge, because many of the sceptics do not argue in a way that is really rational.'
Well, perhaps I can help.
Brexit meanings leaving the EU. This means leaving the Customs Unions & with it, Free Movement of Trade, People & Services. Also it means leaving the jurisdiction of the ECJ. Its not really that hard to understand. This is why I don't get this "Norway +" option...........and that means staying in the CU and paying money to the EU (unless I'm missing something). No backstop or any other "insurances" after the transition/implementation period.
For me, its No deal & leave on the 29th March on WTO terms.
How will things operate in practice on the borders under WTO terms?
More political heavyweights having their say. Terifffik
I think we need to get 'arry in and steady the ship. Even he wouldn't spend £39bn.
I like his jam rolley polley policy, but not sure about making bank accounts under a pet’s name policy.
I believe he would only spend half of the £39b - albeit it may be on a 'one for you, one for me' basis.
Bung the Irish president a few mil, hard border problem solved
I realise you are being facetious but the Irish president has no power. Aside from the fact that he is one of the most honourable politicians around and would never accept your bribe. So thats another solution to the border that is unworkable. Keep trying though and eventually you will find an answer we can work with and you can get out of the backstop.
Austrian chancellor says it is hard to know what will satisfy Brexiters because their arguments aren't rational As Sebastian Kurz, the Austrian chancellor, was arriving at the EU summit (see 2.16pm), he was asked what concessions might succeed in winning over Theresa May’s domestic critics. He replied:
'It is difficult to judge, because many of the sceptics do not argue in a way that is really rational.'
Well, perhaps I can help.
Brexit meanings leaving the EU. This means leaving the Customs Unions & with it, Free Movement of Trade, People & Services. Also it means leaving the jurisdiction of the ECJ. Its not really that hard to understand. This is why I don't get this "Norway +" option...........and that means staying in the CU and paying money to the EU (unless I'm missing something). No backstop or any other "insurances" after the transition/implementation period.
For me, its No deal & leave on the 29th March on WTO terms.
So the EU have committed to saying that the Backstop is temporary and other assurances which if all 27 sign up they will be politically binding but not legally binding. Will that be enough ?
Austrian chancellor says it is hard to know what will satisfy Brexiters because their arguments aren't rational As Sebastian Kurz, the Austrian chancellor, was arriving at the EU summit (see 2.16pm), he was asked what concessions might succeed in winning over Theresa May’s domestic critics. He replied:
'It is difficult to judge, because many of the sceptics do not argue in a way that is really rational.'
Well, perhaps I can help.
Brexit meanings leaving the EU. This means leaving the Customs Unions & with it, Free Movement of Trade, People & Services. Also it means leaving the jurisdiction of the ECJ. Its not really that hard to understand. This is why I don't get this "Norway +" option...........and that means staying in the CU and paying money to the EU (unless I'm missing something). No backstop or any other "insurances" after the transition/implementation period.
For me, its No deal & leave on the 29th March on WTO terms.
In that case, Sebastian Kurz is right. Irrational.
More political heavyweights having their say. Terifffik
I think we need to get 'arry in and steady the ship. Even he wouldn't spend £39bn.
I like his jam rolley polley policy, but not sure about making bank accounts under a pet’s name policy.
I believe he would only spend half of the £39b - albeit it may be on a 'one for you, one for me' basis.
Bung the Irish president a few mil, hard border problem solved
I realise you are being facetious but the Irish president has no power. Aside from the fact that he is one of the most honourable politicians around and would never accept your bribe. So thats another solution to the border that is unworkable. Keep trying though and eventually you will find an answer we can work with and you can get out of the backstop.
I apologise to the Irish president. I was trying, and failing, to make a joke about Harry's alleged love of a bung.
On reflection I don't think Rednapp is the answer to the Brexit problem.
So the EU have committed to saying that the Backstop is temporary and other assurances which if all 27 sign up they will be politically binding but not legally binding. Will that be enough ?
So the EU have committed to saying that the Backstop is temporary and other assurances which if all 27 sign up they will be politically binding but not legally binding. Will that be enough ?
Has that been suggested?
How would that work.
If the back stop is say, temporary for two years, what happens when it expires? If it is temporary, is it still a backstop. Would the 27 and in particular Ireland accept that?
So the EU have committed to saying that the Backstop is temporary and other assurances which if all 27 sign up they will be politically binding but not legally binding. Will that be enough ?
Not to get it through Parliament, nope.
Not some of them. The ERG will vote down anything that isn't unicorns.
I think the solution to the backstop issue is a customs union so not much help here. But I do think the DUPs and other MPs opposition to the backstop has logic if you see it from their position. If you are going to say to them, we won't need it, they can say why have it? The EU say it is insurance, but you take out insurance because you might need it. You hope not to but you might. It is going to be impossible for May to get the support she needs from her own side and her allies!
I would expect the DUP to be against an indefinite backstop.
That is absolutely their position and absolutely to be expected. Their position, and their votes in a hung parliament are currently a factor. There are delicious ironies everywhere for the Tories, but there is little point complaining that the Democratic Unionist Party is being the Democratic Unionist Party, or that the European Union is being the European Union, or that the Republic of Ireland is being the Republic of Ireland, or that the Belfast Agreement (GFA) exists.
That is the dilemma.
One thing the UK could try is to approach the ROI with a deal to dismantle the Belfast Agreement and establish 'hard' controls on the land border in Ireland to satisfy brexit, and in return the UK pays £500 to each person who crosses that border each time they cross it (person not vehicle) because of the delays caused by the checks. If the checks take longer than 30 minutes the payment increases by £500 for each subsequent 15 minutes.
There you go.
A suggestion that is more grounded than belief in Unicorns.
I would expect the DUP to be against an indefinite backstop.
That is absolutely their position and absolutely to be expected. Their position, and their votes in a hung parliament are currently a factor. There are delicious ironies everywhere for the Tories, but there is little point complaining that the Democratic Unionist Party is being the Democratic Unionist Party, or that the European Union is being the European Union, or that the Republic of Ireland is being the Republic of Ireland, or that the Belfast Agreement (GFA) exists.
That is the dilemma.
One thing the UK could try is to approach the ROI with a deal to dismantle the Belfast Agreement and establish 'hard' controls on the land border in Ireland to satisfy brexit, and in return the UK pays £500 to each person who crosses that border each time they cross it (person not vehicle) because of the delays caused by the checks. If the checks take longer than 30 minutes the payment increases by £500 for each subsequent 15 minutes.
There you go.
A suggestion that is more grounded than belief in Unicorns.
(might need some extra tweaks)
Estimated 30,000 people cross the border each day.
I would expect the DUP to be against an indefinite backstop.
That is absolutely their position and absolutely to be expected. Their position, and their votes in a hung parliament are currently a factor. There are delicious ironies everywhere for the Tories, but there is little point complaining that the Democratic Unionist Party is being the Democratic Unionist Party, or that the European Union is being the European Union, or that the Republic of Ireland is being the Republic of Ireland, or that the Belfast Agreement (GFA) exists.
That is the dilemma.
One thing the UK could try is to approach the ROI with a deal to dismantle the Belfast Agreement and establish 'hard' controls on the land border in Ireland to satisfy brexit, and in return the UK pays £500 to each person who crosses that border each time they cross it (person not vehicle) because of the delays caused by the checks. If the checks take longer than 30 minutes the payment increases by £500 for each subsequent 15 minutes.
There you go.
A suggestion that is more grounded than belief in Unicorns.
(might need some extra tweaks)
Estimated 30,000 people cross the border each day.
Easy Peasey, get the dosh (£15,000,000 per day) from the UK magic money tree that found the wherewithal to bribe the DUP. One billion would cover about 68 days of this arrangement (although I suspect there might be increased traffic at the border once the UK government introduces this initiative).
I would expect the DUP to be against an indefinite backstop.
That is absolutely their position and absolutely to be expected. Their position, and their votes in a hung parliament are currently a factor. There are delicious ironies everywhere for the Tories, but there is little point complaining that the Democratic Unionist Party is being the Democratic Unionist Party, or that the European Union is being the European Union, or that the Republic of Ireland is being the Republic of Ireland, or that the Belfast Agreement (GFA) exists.
That is the dilemma.
One thing the UK could try is to approach the ROI with a deal to dismantle the Belfast Agreement and establish 'hard' controls on the land border in Ireland to satisfy brexit, and in return the UK pays £500 to each person who crosses that border each time they cross it (person not vehicle) because of the delays caused by the checks. If the checks take longer than 30 minutes the payment increases by £500 for each subsequent 15 minutes.
There you go.
A suggestion that is more grounded than belief in Unicorns.
(might need some extra tweaks)
Estimated 30,000 people cross the border each day.
Easy Peasey, get the dosh (£15,000,000 per day) from the UK magic money tree that found the wherewithal to bribe the DUP. One billion would cover about 68 days of this arrangement (although I suspect there might be increased traffic at the border once the UK government introduces this initiative).
I remember being told that someone had suggested, not entirely unseriously, that it would be cheaper to give everyone in Northern Ireland £1 million each, hand it over to Dublin, and offer free houses in Britain to those determined to remain in the UK, than paying to keep NI.
Sometimes, and not only at fallow times before pay day, I think the idea has some merit.
Comments
What with being old enough to be her father's older brother and all that (to say nothing of the big local GAA rivalry between my team and hers, with her being from Carrickmore).
She is actually really quite effective as a media operator, though some might not love the Tyrone accent.
The people complaining most loudly about the backstop are also the ones who have said most loudly that there is no border issue - the inherent contradiction of their positions does cause a degree of scepticism about their honesty in the matter.
Unless and until such a time as something can be put in place that does not infringe upon the all-Ireland elements of the GFA, or unless and until the UK decides to abrogate its Treaty responsibilities, the backstop, as the insurance policy that preserves the status quo must remain. That's respecting sovereignty for both state actors that are parties to the GFA, IMHO quite important because we live in a multilateral world.
She’s already playing centre half for Leicester & England!!
Arlene in action for England
Sorry...just aleays thought they looked alike...the dark hair, brooding look and square jaw!!
As Sebastian Kurz, the Austrian chancellor, was arriving at the EU summit (see 2.16pm), he was asked what concessions might succeed in winning over Theresa May’s domestic critics. He replied:
'It is difficult to judge, because many of the sceptics do not argue in a way that is really rational.'
...And then I realised it was from April.
Brexit meanings leaving the EU. This means leaving the Customs Unions & with it, Free Movement of Trade, People & Services. Also it means leaving the jurisdiction of the ECJ. Its not really that hard to understand. This is why I don't get this "Norway +" option...........and that means staying in the CU and paying money to the EU (unless I'm missing something). No backstop or any other "insurances" after the transition/implementation period.
For me, its No deal & leave on the 29th March on WTO terms.
On reflection I don't think Rednapp is the answer to the Brexit problem.
How would that work.
If the back stop is say, temporary for two years, what happens when it expires? If it is temporary, is it still a backstop. Would the 27 and in particular Ireland accept that? Not some of them. The ERG will vote down anything that isn't unicorns.
That is absolutely their position and absolutely to be expected. Their position, and their votes in a hung parliament are currently a factor. There are delicious ironies everywhere for the Tories, but there is little point complaining that the Democratic Unionist Party is being the Democratic Unionist Party, or that the European Union is being the European Union, or that the Republic of Ireland is being the Republic of Ireland, or that the Belfast Agreement (GFA) exists.
That is the dilemma.
One thing the UK could try is to approach the ROI with a deal to dismantle the Belfast Agreement and establish 'hard' controls on the land border in Ireland to satisfy brexit, and in return the UK pays £500 to each person who crosses that border each time they cross it (person not vehicle) because of the delays caused by the checks. If the checks take longer than 30 minutes the payment increases by £500 for each subsequent 15 minutes.
There you go.
A suggestion that is more grounded than belief in Unicorns.
(might need some extra tweaks)
Sometimes, and not only at fallow times before pay day, I think the idea has some merit.