FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > A new NI solution.
A new NI solution.
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
I may have it...
We know the WA is too soft a border. And is BINO. So the EU won't ever agree to change it.
And we know WTO and a soft border, atm at least, can't co-exist.
So why is moone suggesting a temporary hard border?
And it will be temporary as a) the technology to make a soft, wto complaint border is soooo close... And b) the eu really want a deal, so will run towards sorting it out.
And Ireland will understand coz it's only temporary. They can have their GFA border in a bit.
And if there is trouble, then it's a price worth paying, we all knew what we were voting for, it's the will of the people, and if you excuse the poor turn of phrase, it's do or die.
Sorted. No? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Brilliant although I suspect that your analysis was accurate....
However, I suspect that Ireland, half the community in Ulster, the EU, remainers and most of the House of Commons would not accept your solution, even it it wasn't based on flawed logic regarding trade agreements and WTO rules. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
You do understand When we refer trouble we mean innocent police officers and civilians being murdered right ?
I genuinely can't tell anymore if these type of posts are for comedy value (in bad taste) or clueless |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
The last bit is very much tongue in cheek, and I apologise for its bad taste.
But those who support a no deal Brexit are supporting this as a possibility. The same way those who voted brexit are said to have known what they were voting for, inclusding the risk of no deal. Then those who support no deal are doing exactly the same with knowing they could (in theory) be voting for a hard border. Its an outcome which is (according to the logic) consistent with no deal. Therefore something which has a mandate.
AFAIK no "no dealers" are proposing a hard border. Despite it being brexit of the brexitiest kind. My proposal is consistent with both their aims, and many of their positions on Brexit in general. Maybe someone who is pro no deal can expand on why they are okay to risk it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago
North West |
I think that the only way to resolve the backstop issue is to actually let the people who will be affected by it make the decision about it.
I honestly do not believe that the majority of Leavers care in the slightest bit about N Ireland to the point that it probably exists in their minds now as a Brexit blocker and “someone” needs to do “something about it” so that Brexit can go ahead.
Make the backstop actually relate to the geography that surrounds the border and let the people of N Ireland decide about it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think that the only way to resolve the backstop issue is to actually let the people who will be affected by it make the decision about it.
I honestly do not believe that the majority of Leavers care in the slightest bit about N Ireland to the point that it probably exists in their minds now as a Brexit blocker and “someone” needs to do “something about it” so that Brexit can go ahead.
Make the backstop actually relate to the geography that surrounds the border and let the people of N Ireland decide about it."
That is exactly what already happened in the original agreement put forward. The backstop is only there because the UK could not put together a workable plan or more importantly put together a plan that serves it's people (all its people including NI). NI voted 55% stay but because they are not a single entity it doesn't really matter.
As for saying make it a geographical backstop, The DUP which props up the Tories will not allow any misalignment with mainland UK. It could turn out to be one of the most costly political moves in UK history, relying on the DUP to hold the UK Europe and hundreds of thousands of Eu workers to ransom.
On an even more serious note, if there is a hard border of any kind even tech scanning or checkpoints manned by British staff. People will become targets for the IRA and people will die. The overwhelming feeling here is that because it isn't mainland UK that the elites don't really care |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ara JTV/TS
over a year ago
Bristol East |
"I think that the only way to resolve the backstop issue is to actually let the people who will be affected by it make the decision about it.
"
I agree.
The backstop, as originally conceived by the British, affects Northern Ireland only.
It was quite a clever idea when you think about the recent history and the referendum result in NI.
Unfortunately, the UK Government is a hostage of the DUP.
And the DUP sensed an opportunity to drive a coach and horses through the Good Friday Agreement, which it opposed.
The people of NI are the ones who should decide, not a minority of Orange extremists.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think that the only way to resolve the backstop issue is to actually let the people who will be affected by it make the decision about it.
I agree.
The backstop, as originally conceived by the British, affects Northern Ireland only.
It was quite a clever idea when you think about the recent history and the referendum result in NI.
Unfortunately, the UK Government is a hostage of the DUP.
And the DUP sensed an opportunity to drive a coach and horses through the Good Friday Agreement, which it opposed.
The people of NI are the ones who should decide, not a minority of Orange extremists.
"
The funny ...Well it's not one bit funny but anyway. The thing is the good Friday agreement is the only thing stopping decades of civil war and out an end to unready that killed 3000 since the late 70's. This sane agreement has prevented countless DUP members being murdered yet out of pure stubbornness they want to see it gone. I just can't see anyway out of this righy now as long as BJ and Arlene Foster hold power. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
New, more serious solution.
If the WA had a clause which allowed either party to say, in a years time, we're moving to wto terms, would that work.
That is, a year's notice to move to a having the same border controls here as for any other border (eg Dover) and any country (eg China)
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I may have it...
We know the WA is too soft a border. And is BINO. So the EU won't ever agree to change it.
And we know WTO and a soft border, atm at least, can't co-exist.
So why is moone suggesting a temporary hard border?
And it will be temporary as a) the technology to make a soft, wto complaint border is soooo close... And b) the eu really want a deal, so will run towards sorting it out.
And Ireland will understand coz it's only temporary. They can have their GFA border in a bit.
And if there is trouble, then it's a price worth paying, we all knew what we were voting for, it's the will of the people, and if you excuse the poor turn of phrase, it's do or die.
Sorted. No? "
Deluded! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
No, I am Irish and even a temporary border is unacceptable to me.
I was in school when the GFA passed, a lot of you don't realize what it means. We went from learning that Ireland was 32 counties occupied by the UK in the north one day, to learning that Northern Ireland was owned totally by the UK and Ireland had no claim at all on the territory.
And how did Irish people react to giving up northern Ireland to the UK? they were out on the streets singing and partying and everyone was so fucking happy, and 90% of people in Ireland voted for it, and the IRA respected the vote and put away their weapons and guns.
So what did Ireland need to give up all their claims on the north? They just needed it written on paper that the people of Northern Ireland would all have a fair vote and if one day they voted on their own to become part of Ireland both the UK and Ireland would work to make that happen, but its up to them.
They also wanted people in the north to be able to freely move between the north and south.
At the time, the UK had moved to already provide fairer votes for native Irish people in the north. So that was no big deal. We were also both part of the EU so free movement was no big deal.
So the UK gave up pretty much nothing, they just had to write down that they would protect it, and Ireland gave up everything.
Also the people of northern Ireland both nationalist and unionist voted for this agreement, they voted that these two issues should be protected above all else.
I want the north to decide things for themselves. But if a hard border is brought in, then as far as I am concerned the GFA has been broken by the UK and Irelands original stance that the north is part of Ireland and illegally occupied by the UK should be immediately announced by Ireland, the EU and the USA.
I'm sorry if that makes it difficult to do a trade deal with the EU, but this issue was known.
It will be one of the saddest days of my life if the UK put a border up.
Honestly the day Ireland gave up the north and the IRA respected irelands view, was just amazing, unbelievable. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
The circle that cannot be squared is this:
(a) The Republic of Ireland is remaining part of the EU, and will have free movement of goods and people between RoI and mainland EU.
(b) Peace in NI was only achieved by removing the border between RoI and NI, this is the fundamental requirement of the GFA. If any form of border, hard or soft is set up again, there will be trouble. Hence the absolute requirement to keep freedom of movement and regulatory alignment between NI and RoI.
(c) Factions in NI demand to stay part of the UK and will not accept any form of border hard or soft, or differences in trading regulations, between NI and the rest of the UK. If NI is not a whole part of the UK, on equal terms, there will be trouble.
So: RoI will remain an identical part of EU. NI must remain on same terms as RoI. UK must remain on same terms as NI. Hence UK must remain on same terms as EU.
There is no solution. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oghunter33Woman
over a year ago
on the hill NordWest of |
You could argue that the backstop is also a temporary solution. Once there's a new fta between the uk and the EU the backstop is obsolete. In comparison to a temporary hard border the backstop doesn't impact on the GFA, minimises the risk of the troubles flaring up again but also forces both sides to find a solution. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I may have it...
We know the WA is too soft a border. And is BINO. So the EU won't ever agree to change it.
And we know WTO and a soft border, atm at least, can't co-exist.
So why is moone suggesting a temporary hard border?
And it will be temporary as a) the technology to make a soft, wto complaint border is soooo close... And b) the eu really want a deal, so will run towards sorting it out.
And Ireland will understand coz it's only temporary. They can have their GFA border in a bit.
And if there is trouble, then it's a price worth paying, we all knew what we were voting for, it's the will of the people, and if you excuse the poor turn of phrase, it's do or die.
Sorted. No? "
No.
The fact is the GFA (which is a legally binding international agreement) specifically rules out your solution. Therefore what you are saying is that Ireland, the EU and the rest of the world should just accept the UK breaking its treaty obligations because they are an inconvenient hindrance to our present governments attempt to deliver the impossible and remain in power. International treaties don't work like that, take a look at how the US is doing after its president decided to tear up some treaties unilaterally. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think that the only way to resolve the backstop issue is to actually let the people who will be affected by it make the decision about it."
They are...
The Tories will do whatever it takes to cling onto power for as long as possible, that means keeping the DUP happy, and if that means a hard British border on the island of Ireland and a return to sectarian violence that is a price the Tories are quite willing to have the Irish pay (Bo Jo's father the former MEP and JRM have said it, although JRM did say it would be "unfortunate".) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *estivalMan
over a year ago
borehamwood |
are the uk going to put a border up? genuine question.as all you see on the news from the uk is we wont put a border up.yet thee.usay there has to be one to protect there single market but then the primeminister of the republic says there wont be a border ever.so who will be puttin this border up.and from the cpl of times ive been across the border i really cant see how you could put a secure border in well unless something like the berlin wall goes from one side of the country to the other and even though all the politicians from all sides are fucking idiots i cant see the uk or the e.u doing that |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"are the uk going to put a border up? genuine question.as all you see on the news from the uk is we wont put a border up.yet thee.usay there has to be one to protect there single market but then the primeminister of the republic says there wont be a border ever.so who will be puttin this border up.and from the cpl of times ive been across the border i really cant see how you could put a secure border in well unless something like the berlin wall goes from one side of the country to the other and even though all the politicians from all sides are fucking idiots i cant see the uk or the e.u doing that"
I would imagine there would be robust controls at major crossings and spot checks etc at minor ones.
But there is nothing stopping the UK saying, we are comfortable with our tech and away-from-the-border checks and put those in unilaterally. Thatbway the border is soft south to North, and any hardness the other way is all the EUs doing. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
The answer is really simple.
You put the backstop on Northern Ireland only remove its clause from the whole of the EU, The EU already accepted this but then it was widened to include the whole of the UK.
You make northern Ireland an EU offshore trading depot. You move some offices to Northern Ireland for companies that need to comply with EU rules, and you tax all profits from these companies back to the UK.
Unionists will complain, nationalists will be happy, but after they get jobs, neither will complain, and the place of northern Ireland is secured as part of the UK int he future as both sides profit from being stuck in the middle and like being "EU" and "British".
Blame the mess on honouring the good friday agreement, and say that mainland UK is out of the EU. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *estivalMan
over a year ago
borehamwood |
"are the uk going to put a border up? genuine question.as all you see on the news from the uk is we wont put a border up.yet thee.usay there has to be one to protect there single market but then the primeminister of the republic says there wont be a border ever.so who will be puttin this border up.and from the cpl of times ive been across the border i really cant see how you could put a secure border in well unless something like the berlin wall goes from one side of the country to the other and even though all the politicians from all sides are fucking idiots i cant see the uk or the e.u doing that
I would imagine there would be robust controls at major crossings and spot checks etc at minor ones.
But there is nothing stopping the UK saying, we are comfortable with our tech and away-from-the-border checks and put those in unilaterally. Thatbway the border is soft south to North, and any hardness the other way is all the EUs doing. "
im old enough to remember all the shit that went on there and with thousands of troops there the border wasnt what you could call secure so just intrested how anyone would be able to make it so.christ weapons used to go from one side of the border to the other so wont goods be easy to smuggle from n.i to the republic and vice versa??
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
You put the backstop on Northern Ireland only remove its clause from the whole of the EU, The EU already accepted this but then it was widened to include the whole of the UK.
You make northern Ireland an EU offshore trading depot. You move some offices to Northern Ireland for companies that need to comply with EU rules, and you tax all profits from these companies back to the UK.
Unionists will complain, nationalists will be happy, but after they get jobs, neither will complain, and the place of northern Ireland is secured as part of the UK int he future as both sides profit from being stuck in the middle and like being "EU" and "British".
Blame the mess on honouring the good friday agreement, and say that mainland UK is out of the EU.
I agree entirely- the back stop only became UK wide at London’s insistence.DUP are blocking it at the moment and some ERG’s are against it.
But it’s certainly a very credible solution. It would really make NI the Singapore of Europe- which is probably the reason the ERG hate it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Well we now know BoJo's great new plan...
We leave the EU and single market and there is to be no change between Ireland and NI or NI and the mainland and to square this impossible circle the EU should change its regulations and laws to conform with whatever changes the UK chooses to make or it will be the EU's fault when BoJo breaks the GFA.
Meanwhile in the local news the Transport Secretary announces his intention to cancel HS2 and spav (as BoJo described it when commenting on a police investigation he did not approve of) £20,000,000,000 up against the wall. Wonder who is going to get all that land (that was bought up with that £20 billion of public money) at knock down prices? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Has HS2 been cancelled?"
The transport sec has announced an urgent review and said he is seriously considering cancelling it before any more money is spent. When considering this you have to note that the land has been bought and will be fully cleared and ready for development but with nothing else done when the report is ready. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Has HS2 been cancelled?
The transport sec has announced an urgent review and said he is seriously considering cancelling it before any more money is spent. When considering this you have to note that the land has been bought and will be fully cleared and ready for development but with nothing else done when the report is ready."
So it’s being reviewed  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So it’s being reviewed "
If you think the review will not reach the conclusion that the Transport Sec and PM want it to reach your naive. The Transport Sec has told us what is going to happen on the day the PM effectively told Germany and the EU to 'fuck off'. Now I ask again, having spent £20 BILLION of public money buying up and leveling prime real-estate in central London and Birmingham, which of their mates is going to get to buy it up at knockdown prices 'to recoup as much money as possible for the public purse'? Remember it is not so long ago that these same shits sold off the main sorting office for central London for £25 million, for it to be sold on 9 months later for £167 million (if memory serves). |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So it’s being reviewed
If you think the review will not reach the conclusion that the Transport Sec and PM want it to reach your naive. The Transport Sec has told us what is going to happen on the day the PM effectively told Germany and the EU to 'fuck off'. Now I ask again, having spent £20 BILLION of public money buying up and leveling prime real-estate in central London and Birmingham, which of their mates is going to get to buy it up at knockdown prices 'to recoup as much money as possible for the public purse'? Remember it is not so long ago that these same shits sold off the main sorting office for central London for £25 million, for it to be sold on 9 months later for £167 million (if memory serves)."
who is carrying out the review?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"who is carrying out the review?
"
OMG, how obtuse can you get?
Whoever the PM, Transport Sec and DOT give the job to. Maybe instead of looking for ways to justify what is being done you would do better asking why now and why make the announcement on the day BoJo is telling the EU to fuck off. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"who is carrying out the review?
OMG, how obtuse can you get?
Whoever the PM, Transport Sec and DOT give the job to. Maybe instead of looking for ways to justify what is being done you would do better asking why now and why make the announcement on the day BoJo is telling the EU to fuck off."
Why suggest I am slow to understand? I simply asked who is carrying out the review...
Anyway, got the answer now.
Chairs and final authors of the report:
Doug Oakervee, chair, civil engineer, former chair of Crossrail and HS2 Ltd
Lord Berkeley, deputy chair, Labour peer, civil engineer and ex-chair of the Rail Freight Group
Advisory panellists
Stephen Glaister, transport professor and ex-chair of the Office of Rail and Road.
Michèle Dix, director of planning at Transport for London under Johnson, now managing director of Crossrail 2.
John Cridland, ex-CBI boss, now chair of Transport for the North.
Sir Peter Hendy, ex-TfL commissioner, now chair of Network Rail.
Andrew Sentance, economist, ex-Bank of England monetary policy committee member.
Tony Travers, London School of Economics academic.
Andy Street, West Midlands mayor.
Patrick Harley,Dudley council leader.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ild_oatsMan
over a year ago
the land of saints & sinners |
There is a simple solution to the N.I. issue regarding the backstop.
Firstly revoke article 50 for the UK.
Then dissolve the 1707 Acts of Union.
Then have England and Wales re-enact article 50.
It then moves any EU border to English and Wales entry ports. Preserving the GFA.
The fact the UK is now split up into separate independent countries doesn’t matter its Brexit do or die. This should delight the brexiteers as they get the hard brexit they have wet dreamed about.
As they have shown scant regard for the views of countries within the UK.
We are dragging you into Brexit whether you like it or not.....
So the split of the union has to be a price worth paying.
After all we are heading for a great rosy future...... I know it to be true ..... because Boris said so.....  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"or it will be the EU's fault when BoJo breaks the GFA."
I 100% think he is trying to blame the EU if the GFA is broken, however its America that is the guarantor of the deal and they ultimately decide who has broken it.
The Speaker of the US house of representitives said a no deal will mean no trade deal with the US. She spoke on behalf of the whole democrat party.
Today Congress warned boris again that without a backstop there will be no trade deal with the US. The Congresional friends of Ireland said they will block any trade deal. They spoke on behalf of all members of congress with Irish heritage, regardless of party.
So if he manages to convince a small portion of UK people that it was everyone elses fault, not his, it wont convince the US and wont stop the needless pain it will cause. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Reports yesterday the BJ was asking that Ireland voluntarily aligns itself with the UK after brexit thus removing the need for the backstop and then when everything is sorted reverting back to the EU.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago
North West |
"Reports yesterday the BJ was asking that Ireland voluntarily aligns itself with the UK after brexit thus removing the need for the backstop and then when everything is sorted reverting back to the EU.
"
Probably more like mischief making than truth.
The very idea that Ireland would dissociate itself with the rule book of the EU and align itself with Billy No Mates Britain in order to resolve a British made problem is somewhat ludicrous. This story has been invented in the head of a glorious Brexiteer whilst they were draped in a Union Jack and wanking furiously at pictures of the white cliffs of Dover. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ara JTV/TS
over a year ago
Bristol East |
Someone floated the story with the Sun - No 10 press office - and someone denied it - No 10 press office, again.
Straight from the Trump playbook.
Sorry, chaps, the Brexiteers created this crisis and it is up to the Brexiteers to solve it.
The idea of "trapping" Ireland in a new single market for the British Isles suggests a bit of desperation. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
