To ask Leavers what is actually wrong with the backstop?

[Bearbehind]

The current, UK wide backstop in the Withdrawal Agreement is simply a safety net to ensure no hard border is required until we find a technological solution which enables us to leave CU/SM

What’s the problem with that?

Why is it such a big issue for Leavers?

I can only imagine it’s either that

• Leavers still think ‘they need us more than we need them’ so we’d never actually need a technological border anyway as we’ll end up with the same terms outside the EU

Or

• They know the whole WA is actually shit and worse than we have now so the backstop is the tangible way to stop it being approved

boney please stop doing your usual arguing with me just for the sake of it.

What do you think is wrong with the backstop?

And if you don’t think there’s anything wrong with it, why is it such a problem to others?

CB isn’t that just my second reason in the OP ie, the WA is actually just shit and it’s not really about the backstop.

Bearbehind

Its not an argument. I am pointing out a fact, something that you don't like me doing.

What do you think is wrong with the backstop?

Its not what I wanted, and if we had that there would be no need for a backstop at all.

As for why SOME leavers don't like it maybe you could word your posts so that it was targeted at them.

There IS a Brexit board you know

Hiding important debates on a board few people visit doesn't exactly help debate, does it....

IF Scotland was independent and in the EU, there should be no need for a hard border because presumably, by then, the TECHNOLOGICAL solution would be well tried and tested in Ireland.

oh no, I forgot, there is no tried and tested technological solution

What do you think is wrong with the backstop?

And if you don’t think there’s anything wrong with it, why is it such a problem to others?

People have already told you, you're not listening. The backstop as written means there is literally no legal way that the UK could escape the EU, if the EU wanted to force us to remain entangled. In terms of our options for leaving the EU, we'd be worse off than we are now as full members.

I'm a remainer, but once I understood the above I fully accepted parliament was right to reject May's deal.

The EU are fed up of us - they’d be happy if we just left, as long as we don’t force a hard border
Where is your proof for that other than just a remainers opinion? Boris has put forward a deal that doesn't force a hard border but the EU aren't interested because they think the surrender bill stops us from leaving.

Perhaps you could explain the logic of any country handing over their ability to leave the EU to the whim of the EU? Why would any sane government do that? You obviously have remainers blindness and because of that no answer will ever satisfy you. Until remainers open their eyes we will never bring this country back together again.

If in five years time the UK comes up with another tech solution all Germany or France has to do is say no! we like your money you are not allowed your freedom back, now do as you are told and shut up backstop.

The backstop is worse than no Brexit. The WA attached to the backstop is very shit, as it signals/intends that the UK will forever be in the SM and CU. The WA with the backstop replaced with a Boris no hard border deal is acceptable.

N.Ireland ultimately does have the ability to stay in the EU by merging with The republic. I hope it never does but should it hate being out of the EU that much it does have options. Of course there is always the danger that people are only allowed to vote for one of the options on any referendum but that is another story.

Because a) most know fuck all about Irish history and b) they don't care anyway

Evan Davies was interesting the other day. He cross questioned an Irish minister (I think) who said Britain needed to sort out its NI question and soft/hard border thus

1. So you don't accept the proposals for NI/RoI? Ans No - soft border is unfeasible, hard border worst of all world.
2. So if UK's soft border proposals are not accepted by the EU, we'd go with the hard border.

Mind you Davies was a severe on the UK advocate of soft borders, citing the many men in vans who could cross at any point on the very porous NI/RoI border to take advantage.

Why don’t leavers want a hard border. I don’t get it. Leave means than the UK and Ireland have different trade deals. You leave you can’t expect to retain the right to import anything in or out of the Eu. It’s a benefit of being in the EU! You voted leave so that means hard border!

People have already told you, you're not listening. The backstop as written means there is literally no legal way that the UK could escape the EU, if the EU wanted to force us to remain entangled. In terms of our options for leaving the EU, we'd be worse off than we are now as full members.

I am listening, I just don’t agree. Of course there’s a ‘legal’ way to leave.

We just sort the border out with a solution that’s actually viable and we could leave.

I guess this thread is demonstrating the issue though; Leavers are generally convinced that the EU is acting in bad faith and will do anything to make us stay.

Which I find hard to believe given the EU have made it very clear from day 1 what is and isn’t possible and have even listened to every half arsed idea TM or BJ have had if it might provide a solution.

Leavers don't care about the backstop, only a minority of Brexiteering MPs.

I fully accepted parliament was right to reject May's deal.

I don’t disagree with rejecting the WA on account it’s generally shite - what I don’t understand is why the focus is on the backstop.

If that were to be changed the WA still probably wouldn’t pass because of everything else anyway.

Boris has put forward a deal that doesn't force a hard border

It does, it just moves the actual border

‘Check points’ anywhere would be subject to the same vulnerabilities as a hard border.

Plus it wouldn’t actually work because small businesses don’t have the funds to comply and it leaves the SM wide open with all the ‘gaps’ between check points.

If you genuinely believe this is a viable solution, could you explain how it would work?

Why don’t leavers want a hard border. I don’t get it. Leave means than the UK and Ireland have different trade deals. You leave you can’t expect to retain the right to import anything in or out of the Eu. It’s a benefit of being in the EU! You voted leave so that means hard border!

You know what I was saying about people not understanding the facts - seriously, that comment is mind blowing.

@Whatafackinliberty

"frog face" - I thought it was just me!

I don’t disagree with rejecting the WA on account it’s generally shite - what I don’t understand is why the focus is on the backstop
Its been spelled out in black and white. The backstop is the part of the WA that keeps us in the EU without any unilateral way for the UK to exit. The rest of it can be 'fixed' after we leave.

You keep saying well just invent some technological solution and the EU will let us leave. But the EU/Ireland have been very clear that they do not accept any technological solution is workable.

So the only way the EU would let us leave would be if we stayed in the SM & CU. Which means that under the backstop we will never leave.

Hence we are in the situation that a no deal seems to be the only way we can escape the EU. How many times does this have to be spelled out?

But the EU/Ireland have been very clear that they do not accept any technological solution is workable.

No, they’ve said there is no technological border currently available.

If one were developed why wouldn’t it be acceptable? After TM repeatedly said it was only a matter of time.

This is back to my first reason in the OP - we actually have no intention of developing any such border because we still think we’re too special to need to

Hence we are in the situation that a no deal seems to be the only way we can escape the EU

Under no deal we will have broken an international treaty which we’d have to deal with PDQ in order to move on.

No deal is far from the end

But I actually agree it’s the only way to break the deadlock.

If one were developed why wouldn’t it be acceptable?

Umm I think their are about £17.4 billion (gross) reasons a year why they would never find a solution acceptable.
Then their is the hope that after 5/10 years of project fear we will have given up changed our mind. You remember if the EU doesnt get its own way the first time, they make you vote again until they get the right result.

walking if you genuinely believe that, nothing I say will ever convince you.

It’s just the ‘they need us more than we need them’ argument though.

No deal is far from the end
I agree but we would finally be out of the EU and beginning to resolve this, instead of the currently increasing hell of purgatory.

Oh for feck sake walkingdeadfanggirl I take it your talking about the Lisbon treaty. Ireland voted against it due to certain terms, the Irish government went back to the EU and discussed the issues, the EU agreed to change the treaty and remove the issues which concerned the Irish public. There was another vote and then it passed. At least get your facts right. Boris agreement did not work for Ireland why the he'll should Leo Varadkar accept something that will damage the economy and peace of its country.

instead of the currently increasing hell of purgatory.

That is just dramatic bollocks.

The effects of no deal Brexit are going to be far more wide spread than anything the EU has ever done.

Remember, we are a country with residents who called the police when KFC ran out of chicken.

We’re not exactly ready for food and medicine shortages are we?

As for no deal, you do know that you will still have to agree a deal with the EU and the backstop will still be one of its red lines unless Boris can think of an alternative that actually works. By the way Irishman Phil Hogan will be head of the trade talks for the EU