Westministers: Boris and May give us the Brexit Leeming Plan.

[RedToothBrush]

Theresa May has made a speech.

It’s a wish list for hard core Brexiteers. It’s a large corporate executive’s wet dream for exploitation.

Even requests for a white paper as recommended by the Brexit Committee have been ignored. Thus meaning there is no chance for proper scrutiny. Plus whilst on the one hand parliament have been told they will have a vote on the end deal, this is merely slight of hand, with Davis stating that if parliament vote against this, then we will leave the EU without a deal in a chaotic exit. Thus making the vote an exercise with a gun to parliament's head.

Workers Rights and the Welfare State die with Brexit. Even the precious NHS. Especially the precious NHS once its been stole off to the highest American bidder.

May is being lobbied by her hard right and to save her next she listens only to them. She has no interest in listening to anyone else. The demographic and voting patterns favour her to head this direction. There is nothing to be gained for her personally by doing anything else.

She is already laughing her head off in glee at the collapse of the NI assembly. It plays right to her agenda.

Under the wheels of the bus go the JAMs, under go the disenfranchised who rarely vote but came out in force for the referendum, under go single mothers, under go the disabled, under go those with mental health concerns who struggle with already bureaucratic systems set up to ‘catch them out’, under go the EU immigrants especially those who have families here and may not have equal rights in future, under go British Citizens living abroad who might find themselves without healthcare or pensions, under go our Human Rights and any chance of challenging the state’s authority and interference in our every day lives, under go small business who will drown in red tape, under go Scotland and NI.

Yet this is ‘for the children’ or ‘the grandchildren’. Its spineless and cynical and offers nothing for those currently able to vote but under the age of 40. Won't you think of the children? Its fine if you are already retired and have a nice little pension isn't it?

The National Interest? This is a foreign concept. Probably an EU one.

The Baby Boomers are net beneficiaries of the welfare state. The young are unlikely to have a welfare state in a few years and are already net contributors. They have now been robbed of the choice over their future and in patronising tones effectively told they are irrelevant.

And of course Uncle Donald is a fan. You can almost see his vampire fangs reading to get his teeth into the UK and suck the life blood out of it.

It is a horror show.

Its all about selling Theresa May to the Express and the Mail and they love it. Her speech is to set the scene of how committed she is and to lay the blame at anyone who challenges her. It attacks the EU and paints them as the aggressor who are there to prevent poor little Britain from getting what it wants. If Brexit goes wrong, it was all an anti-British plot. Not a collective self inflicted brain haemorrhage. She's gone full on Farage and out Farages Farage.

This all comes perhaps a week before the Supreme Court Ruling.

Funny timing eh? No not really.

It’s a pre-emptive strike.

What on earth will they say? Will this merely allow May to dismantle our current legal system by gathering support for a General Election Manifesto that outlines its demise? Thus extending the mandate for Brexit even further. Probably.

I fear that the courts may only serve to strengthen May in the long run due to the lack of opposition and a Labour party that is imploding, with dozens of its MPs being rumoured to be looking for employment elsewhere. I fear that without a media able to effectively hold May to account in the face of her media baron supporters.

Our only hope really lies within the Conservative party itself and whether May is able to keep a lid on the various on going power struggles. The only trouble is that one of those challengers is a certain Brutus in the form of Mr Gove. I struggle to work out who would be worse; Gove or May. And of course this only highlights the issue that who else is there with in the Conservatives who isn’t a reptile? Even Arron Banks commentated that during the referendum he found Labour MPs nice people and the Conservatives unpleasant almost to a man. High praise indeed.

Meanwhile in America, NATO is obsolete and so Europe will have to consider an EU Army and Russia is firmly getting its claws in. And yeah, just Donald Trump. That Project Fear thing was just fake scaremongering wasn't it? Right? Right?

sigh

What on earth can possible stop this insanity? Not necessarily stop Brexit, but at least stop the PURE INSANITY.

The fact that both countries were in the EU was a fudge to overcome issues of who was sovereign. It did not resolve any of the issues that still plague NI in relation to violence. They ave been bubbling away under the surface looking for a good excuse to explode.

Leaving the EU doesn't mess up the GFA it messes up the republicans plans for NI to leave the UK

The words of someone who opposes the GFA and isn't at all unhappy about seeing it collapse (because it depends on the EU framework including the ECHR and EU funding for its existence)?

Someone who sees in Brexit the chance of a final showdown with the nationalist community?

Yup it was a fudge - you will find quite a lot of things like that are a fudge. Some more successful than others.

May does actually have another land border to worry about - that of Gibraltar with Spain. One which is also the source of tensions, although different to the Irish ones, and also one which is governed by international treaties.

Looking forward to Khann's speech tomorrow at Davos. He might be one to watch in the future; charismatic.

uk.businessinsider.com/sadiq-khanin-davos-speech-brexit-hard-brexit-article-50-single-market-2017-1

That's a very encouraging report about Copeland's Labour candidate Red. I hope they can utilise the same techniques as employed against the BNP to see off the poison of UKIP.

I also find it could be useful for me to cut out, containing as it does some good ideas, and keep for my own political activies, so thanks for it.

Math, I've just read your post about a united Ireland potentially being more prosperous, and it seems in line with an article I read the other day from last year:

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/why-reunified-ireland-offers-best-outcome-for-north-s-future-1.2918645%3Fmode%3Damp?client=safari

It made me think about what the best way forward for NI actually is, but I don't have any ties there so have no idea about how current feelings are etc.

Is it a realistic thought that the solution to Brexit wrt NI & the unique situation there (and ROI too obviously) is to reunify - thereby aligning Ireland's economy as one, and recognising their vote to remain in the EU?
But to aid a transition, Westminster to commit to financial support to make it as economically painless as possible.
Also, to appease unionists, a similar arrangement wrt passports/citizenship as is currently with NI citizens being able to have singular/dual nationality as desired.
Also, common travel area agreement maintained.

That is, all current NI citizens who identify as British or British/Irish remain so, (albeit now as part of united ireland) with CTA continuing between Ireland & Britain & Britain supporting Ireland & NI with economic transition & alignment.

Serious question btw, I'm not trying to be obtuse.

Serious question btw, I'm not trying to be obtuse.

I think all ideas need to be considered, however unlikely they may be.This is what is annoying me. It shouldn't be a bunch of folks on the internet; May should have a committee of some from Westminster, Belfast and Dublin since the issues are so important, who should have been hard at negotiations for the last six months, so that they have some concrete proposals to put forward no. But no, it appears it's all a bit of an afterthought. "Brexit means Brexit, and I can only be arsed to think about the bits which promote my career", should be her new slogan.

m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58811f4ae4b096b4a23091f
Trump Sought Military Equipment For Inauguration, Granted 20-Plane Flyover

During the preparation for Friday’s transfer-of-power, a member of Trump’s transition team floated the idea of including tanks and missile launchers in the inaugural parade, a source involved in inaugural planning told The Huffington Post. “They were legit thinking Red Square/North Korea-style parade,” the source said, referring to massive military parades in Moscow and Pyongyang, typically seen as an aggressive display of muscle-flexing.

You know when you want something to be fake news? Well. That.

Wrt NI - I think these is no sense insisting that the current arrangement must be set in stone. It serves no useful purpose except to keep old wounds open and old fears alive. In turn all of the tribalism has a dampening effect on economic growth. Nobody can move forward to tackle serious economic issues while the province is the poor relation of Westminster, partly for economic reasons associated with that 'out of sight and out of mind' reason, and partly for political reasons that are related to the lack of incentive to shake off old shibboleths. There is incentive now.

Closer alignment with Ireland within the framework of the EU provides the obvious alternative to falling off the Brexit cliff. Closer alignment that would actually be effective could mean a federal Irish state, with passport rights, freedom of movement, mutual higher educational arrangements and other acknowledgements of ethnic allegiances.

The alternative is a labyrinth of special arrangements that would safeguard Irish farming and food processing both north and south of the border and especially in the border region. This would have to take place within the framework of the EU, because so much of food processing and agriculture is subject to EU regulation, and because NI agriculture has up to now been operating under those rules it would be more costly to change than to remain the same.

(By rules I mean the regulations about animal welfare, feed, hygiene, equipment specs, record keeping, and much, much more.)

There's an issue with the CTA however in that there was set to be a challenge on it within the EU before brexit became a possibility. It wasn't seen as much of a thing though as in reality there's little difference between it and fom. The challenge is more likely though if/when brexit happens because it contravenes eu rules, in that one of their states is getting a massive advantage that the others aren't. ROI desperately don't want to be caught in a pick one or the other situation.

CON: 43.2% (-16.6)
LAB: 36.7% (+7.1)

solution is to reunify not as popular as one might think.
It's the economy ...... and much of NI employment is British public service. That wouldn't carry through in UI.
A f* up. Peace at all costs*. Vote it down labour/liberal/SNP. Do it for peace.

math I don't think anyone is arguing that the GFA has to be set in stone. It's not perfect; no compromise is. With the two sides as deeply entrenched as they were prior to the GFA, only compromise was going to work. A united Ireland may make geographic and economic sense, but if it triggers a return of the Troubles then no one wins.

I'm not Irish so don't have a good sense for how likely this is. However, when we went on holiday to NI, several things struck me:

• for my 14yo DD, NI was mainly synonymous with Game of Thrones. Her generation has little awareness that not so long ago, a British person using the word "terrorist" almost always meant "Irish terrorist". Visiting NI as a tourist is normal now; when I was a teenager, no one went on holiday there. I found our visit surprisingly moving in this respect.

• most tourists see little evidence of the Troubles. We didn't, until we visited Derry and walked the town walls. From the walls, you can see Protestant estates surrounded by barbed wire and walls graffitied with belligerent messages. And in the surrounding area, the Protestant border towns display Union Jacks to a degree that looks extremely provocative to an outsider. Flags everywhere; even the curbs are painted red, white and blue. Trouble is still simmering under the surface (as recent political events show).

• Northern Ireland has benefited from fucking enormous amounts of EU money. Take that away, and you have a social and econmic crisis on your hands, which will be fertile ground for sectarianism and violent protest.

Brexit puts the progress of the last two decades at risk. This is non-arguable, which is why you rarely see brexiters stray into the NI question. There is no doubt that while the Scots may feel hard done by, with some justification, it's the Irish who stand to be really screwed over.

Replacing the GFA may look like a good idea on paper - but all the parties have to sign up to an alternative arrangement. Achieving this without violence looks bloody difficult to me.

And don't think that christian sectarian strife is limited to NI. It's alive and well in Glasgow, Liverpool........memories are long and schools are still segregated.

Thank you for answering
As I said, I've no personal experience of or ties with NI so have no quantifiable context of any tensions still bubbling.

Hypothetically, if NI & ROI agreed to re-unification with the terms mentioned in the article:

Continued transitional economic etc support from WM until the economic alignment is completed; UK passport/citizenship or dual UK/Irish passport/citizenship for those that want that; continued CTA arrangements.

Then would the EU really put peace at risk at the expense of principle?
The CTA is important to Ireland, NI & the rest of GB and existed before EU did - even as a eurosceptic I don't believe the EU would push that in reality (even if there are grumblings from other member states).

NI would be economically better within the EU as part of a unified Ireland undoubtedly, Ireland will avoid being economically decimated by reunification if it is managed & supported properly (input from WM by invitation, practical, economic and unmeddling only).

There does appear to be little appetite within ROI for reunification. But that doesn't mean there's none. Things change. It wasn't that long ago there was little appetite for the UK to leave the EU.

Then would the EU really put peace at risk at the expense of principle?

I think you're asking the wrong question here. The right question is

"Would the UK government really put peace at risk over a question of principle?" (And if so: why?).

Let's be clear here: the EU is doing nothing to put the GFA at risk; it would be perfectly happy with the status quo, which has kept peace for the best part of two decades now - an uneasy peace, for sure, but we no longer live in fear of IRA bombs as we did when I was growing up in London, and ordinary people in Ireland can now live without militarised border controls and the pervasive threat of violence.

The decision to make the ROI/NI border a hard line between the UK and the EU is one that is in the hands of the present British government - notably, if it chooses to leave the customs union (IMO this is what creates the greatest threat of a hard border, since not having one would present issues not only for the EU but also potentially for the UK's WTO status, due to "most favoured nation" principles).

I tend to agree that Brexit makes reunification the only desirable long-term solution. Last time I was in NI, I listened to Irish business news on the radio and could almost weep hearing discussion of Apple in Cork, and of Dell and Pfizer; none of this would come to NI as it is now meaning that educated ambitious young people like I was feel compelled to move.

Yes, NI is heavily subsidised by the British taxpayer but that is no life and no future. There was a future in the EU but a hard Brexit is taking that away.

Unionists would object but should not be allowed to hold the country to ransom with the threat of violence. NI was created in the first place due to the fear of unionist violence when the majority of Ireland wanted to leave.The border was gerrymandered to create a unionist majority, ignoring the democratic wishes of Ireland as a whole.
Whilst they may have had reasons to fear oppression in a Catholic country in 1910 (ironic given the oppression of Catholics in NI under partition), the Republic is now more enlightened, modern and liberal than NI, with a dynamic economy and future that NI can only dream about.

The border was gerrymandered to create a unionist majority,

Lol. There wouldn't have been much use partitioning an area that didn't have a Unionist majority would there?

So apparently there is a rally in Leeds today, a rally against Trump and to show our support to all the Americans against a president that has shown how he is racist and sexist etc...

Can someone explain me why, if we are able to have a rally against a democratically elected president (however bad he is), we can't have a rally against Brexit or against TM version of Brexit?
Both cases, the electorate was split half and half ish. Both cases, the election was democratic. In both cases, it will have a huge impact on the population living there. So, for the British people who will be at the rally, why is it ok to do one and not the other?i just don't understand.

Tucker - the point is that NI is not a natural country which is why it is so unstable. Actually, NI was made larger than the areas with a Unionist majority in order to make it a big bigger (so Tyrone and Fermanagh were included even though they voted for Irish independence), but it was not intended to be permanent. The lack of stability is why some elements Unionist culture feels so under siege - they feel they have to keep fighting against the logical solution.

A Hong Kong style solution is the way forward with the UK subsidising for a prolonged transition.

the point is that NI is not a natural country which is why it is so unstable

I understand the history - as much as anyone not living there can. It just tickled me that yo said that the borders had been gerrymandered to create a unionist majority - as if that was some sort of revelation. If you're creating an enclave within a foreign country then of course you draw the border to include the people you're creating the enclave for, why wouldn't you?

On Channel 4 news last night there was a very brief mention of the fact that since Theresa May's speech on Tuesday major investment banks have announced the relocation of 7000 jobs from London to the continent. Did anyone else hear it? I can't find any other reports of it.

Smurfs - well there was a huge anti brexit demo in the summer, but the September demo was much smaller. I think people got apathetic, and put off by the 'it's anti-democratic' approach.
I do think that the march tomorrow will get more people used to demonstrating, we could see things turn, who knows.

I think you're asking the wrong question here. The right question is
"Would the UK government really put peace at risk over a question of principle?" (And if so: why?).

I was just about to come on to say much the same. This is a question wholly created by Westminster. Not having a referendum would have allowed things to continue as they were, tensions simmering under the surface may be but a new generation growing up without the memories of bombs and armed border posts. Properly drawn up legislation around the conduct of the Referendum itself, to consider what a Leave vote would really mean, backed up with a White paper on the arguments, and proper thresholds like all four countries needing to have been in agreement, would also probably have prevented the question arising. OK a proper debate and 4 country agreement wouldn't have shut Farage and the Tory right wingers up, but they have not been able to shut up in 43 years despite their lives not being threatened much, so they would have carried on whinging. IMO people's lives are of more importance than the opinions of a few moneyed right wingers.

The comment above about the union jacks flying in the Protestant areas made me think that May's "Red, White and Blue Brexit" could be seen as extremely insensitive in NI, and just shows how little understanding she has. As an aside, my own thought on the Red White and Blue nonsense, having grown up in Wales, was that there was no blue in our flag, so she wasn't giving us any thought.

And please tell MPs to shut up about 'the will of the people'. This is a particularly difficult problem and as our representatives in a Parliamentary democracy it's your duty to try to resolve it. Don't cop out and try to pass the buck.