So Johnson has 30 days to come up with an alternative to the backstop......

[Bearbehind]

This will be interesting to watch!

17.4 million being told they can’t have what they voted for because is does not suit an arrangement made that they had no say in does not meet the definition of democracy

...again i refer you to the fact we live in a representative democracy, the actual vote was non binding and nothing more than an opinion poll, DC promised things he couldn't deliver.
MPs are representative and not delegates.

Falklands war was an invasion of UK soil.
BUT most importantly, the UK public did not vote for Argentina to invade.

Deliberately wrecking the GFA is a voluntary act.

What’s wrong with Norway plus? IF people want to do trade deals with other countries they can FIRST come up with a border solution THEN propose it in a referendum.

17.4 million being told that they must comply with an international peace treaty that their elected representatives signed does

Signed without anyone in; England, Scotland or Wales being given the chance to have a say. Troubles spilled over onto UK mainland. So why were UK mainland voters excluded from the process that lead to the GFA?

I don’t remember being asked to vote for the GFA, but I remember being asked if I thought UK should or should not remain in the EU.

Tony Blair signed the GFA in 1998 after being elected in 1997. Labour won 418 seats, but due to the first last the post system in UK he obtained that number of seats with 43% of the vote out of a total votes cast of 31.3 million to give 13.4 million vote for Blair.

Article 50 concluded in 2009 by EU. No reference to GFA concluded 11 years earlier. Nor was GFA revisited to take into account that there was now a mechanism that enabled either, or both, ROI and UK to leave the EU.

This is the error. To make an agreement that relates to previously made agreements without consideration of the impacts on the previously made agreements is huge oversight.

The 2016 referendum was not based on seats, but was a binary choice. Leave or remain. Majority vote was to leave the EU with 17.4 million, 52% of a total vote cast of 33.5 million.

So PM who signed GFA was elected by 13.4 million whereas the vote to leave EU was 17.4 million. A difference of 4 million.

Remain campaign leaflets sent to every household did not reference the Irish border. Nor does the website eureferendum.gov.uk.

The day minority opinion prevails over majority opinion is the day the World returns to the laws of the jungle whereby differences are solved by wars.

I mean a border solution in compliance with GFA and acceptable to people in NI.

Minority opinion frequently triumphs over majority - especially in first past the post.

The day minority opinion prevails over majority opinion is the day the World returns to the laws of the jungle whereby differences are solved by wars

Not correct.
Not listening to minority opinion led to WW2, not listening to minority opinion led to Vietnam.

Majority opinion is to bring back hanging, a few years ago, it was for all classes of murder... how many innocent people would have been hung had we bowed to that "opinion" ?

That is why representative democracy is so vital, it stops the ignorant from having direct says in matters they have zero knowledge in and causing wars!

@MysteryTripAgain - Signed without anyone in; England, Scotland or Wales being given the chance to have a say. Troubles spilled over onto UK mainland. So why were UK mainland voters excluded from the process that lead to the GFA?

Because that is the way the UK democracy works. You don't have a written constitution. Your elected representatives can make decisions of this nature without a referendum. If the electorate do not like the decision, they can vote for a different government next time.

Article 50 concluded in 2009 by EU. No reference to GFA concluded 11 years earlier. Nor was GFA revisited to take into account that there was now a mechanism that enabled either, or both, ROI and UK to leave the EU.

This is the error. To make an agreement that relates to previously made agreements without consideration of the impacts on the previously made agreements is huge oversight.

Nope. The only error was in assuming the UK would display sufficient integrity to stand by their legal obligations under the GFA. Ireland wanted to join Schengen. The UK didn't. Ireland showed integrity and took the mature approach of not joining Schengen as to do so would threaten the GFA if the UK were not also a party to it.

There is nothing stopping the UK leaving the EU while remaining compliant with the GFA. Norway plus does exactly that.

The day minority opinion prevails over majority opinion is the day the World returns to the laws of the jungle whereby differences are solved by wars.

All I can do is laugh at the ridiculousness of this statement. Unless the entire population votes on every decision, this will happen regularly. Your electoral system of fptp is particularly susceptible to minority opinion overriding majority opinion. Do you consider the UK electoral system democratic? If so, you have immediately contradicted your statement above. If not, why not and what are you doing to ensure it becomes democratic?

The day minority opinion prevails over majority opinion is the day the World returns to the laws of the jungle whereby differences are solved by wars.

This is seriously comic, in relation to a country with fptp and a system where the PM is chosen by members of the party. Thinking BJ is fit to be PM is a minority opinion (esp in Scotland, where his popularity ratings are sth like -37%), but it has prevailed with a sickening vengeance.

...it stops the ignorant from having direct says in matters they have zero knowledge in and causing wars!

Not just the ignorant, but the unscrupulous - Johnson, Priti Patel are two who immediately come to mind there.

The day minority opinion prevails over majority opinion is the day the World returns to the laws of the jungle whereby differences are solved by wars.

All I can do is laugh at the ridiculousness of this statement. Unless the entire population votes on every decision, this will happen regularly. Your electoral system of fptp is particularly susceptible to minority opinion overriding majority opinion. Do you consider the UK electoral system democratic? If so, you have immediately contradicted your statement above. If not, why not and what are you doing to ensure it becomes democratic?

Indeed. (Wish I was on the iPad so that I could use the "clapping hands" emoji ).

When was the last time a UK Government was voted in with by a majority of the popular vote? Answer: 1931

The Tories actually increased their percentage of the popular vote in 2017 compared to 2015, despite losing their overall majority, yet they still only got 42.4% of the vote.

I presume that MidnightTripAgain is actively campaigning for a more "democratic" PR system rather than FPTP somehow I think not, but I might be wrong

FWIW: the SNP, who have benefited from FPTP in WM elections (especially in 2015 ) are still in favour of PR as they believe that it is a fairer electoral system, even though it would result in fewer seats for them in WM.

I agree prettybird. One complaint is that people like Farage and UKIP would get elected, but the people who want to vote for them are as entitled to have a say as anyone else. As we saw in local Government, once the UKIP tendency get elected they go and make a complete pig's ear of things and get booted out the next time.

Ulster. Northern Ireland. The north of Ireland. The Irish Republic. Eire. The Republic of Ireland. Ireland. Britain. UK. The British Isles. The British Islands. Etc.

The whole Anglo-Irish Question is bedevilled by folks who fuss and obsess about the preferred terminology of others. Best not to nit-pick lest your nits be picked.

The Ulster Unionists (sic) know who they are. They insist they are British. We could get into a pedant-fest over that, or we could let them get on with it, big bangy drums and all.

To be fair Mockers it is not pedantic to point out that whilst counties Cavan, Monaghan and Donegal are in Ulster they are in no way part of the United Kingdom.

If the electorate do not like the decision, they can vote for a different government next time

They did in 2010. Labour out an Conservative in.

Norway plus does exactly that

Unless the entire population votes on every decision, this will happen regularly

Nothing said about the entire population voting. Majority of those who choose to vote was the point. On your logic GFA is flawed as only 56% of ROI took part in referendum and 81% for NI. Overall turnout was 63% which is less than the EU referendum turnout.

Back to the old argument that remain in Customs Union and Single market represents leaving the EU. Don't think it does as that prevents dealing with non EU countries

They did in 2010. Labour out an Conservative in.

The Tories didn't win in 2010. Much to what many LibDems must now regret, they went into a Coalition with the Tories. It caused them to lose a raft of votes at the 2015 election. At the time though, people thought the Tories would behave honourably. Fool me once...

Back to the old argument that remain in Customs Union and Single market represents leaving the EU. Don't think it does as that prevents dealing with non EU countries

It does, whatever you think. As far as deals went, we were going to have the easiest deals in history, we hold all the cards. So far the only deals which look likely are ones which will smash the NHS, destroy our farming industry, lower our food standards and risk violence breaking out again in NI.

@MysteryTripAgain - some people would count Norway plus as leaving. Not everyone cares that much about trade deals. People wanted leave for different reasons. Maybe they should spell out the specific Brexit option out in the next referendum if they have one.

People have also said there should be no border between Ireland and NI. But how will this be possible and to have different regulations either side of the border? How will people end freedom of movement.

Norway plus satisfies things. People can vote in Brexit party to specify a Brexit if unhappy

The Freedom of Movement of people is a difficult one, because this is part of the Common Travel agreement. However, I believe that this is not written down, but is more of a Gentleman's agreement, so the Tories could scrap it, if they chose to.

So why were UK mainland voters excluded from the process that lead to the GFA

Because people on the mainland are for the most part, incredibly ignorant of the day to day lives of the people of Northern Ireland, they don't understand the reality and don't really care as they see NI as 'not their problem'

Hence the lack of discussion about this issue in the run up to the referendum, during the referendum and when Article 50 was triggered.

As far as deals went, we were going to have the easiest deals in history, we hold all the cards

Some might have believed that, but I did not. Since the vote to leave EU the UK has made trade deals with 38 countries, but so far has not got in with the biggest players such as, US, China and India.

China doubtful as they seem to want to go it alone.

US seem to saying a deal can be done if UK leave EU with no deal. Not convinced about Trump's motives. Keeps talking about a great deal can be made with UK, but does not say it will be great for UK.

India would be my choice as language not a problem and India is a growing economy and a huge food producer

Because people on the mainland are for the most part, incredibly ignorant of the day to day lives of the people of Northern Ireland, they don't understand the reality and don't really care as they see NI as 'not their problem'

Partly true I would say, but has that come from fact that UK mainland was not kept in the loop during the development of the GFA? As previously said the troubles affected UK mainland too.

Why do some think we would be able to get better trade deals as a single country than as part of a massive trade bloc ? How will these trade deals be more beneficial to the ordinary person living in the UK ?

@MysteryTripAgain - On your logic GFA is flawed as only 56% of ROI took part in referendum and 81% for NI.

You're getting confused again. I'm not the one arguing that allowing the opinion of the minority to override the opinion of the majority leads to the law of the jungle.

You still haven't answered my question: Do you consider the UK electoral system democratic? If so, you have immediately contradicted your statement above. If not, why not and what are you doing to ensure it becomes democratic?

Overall turnout was 63% which is less than the EU referendum turnout.

I told you previously that Ireland did not vote for or against the GFA in the referendum of 1998. You combining the votes from Ireland and NI is the equivalent of combining the votes in the Irish presidential election and the votes in the US presidential election and saying Michal D. Higgins was voted for by a miniscule percentage of voters but still became president.

Partly true I would say, but has that come from fact that UK mainland was not kept in the loop during the development of the GFA?

The UK mainland was very much in the loop during the development of the GFA. There were many, many news stories on the GFA and what was going on. If people chose not to inform themselves of what was going on, that is a very different story.

You still haven't answered my question: Do you consider the UK electoral system democratic? If so, you have immediately contradicted your statement above. If not, why not and what are you doing to ensure it becomes democratic?

I can see the argument why FPTP is considered unfair, but I am not sure how could administer a PR system. For example, a party wins 55% of seats, but nationally has 45% of the vote. How would it be decided which constituencies get the MP they voted for and which do not?

The UK mainland was very much in the loop during the development of the GFA. There were many, many news stories on the GFA and what was going on. If people chose not to inform themselves of what was going on, that is a very different story

I was not referring to media coverage, but the fact that nobody on UK mainland got the chance to vote like those in NI. Might not have been much of a turnout from the mainland, but as troubles spilled over to the mainland I think have been appropriate.

@Mystery - i’d like to see larger constituencies with multiple MPs. Let’s face it, many issues in 1 constituency apply to the next door one too. People can still see a local MP and are more likely to get one who shares their views.

The drawback is that people will not necessarily have clarity on who gets in, particularly where 2 candidates get elected from the same party for a constituency - though the party can state who the 1st choice candidate is if they only get 1 place.

Why do some think we would be able to get better trade deals as a single country than as part of a massive trade bloc ?

At present individual members of the EU are not permitted to approach non EU Countries directly to make trade deals. All must go through the EU. This is why I like the Norway model as they are in EEA, but can still pursue trade deals with Non EU Countries.

Single Market favours manufacturing more than services. Hence Germany, who has a larger manufacturing base that UK does well. Germany has a large trade surplus from inter trade with other EU members. Whereas UK currently has a 64 Billion Trade deficit with the EU which has been growing since 1999. 21 Billion is with Germany alone. However, UK has a trade surplus of 44 Billion with non EU Countries. Idea is expand more in non EU Countries. How successful that will of course remains to be seen.

How will these trade deals be more beneficial to the ordinary person living in the UK ?

UK can set tariffs with non EU Countries and source cheaper goods. However, leaving EU without a deal could reduce the value of Sterling and offset any savings made by sourcing from outside UK.