The Brexit Arms

[BrexitArmsLandLady]

🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧
🍻🍺🎉🍾🍹🍷🥂🍻🍺🎉🍾🍹🍷🥂

Hold the line Brexiters!!

Nearly there...

Only 53 days to go!

🍻🍺🎉🍾🍹🍷🥂🍻🍺🎉🍾🍹🍷🥂
🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧

Isn’t it just jas

That’s why I don’t understand bellinis insistence that that is the solution.

It just pisses off a different group of people.

Why should NI have the economic benefits of cu amd sm access but we do not?
OR we are punishing NI to stay in the hated and economically damaging EU

NI is a member state of UK. So a benefit to NI is a benefit to the UK as a whole.

I can only assume neither of you is old enough to remember the Troubles or the time before it started or how miraculous the GFA was.
I'd rather be pissed off than dead. I'd rather my daughter was pissed off than dead. I live in NW England. There is more than one "Manchester bomb" in our recent history.
I don't care how it's done. Protecting GFA is the most important thing and our failure to take it into consideration is why we aren't out.
We won't get a trade deal with the EU after No Deal if we have fucked it up. Or at least we won't get a trade deal that is anything like the magic one , No Dealers dream we will get.
It may all come back to No Deal in your view but it will always come back to GFA too.

I agree, whatever happens the GFA has to be protected and is more important than any deal.

Why should NI have the economic benefits of cu amd sm access but we do not?
OR we are punishing NI to stay in the hated and economically damaging EU

NI is a member state of UK. So a benefit to NI is a benefit to the UK as a whole

So, membership of the cu and sm is an economic benefit to NI and hence to the UK ?

Many other brexitiers would say being in such a relationship is economically damaging (which is a reason to leave) so we damage NI and hence the rest of UK?

About as economically damaging as not being dead or not being at risk of death. And taking all be benefits of peace and prosperity.

As a Scot, I do think that a border in the Irish Sea will be unpopular.

But I think also most Scots just want to avoid No Deal.

So the preferential treatment of NI would be more of an issue later.

I think it would lead to Independence but then so will No Deal.

Scotland has its own arguments for independence. Tbe "special treatment " in this case would be not destroying the hard won peace in NI.
It isn't the same. It's arguments for independence have nothing to do with The Troubles.

I think a border in the sea will lead to Loyalist violence, which is what triggered the the so called troubles in 1968.

Recent polling is showing a move toward unification, that is absolutely unacceptable to Foster and co.

The only way to fully protect the GA is to revoke.

Boris is holding Brexit talks with Jean-Claude Juncker on Monday. First face to face meeting.

So, membership of the cu and sm is an economic benefit to NI and hence to the UK

It solves the unique circumstances of NI.

Seems to be a misconception that UK will never trade with the EU again. Neither he EU nor the UK want that to happen.

UK has a trade surplus with Ireland as an individual member of the EU, but has a trade deficit with the EU as a whole.

Then loyalists will face law enforcement same as everyone else. They don't have the money or the international backing. And putting a customs border in the sea makes NI on its own a successful entity which UK doesn't have to spend as much money propping up.
If there is a (re) unification referendum in NI, that will be the will of the majority. As will independence vote for Scotland. What are you afraid of?

I think a border in the sea will lead to Loyalist violence, which is what triggered the the so called troubles in 1968.

Agreed - there are 2 sides to the NI situation and appeasing one will rile the other.

It’s not going to end well whatever happens because the peace there is just too fragile - that’s the real problem

And making NI the scapegoat for whatever Brexit we have now is going to cause problems on 1 side or the other.

I think a border in the sea will lead to Loyalist violence, which is what triggered the the so called troubles in 1968

That’s why NI being a special economic zone is the better option.

Whatever. You are itching for no Deal to make people suffer for their foolishness and you don't give a shit about NI.
Not much I can do about your attitude.

That’s why NI being a special economic zone is the better option.

Eh? That requires a border in the sea.

Sorry AuldAlliance was not aware of that interpretation of FWIW

Bear somewhat shocked to find that after all these years and doorbell gate we agree far more than we disagree these days

Couple of interesting articles.

The first is a legal view of the Prorogation cases in Scotland and England.

ukconstitutionallaw.org/2019/09/13/alan-greene-miller-2-non-justiciability-and-the-danger-of-legal-black-holes/#comments

The theme is that in viewing prorogation as an absolute Executive power the courts create a legal Black Hole. As pp have referred to, the danger is that the case could be setting a precedent for prorogation for as long as the Government likes for any reason. It looks like the Supreme Court will either seek to set limits, or if it deems this beyond the scope of the legal system, invite Parliament to do so.

The second looks at the limitations of the Benn - Burt Act. It posits that there is even an outside chance it could cause No Deal. This would happen if the EU set conditions which Parliament was unable to approve -( the 31 January vanilla option is nowhere near long enough to be useful if the aim is anything other than giving Boris time to get his preferred option imho).

ukconstitutionallaw.org/2019/09/13/alan-greene-miller-2-non-justiciability-and-the-danger-of-legal-black-holes/#comments

Mummy you are correct. The BBC et al are spectacularly failing to notice the N Irish judgement. "...there is nothing in the Belfast Agreement to require EU Membership (or regulatory alignment or customs union membership for that matter). "

I think this is highly significant as to me it implies that the GFA is the pre-existing backstop. Therefore as the UK and Ireland are the principals and the EU the guarantor the onus would be on the EU to allow Ireland and the UK to negotiate border arrangements bi-laterally. This was the assumed starting position, on the UK side at least, when Art 50 was triggered.

I am not sure what the Appeal process for this case is but feels like it may go to the ECJ?

Why should NI have the economic benefits of cu and sm access but we do not

Because whether a border is imposed on the land or in sea you are asking one group of people to compromise on the terms of the good friday agreement which guaranteed an identity either irish or british

Bellini likes the idea of the special economic zone and whilst i agree it is probably the lesser of 2 evils, ( i would personally rather the whole bloody UK realised brexit is a shit storm and gave it up) having border in the sea and the backstop still partially removes unionists ( not all of them dupers) from the british identity they were guaranteed under the terms of the peace treaty.

This would be a huge compromise by unionists as they already compromised in 1998 on things like: having IRA prisoners responsible for atrocities released early into society and then having a former IRA commander appointed as minister for education in local politics. These types of things were hard to stomach on both sides.

This is a big ask to have them now go further and be economically separated from GB. Many of the ordinary people suffered years at the hands of the troubles and the memories are still raw. To think that they and their parents went through all of that in the name of the union, only now to be separated from GB is going to be very hard to take...so i dont think anywhere else in the UK has any place complaining if we do get special economic terms.

We have been waiting in NI since the 1960s to have several motorways built so maybe a bit of investment is long overdue

Whatever
Not much I can do about your attitude

Well you could argue more eloquently how it actually would work as a solution as, from where I’m at, even if it happened, it’s a short term solution that then leads to the discontent of:-

• Those in NI who didn’t chose it
• Most of Scotland
• most of London
• Everyone who wants no deal

So we have a GE and were back facing no deal again

Tbe ruling in NI means that it is incumbent upon both sides to protect GFA. The EU is not going to cast a member state adrift so it cannot fuck over Ireland to kowtow to a country that wants to leave.

Bear somewhat shocked to find that after all these years and doorbell gate we agree far more than we disagree these days

Lol! Doorbell gate seems like a lifetime ago 😂

I still don’t agree with yours or any Leavers rationale for wanting to leave but I do respect the fact we can’t change your opinion any more than you can change mine and wishful thinking isn’t going to resolve this mess.

I have tried to argue in detail but your No Deal devotion (which is no different to other No Dealers on here) keeps dismissing it as irrelevant. Of course DUP will be pissed off. I'm not sure they have the backing of the Unionist community as evidenced by the result of the referendum which was clearly cross sectarian divide for Remain.
Of course people who support Remain who are not in NI will be pissed off. Like they aren't pissed off now?
This gets us out which is what the majority of the UK apparently wanted. It protects GFA (which only stupid fucking twats want to ignore).
If Scotland wants independence that is a different discussion and may well be what happens.

bellini it’s got nothing to do with my ‘no deal devotion’

The fact is everything even you have listed is exactly why it’s not a viable and sustainable solution.

It might suit you but it’s not all about you.

Do you honestly think if BJ goes back to parliament with anything with the words Withdrawal Agreement on it it will magically pass now?

It won’t - it’s toxic.

It always was poisonous but he’s made it radioactive now.