The Brexit Arms

[BrexitArmsLandlady]

🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧

Go BoJo!
Go BoJo!
Go BoJo!
Go BoJo!

So near & yet so far..............

🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧

Ruth Smeeth & Gareth Snell (both Labour) have said they will vote for it

EU won’t accept it if it doesn’t work for their members

EU have no reason to accept it because of 'surrender bill' which has handed control of extension (and length of extension) to them.

No deadline looming = no need for them to accept anything at all

So nobody’s worried that the Brexit figureheads have all lied over and over again about digital solutions, alternative arrangements, no need for checks.... for 3 whole years.

Johnson was writing in the Telegraph just 2 months ago that checks in Ireland wouldn’t be necessary.

You all enjoy being lied to?

Perhaps but if everyone on our side is finally... Lined up...

They will look like dictatorship if they they, guy and junker don't agree it.
Did anyone see jrm questioning guy in that brexit committee thing?? What Shifty little prick. (guy that is )

I'm more concerned about corruption, lies a d cover ups in the eu right now... It's a moving situation.

Perhaps but if everyone on our side is finally... Lined up...

But ‘our side’ has always been ‘lined up’

Lined up in wanting the impossible - which this is too.

Guy represents the eu empire.

Thanks for your honest answer.

Just to make sure I understand - you don’t mind being lied to, if the person doing the lying happens to be promoting what you believe in?

Johnson was writing in the Telegraph just 2 months ago that checks in Ireland wouldn’t be necessary

And the new deal does NOT involve any checks on the border. A hard border is NOT necessary.

Bollocks gone what a load of desperate rubbish.

@walking

Then I’m sorry if I’ve misunderstood the situation.

I’ve been talking about what Johnson said yesterday in an interview - that there would be checks.

I’ll read up again and make sure I get the latest.

Imnotthrowingawaymyshot. The significance of 'most googled terms' on June 24th, which was the day after the referendum result, strongly implies that many had no idea what they were voting for. A 15 second search reveals https://www.macleans.ca/politics/worldpolitics/what-were-googles-most-frequent-searches-after-brexit/ this]]

I cannot preview on my phone, but I hope the link works, in helping you grasp why I posted it, as it is self explanatory.

Sorry, didn't link correctly.

Type into google 'what was the most asked question on 06/24/2016 UK?' (US date convention).

See what comes up.

that there would be checks
There will be some checks but they will not be at the border. They might be at the point of origin, destination or somewhere else but they will not be anywhere near the border.
If someone looked inside a lorry at my local Tesco to check it had TVs inside it, that does not make my local Tesco a border with another country.
I think that is a perfectly workable and reasonable compromise.

And...

Who do you think was googling? Again what your point is...

I think the majority of people with any analytical ability will recognise that if the EU don't agree, it actually isn't the EU's 'fault', it's because the deal compromises a member country.

Which they won't do.

Do I spot another 'blame shift'?

imnotthrowing you mean this one

m.youtube.com/watch?v=ix7_26pM0AY

Over to you Guy.

If someone looked inside a lorry at my local Tesco to check it had TVs inside it, that does not make my local Tesco a border with another country.

and if the van stops half a mile down the road and picks up some unchecked goods?

Varadker says it doesn't provide everything that the backstop does.

Perhaps not, but no-deal means no back stop in any iteration at all.

@Walkingdeadfangirl

Thanks for the summary. I’ve read the details now.

It does sound reasonable the way that they’ve put it, I agree.

But my knowledge of customs arrangements, trade etc is minimal.

I do hope it’s an ok basis for tweaking an acceptable withdrawal deal.

Apologies that I took what was said out of context. I must admit I was outraged before your update, and feeling pretty angry.

I shall keep my fingers crossed that this moves things along.

it's because the deal compromises a member country.

And arguably 'no deal' will compromise Ireland even more

So why the dogmatic adherence to the original WA backstop?

and if the van stops half a mile down the road and picks up some unchecked goods?
Then Tesco/the driver becomes a smuggler and at some point will be caught, punished and imprisoned. Do you think smuggling doesn't happen across the Irish border at the moment?

That vid of Verhofstadt & JRM is excruciating 😂

We need the backstop because of the rules!

• but what if there is no deal?

We need a border!

• so the EU will insist on a border?

Yes! But no! But yes! But we need the backstop!

The bloody backstop is the sticking point for WM - if the EU can compromise on it then the WA should pass & then we can get on with it all.

Then Tesco/the driver becomes a smuggler and at some point will be caught, punished and imprisoned. Do you think smuggling doesn't happen across the Irish border at the moment?

At the moment goods adhere to the same EU standards, after Brexit they will not making the potential for smuggling across a very complex border rife.

And arguably 'no deal' will compromise Ireland even more

Ireland isn't going to be bullied by the UK anymore. Good luck getting trade deals if the GFA is breached.

Isn't it dusty.

Painful to watch but renews my flagging resolve to get out! I cannot stand the man.