Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
Sauce For The Goose?
34 Answers
Former Chancellor Philip Hammond has accused the PM of trying to wreck the chance of a new Brexit deal, by making demands the EU could never accept.
https:/
so it's ok for the EUSSR to have "unacceptable" demands but not us! right oh! the gaul of the Quisling knows no bounds!
https:/
so it's ok for the EUSSR to have "unacceptable" demands but not us! right oh! the gaul of the Quisling knows no bounds!
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
The DUP’s position is fundamentally ridiculous: they acknowledge that a No Deal is bad for NI and they probably even acknowledge that it’s bad for the Union also. I suspect they actually would like a border.
Had they not held the balance of power their objections would have been effectively ignored. Most of the ERGites who complained avowedly only did so out of sympathy and no doubt also fear
Had they not held the balance of power their objections would have been effectively ignored. Most of the ERGites who complained avowedly only did so out of sympathy and no doubt also fear
The reason the backstop is an issue is because the EU demands it. The DUP isn't the issue. There's surely next to no support for internal UK borders and minority support for casting NI off from the rest of the UK. Meanwhile we're having to cope with the ridiculous suggestion that keeping the whole of the UK in instead solves anything, given that we're meant to be leaving.
//What unacceptable demand is the EU making, as a matter of interest?//
The Irish backstop is the most unacceptable of a large list. It compels either the entire UK to remain in the Customs Union or simply Northern Ireland to do so (thus necessitating a customs border in the Irish Sea). One of the principle aims of Brexit is to see the UK (in its entirety) out of the Customs Union. If the backstop is agreed the proposed “interim” situation can remain in perpetuity unless the EU grants its permission for it to end.
Prominent in the minds of the Euromaniacs, when they decide whether to kindly let us remove ourselves from the backstop trap which they have created will be the “political declaration” which accompanies the Withdrawal Agreement. This is equally obnoxious. It requires the UK to agree to “…ambitious customs arrangements that build and improve on the single customs territory provided for in the Withdrawal Agreement”. It also demands that the UK should align with EU laws and that a future relationship must ensure that a level playing field ensues on State aid, competition, social and employment laws. It also demands fishing quotas for EU boats fishing in UK waters, “Mobility arrangements” (aka free movement), social security co-ordination (so that EU nationals in the UK can draw equal benefits, thus drawing migrants from low paid economies). It proposes that overseeing all of these laws will be, needless to say, the ECJ.
Do you need me list any more of those demands?
No other treaties in the world require the participants to submit to the courts of another party. Nor do I know of any other international trade treaty where one party is unable to unilaterally end its agreement provided the appropriate notice is given.
The Agreement and the accompanying political declaration is an alternative version of the Lisbon Treaty and whatever Leave voters were said to have voted for they do not vote to end our participation in one treaty only to sign another which is arguably worse.
//The deal is an agreement.
It contains no demands.//
You misunderstand. It is not an agreement because it has not been agreed (other than with Mrs May). It became a list of demands when it was announced that it was a take-it-or-leave-it deal. The accompanying duress is the threat of a very messy Brexit when pragmatism should prevail to make it as smooth as possible for both parties.
//The only reason the backstop is an issue is because of the DUP.//
Again you misunderstand. I am not a DUP member or supporter and nor do I live in Northern Ireland. But the backstop is an issue for me because whilst it exists there must be either a customs border in the Irish Sea or the whole of the UK must remain in the EU’s Customs Union. Neither of these is in the least bit acceptable to me (and I doubt I’m alone).
Too much emphasis has been placed on the unacceptability of the Deal based solely on the Backstop. That is just one aspect of very many which makes the agreement totally unsuitable and rather than try to renegotiate it (which we have been told is impossible anyway) it should simply be ditched.
The Irish backstop is the most unacceptable of a large list. It compels either the entire UK to remain in the Customs Union or simply Northern Ireland to do so (thus necessitating a customs border in the Irish Sea). One of the principle aims of Brexit is to see the UK (in its entirety) out of the Customs Union. If the backstop is agreed the proposed “interim” situation can remain in perpetuity unless the EU grants its permission for it to end.
Prominent in the minds of the Euromaniacs, when they decide whether to kindly let us remove ourselves from the backstop trap which they have created will be the “political declaration” which accompanies the Withdrawal Agreement. This is equally obnoxious. It requires the UK to agree to “…ambitious customs arrangements that build and improve on the single customs territory provided for in the Withdrawal Agreement”. It also demands that the UK should align with EU laws and that a future relationship must ensure that a level playing field ensues on State aid, competition, social and employment laws. It also demands fishing quotas for EU boats fishing in UK waters, “Mobility arrangements” (aka free movement), social security co-ordination (so that EU nationals in the UK can draw equal benefits, thus drawing migrants from low paid economies). It proposes that overseeing all of these laws will be, needless to say, the ECJ.
Do you need me list any more of those demands?
No other treaties in the world require the participants to submit to the courts of another party. Nor do I know of any other international trade treaty where one party is unable to unilaterally end its agreement provided the appropriate notice is given.
The Agreement and the accompanying political declaration is an alternative version of the Lisbon Treaty and whatever Leave voters were said to have voted for they do not vote to end our participation in one treaty only to sign another which is arguably worse.
//The deal is an agreement.
It contains no demands.//
You misunderstand. It is not an agreement because it has not been agreed (other than with Mrs May). It became a list of demands when it was announced that it was a take-it-or-leave-it deal. The accompanying duress is the threat of a very messy Brexit when pragmatism should prevail to make it as smooth as possible for both parties.
//The only reason the backstop is an issue is because of the DUP.//
Again you misunderstand. I am not a DUP member or supporter and nor do I live in Northern Ireland. But the backstop is an issue for me because whilst it exists there must be either a customs border in the Irish Sea or the whole of the UK must remain in the EU’s Customs Union. Neither of these is in the least bit acceptable to me (and I doubt I’m alone).
Too much emphasis has been placed on the unacceptability of the Deal based solely on the Backstop. That is just one aspect of very many which makes the agreement totally unsuitable and rather than try to renegotiate it (which we have been told is impossible anyway) it should simply be ditched.
I simply try to address all the points made in the way I think best, Ikky. I find it beats name calling (which I know you don't resort to, but some do).
//Bring back a hard border, with watch towers and border guards.//
There is no requirement for a hard border in Ireland, least of all one with "watch towers and security guards". Nor will there be one - not least because nobody has any intention of imposing one, whatever type of Brexit is delivered. Fuss and bluster.
//Bring back a hard border, with watch towers and border guards.//
There is no requirement for a hard border in Ireland, least of all one with "watch towers and security guards". Nor will there be one - not least because nobody has any intention of imposing one, whatever type of Brexit is delivered. Fuss and bluster.
