Brexit - The End of the United Kingdom?

[ifk101]

The DUP has done us a big favour. Not only have they protected our interests, they have advanced them to effectively maintain the current status quo with the North and now the rest of the UK. What the UK can independently do in the future will now be severely curtailed to align with the customs union and single market, of which Ireland has a say and the UK doesn't.

[DannyInvincible]

The DUP has done us a big favour. Not only have they protected our interests, they have advanced them to effectively maintain the current status quo with the North and now the rest of the UK. What the UK can independently do in the future will now be severely curtailed to align with the customs union and single market, of which Ireland has a say and the UK doesn't.

Tiocfaidh Arlene!

[The Fly]

I do have some sympathy for those who voted Leave in England and now feel somewhat cheated by this outcome. I have even more sympathy for those who voted Remain and now have a kind of '2nd class' status in respect of their rights compared to a unionist in NI who can avail of their entitlement to an Irish passport.

[DannyInvincible]

The commitments and principles outlined in this joint report will not pre-determine the outcome of wider discussions on the future relationship between the European Union and the United Kingdom and are, as necessary, specific to the unique circumstances on the island of Ireland. They are made and must be upheld in all circumstances, irrespective of the nature of any future agreement between the European Union and United Kingdom.

This appears to be a commitment that there will be no hard border even if the worst possible eventuality transpires and the UK and EU can't agree a trade deal. I heard Varadkar confirming the same on the radio a while ago.

[DannyInvincible]

This appears to be a commitment that there will be no hard border even if the worst possible eventuality transpires and the UK and EU can't agree a trade deal. I heard Varadkar confirming the same on the radio a while ago.

Actually, Nigel Dodds was on BBC NI's 'Newsline' yesterday evening (https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b09hbl93/bbc-newsline-evening-news-08122017) (at 5m10s in link) claiming that "nothing is agreed until everything is agreed" and that yesterday's paper "will disappear" if there is no final trade deal. His prioritisation of getting to phase two of talks ahead of border clarity was undoubted hard Brexiteering and his words yesterday worryingly appear to fly in the face of Varadkar's words (and indeed the words of the document itself). Varadkar said the commitments agreed by the UK were "bulletproof", but has he forgotten who he's dealing with (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfidious_Albion)?

This morning then, we have Michael Gove telling British voters that they "can change the EU deal if they don't like it" and that the UK will have "full freedom to diverge from EU law on the single market and customs union" (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/dec/09/michael-gove-voters-can-change-eu-deal-if-they-dont-like-it). Full freedom to diverge is wholly incompatible with full alignment where necessary to maintain a soft border in Ireland.

Andrea Leadsom has been saying similar things to Gove; essentially that the UK could make a deal and then renege on it. What sort of approach is that? The UK would quickly lose whatever credibility it has if it was conduct itself in such a manner. What effect do they think such a duplicitous approach will have on countries considering a future deal with the UK? Nobody will want to make deals with you if you can't be trusted to uphold your side of the bargain.

The sheer quantity of varying interpretations of what yesterday's paper means is astonishing and seriously concerning. Something will have to give eventually.

The difference in the post-agreement words of Varadkar and Foster was very striking in terms of possibly revealing who really came out on top from these negotiations and whose triumphant tone is mere bravado; Varadkar confirmed that "we have achieved all of our goals" whilst Foster admitted that "there are still matters [the DUP] would have liked to see clarified" and that her party had agreed to things about which they weren't wholly satisfied because they "ran out of time essentially". I'm not sure how the DUP can boast victory in light of the wounded reality conceded by Foster's words. Perhaps those who remain somewhat concerned by the multitude of interpretations doing the rounds at the minute can take some comfort in that.

Just reading paragraph 52 of yesterday's paper:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DQhlfueWsAEk3Iz.jpg

I'm guessing that could mean that Irish citizens from the north will possibly maintain EU representation and voting rights? I'm pretty sure Guy Verhofstadt had aired that idea before. Meanwhile, whilst British citizenship will no longer be an EU citizenship (meaning no such rights for UK citizens), it does nevertheless seem astonishing that Britain could be tied into the single market and customs union (because the north of Ireland, with which Britain must be aligned, must be tied in to the all-island economy) but have no actual representation to influence the terms of engagement. That's an awful deal really. And what will they pay for the honour of leaving themselves in this significantly worse off position compared to before? Up to £50 billion. You couldn't make this stuff up.

[DannyInvincible]

No hard border
https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/brexit-breakthrough-taoiseach-hails-significant-day-as-deal-ensuring-no-hard-border-finally-agreed-36389898.html
well i never................:)

And FG riding high in the polls.
Now what are SF and their supporters going to moan about for the next few months.

A piece by Jonathan Powell here on the residual concerns over the British government's border assurances: https://www.ft.com/content/5654351e-db74-11e7-9504-59efdb70e12f?segmentid=acee4131-99c2-09d3-a635-873e61754ec6


"Rejoice! The prime minister has solved the thorny problem of the Northern Ireland border, concluded the divorce negotiations and now we can move on to the sunny uplands of negotiating future trading relations with the EU.

Or has she? In fact, the problem of the border is not resolved at all but simply left hanging. The language on “full alignment” means different things to different people. A series of contradictory undertakings have been given and a new separate strand of negotiation on Ireland opened in the next stage."

Powell was a governmental negotiator and advisor to Tony Blair when the GFA was agreed, so I'd say he knows a thing or too about constructive ambiguity and how it works.

[DannyInvincible]

'UK qualifies implications of ‘full alignment’ Brexit pledge': https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/uk-qualifies-implications-of-full-alignment-brexit-pledge-1.3320823


The British government has played down the implications of a promise of “full alignment” of policies to support an all-island economy in Ireland if other ways of avoiding a hard border cannot be agreed.

The agreement between Britain and the European Commission says that in the absence of agreed solutions, the UK will maintain full alignment “with those rules of the internal market and the customs union which, now or in the future, support North-South co-operation, the all-island economy and the protection of the 1998 agreement”.

A senior official at the Department for Exiting the European Union in Westminster said on Friday that the commitment applies only to the six areas of North-South economic co-operation identified in the Belfast Agreement. These are transport, agriculture, education, health, environment and tourism.

[DannyInvincible]

Was watching Andrew Marr's show on BBC yesterday (https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b09jchpq/the-andrew-marr-show-10122017) and he was describing the past week as Theresa May's "best week since she became Prime Minister"...

Why are people and the media fawning over her "negotiation skills"? The deal struck was somewhere between a fudge and a capitulation.

[BonnieShels]

Well they have the EU and therefore us over a barrel. I'm sick to death at this stage. I want them gone.

[backstothewall]

This deal will last as long as the mathematics in the House of Commons and no longer. It satisfies nobody.

FG have come out of it smelling of roses. Some change in a week. FF on the other hand are in crisis, whether they realise it or not.

With the polls as they are I'd imagine Leo is considering going to the people in the early Spring. If he wants to be the FG leader who puts the soldiers of destiny to the sword he should wait until SF have McDonald in place. FF will find themselves squeezed between a government seen to be performing well, and SF with a fresh faced leader and an agenda of radical change to appeal to the disillusioned and dispossessed.

On the idea discussed above of the north retaining our MEPs, Id fully expect that to be the case. I've had a pet theory for a while that for the European parliament we will end up as a single all island constituency (the current boundaries make no sense at all anyway) with the number of seats apportioned to us to reflect all those in the island who are entitled to Irish citizenship (everybody).

The DUP will go potty but they don't get any say in the internal affairs of the EU post-Brexit.

[Gather round]

Why are people and the media fawning over her "negotiation skills"? The deal struck was somewhere between a fudge and a capitulation

1 The Beeb always fawn over the Govt of the day- and will do as long as they're Govt funded

2 A large part of the population believe what they read in the Tory-run press, even the obvious nonsense

[Gather round]

On the idea discussed above of the north retaining our MEPs, Id fully expect that to be the case. I've had a pet theory for a while that for the European parliament we will end up as a single all island constituency (the current boundaries make no sense at all anyway) with the number of seats apportioned to us to reflect all those in the island who are entitled to Irish citizenship (everybody).

The DUP will go potty but they don't get any say in the internal affairs of the EU post-Brexit

Wouldn't the actual election be an internal affair?

[Kingdom]

Danny, superb analysis over the last few pages, really great reading.

In the context of an All-Island European Parliament election, what would the potential constituencies be? Potentially Dublin, Belfast, Leinster, Munster, Connaught and Ulster?
The Republic has 8 seats, with the North having 3. Assuming there would be no increase to an all-island total of 11, would be a re-alignment of Dublin 2, Belfast 2, Leinster 2, Munster 2, Ulster 2 and Connaught 1 work and would this Belfast single constituency guarantee a Unionist Seat?

[Gather round]

In the context of an All-Island European Parliament election, what would the potential constituencies be? Potentially Dublin, Belfast, Leinster, Munster, Connaught and Ulster? ...would this Belfast single constituency guarantee a Unionist Seat?

NI won't be in the EU so it won't formally take part in a EU election. If Martina Anderson gets re-elected in Connacht- Ulster instead she can offer to represent Unionist interests. I daresay it'll be politely declined ;)

[BonnieShels]

Danny, superb analysis over the last few pages, really great reading.

In the context of an All-Island European Parliament election, what would the potential constituencies be? Potentially Dublin, Belfast, Leinster, Munster, Connaught and Ulster?
The Republic has 8 seats, with the North having 3. Assuming there would be no increase to an all-island total of 11, would be a re-alignment of Dublin 2, Belfast 2, Leinster 2, Munster 2, Ulster 2 and Connaught 1 work and would this Belfast single constituency guarantee a Unionist Seat?

I think an All-island constituency would be the way to go about it to stop any "complications". Postal voting and mobile polling booths could easily be implemented too. Or those at the border could easily pop into their nearest station. Easy Peasy.


NI won't be in the EU so it won't formally take part in a EU election. If Martina Anderson gets re-elected in Connacht- Ulster instead she can offer to represent Unionist interests. I daresay it'll be politely declined ;)

Well they will be heard loud and clear. :rolleyes:

[DannyInvincible]

1 The Beeb always fawn over the Govt of the day- and will do as long as they're Govt funded

2 A large part of the population believe what they read in the Tory-run press, even the obvious nonsense

Ha, aye, I was more "asking" rhetorically to express my sheer exasperation. :)


Danny, superb analysis over the last few pages, really great reading.

In the context of an All-Island European Parliament election, what would the potential constituencies be? Potentially Dublin, Belfast, Leinster, Munster, Connaught and Ulster?
The Republic has 8 seats, with the North having 3. Assuming there would be no increase to an all-island total of 11, would be a re-alignment of Dublin 2, Belfast 2, Leinster 2, Munster 2, Ulster 2 and Connaught 1 work and would this Belfast single constituency guarantee a Unionist Seat?

Cheers, Kingdom!

If there were two seats available in a Belfast constituency, I think you could safely expect one to be unionist anyway. If there was just one seat available in the constituency, I guess it would depend on the boundaries; the PUL community are now a minority community in the Belfast city council area (http://www.niassembly.gov.uk/globalassets/documents/raise/knowledge_exchange/briefing_papers/series3/gaffikin241013.pdf), although I'm pretty sure they'd form a comfortable enough majority if you included the wider metropolitan area.

[The Fly]

940531473609830401

[The Fly]

940540781684719616

[BonnieShels]

I really don't get how the UKGov don't get who they are dealing with it. The EU are so so rigid (most of the time) wrt rules. Why would they change tack now to suit the Brits?

[Gather round]

I really don't get how the UKGov don't get who they are dealing with it. The EU are so so rigid (most of the time) wrt rules. Why would they change tack now to suit the Brits?

Perhaps not when it's time to submit the annual accounts?

The EU is an often chaotically inefficient corporatist bureaucracy. Without endorsing any of the Brit Govt's baloney there must be a chance they'll fudge things.

Quick question for DI and the panel- why would Estonia or Hungary be that bothered about a Hard Irish border as Fintan O'Toole claims?

[Charlie Darwin]

Has Fintan O'Toole claimed that?

[DannyInvincible]

Quick question for DI and the panel- why would Estonia or Hungary be that bothered about a Hard Irish border as Fintan O'Toole claims?

What did O'Toole claim exactly?

If he has made such a claim, Estonia or Hungary might well be bothered out of a sense of solidarity with an EU ally who is standing up for its interests against an outsider (the UK). They may see Ireland as an ally who'll assist them as part of the larger EU bloc in their time of need at some later point in time. All for one and one for all; that sort of idea perhaps? There would be obvious practical benefit in such an approach.

[Gather round]

What did O'Toole claim exactly?

If he has made such a claim, Estonia or Hungary might well be bothered out of a sense of solidarity with an EU ally who is standing up for its interests against an outsider (the UK) and who may assist them as part of the larger EU bloc in their time of need at some later point in time? All for one and one for all; that sort of idea perhaps? There would be obvious practical benefit in such an approach

O'Toole said (in one of his many Radio Ulster interviews in the last week) that all 27 EU members were strongly committed to stopping the Hard Border. After all it fits his broad argument most of which I agree with- if NI is to have the same customs rules as both Dublin AND London then those will be Brussels rules and so a Hard Brexit is impossible.

This might be a careless flight of fancy. Estonia and Hungary have reasons to prefer a pretty cast iron external EU border- Russian Army and foreign migrants, for two- even before you consider that Davy Crockett's divided far might not be that pressing an issue in Narva or Miskolc.

[Charlie Darwin]

I highly doubt the Estonians are fretting about the Russian Army invading Tallinn through Dublin airport. Where on earth do you come up with this nonsense?

[backstothewall]

NI won't be in the EU so it won't formally take part in a EU election. If Martina Anderson gets re-elected in Connacht- Ulster instead she can offer to represent Unionist interests. I daresay it'll be politely declined ;)

Formally as far as who is concerned? It would be formal and legal to Ireland and the EU. Quite frankly nobody else matters.

[DannyInvincible]

O'Toole said (in one of his many Radio Ulster interviews in the last week) that all 27 EU members were strongly committed to stopping the Hard Border. After all it fits his broad argument most of which I agree with- if NI is to have the same customs rules as both Dublin AND London then those will be Brussels rules and so a Hard Brexit is impossible.

This might be a careless flight of fancy. Estonia and Hungary have reasons to prefer a pretty cast iron external EU border- Russian Army and foreign migrants, for two- even before you consider that Davy Crockett's divided far might not be that pressing an issue in Narva or Miskolc.

I don't see how the EU's eastern borders would be necessarily affected by what happens between Ireland and the UK though. Preventing a hard border in Ireland relies upon either special status for the north or a soft Brexit for the entire UK, meaning the whole of the island of Ireland (along with Britain potentially) can stay within or aligned to the single market and customs union. Russia and other states to the east of the EU aren't party to the single market or customs union, so states like Estonia or Hungary can still maintain hard boundaries on their eastern borders without issue and in accordance with their presumed wishes. Maintaining a soft or invisible border in Ireland wouldn't necessitate the same in the east as the circumstances of the respective sets of states involved are totally different.

On the other hand, if Britain was to leave the EU, diverge from the single market and customs union and take the north of Ireland with it, that would necessitate a hard border in Ireland. That would be analogous to the situation at present between Estonia and Russia or between Hungary and other non-EU eastern states. However, I think everyone is aware that divergence for the north of Ireland would necessitate a hard border, which is why the north being party to a hard Brexit simply isn't on the table. The EU-UK agreement last week even seemingly stated that a local solution will be found to the Irish border problem no matter what happens and even if there is no overall trade deal.

So I don't see any potential clash of interests or whatever for the likes of Estonia or Hungary. They can support the Irish government (as an EU ally dealing with an outsider) in using its influence to push for either special status for the north of Ireland or a soft Brexit whilst simultaneously maintaining hard boundaries on their own eastern borders with non-EU/SM/CU states; there's no inconsistency there.

Meanwhile, the Common Travel Area remains an arrangement between Ireland and the UK, subject to any decision to the contrary at their mutual behest or subject to any enforced adjustment due to changing circumstances; there'd be no duty upon any other EU state to enter into any similar sort of arrangement with a non-EU state.

[ifk101]

Yes and no Danny. There could be objections depending on the future direction the UK chooses to take. If, for example, the UK's future trade deal with the States results in the sale of manky, chlorine-washed chicken in the UK, there might be a need to block the flow of sub-standard produce from the UK via the Irish border into the EU. Therefore, EU agreement to a soft exit and no border in Ireland is dependent on UK alignment to the single market and customs union. The no-border scenario is acceptable to other member states if the UK remains aligned to the EU as there'll be a want to avoid the flow of undercut, sub-standard UK produce entering the EU market.

[DannyInvincible]

Yes and no Danny. There could be objections depending on the future direction the UK chooses to take. If, for example, the UK's future trade deal with the States results in the sale of manky, chlorine-washed chicken in the UK, there might be a need to block the flow of sub-standard produce from the UK via the Irish border into the EU. Therefore, EU agreement to a soft exit and no border in Ireland is dependent on UK alignment to the single market and customs union. The no-border scenario is acceptable to other member states if the UK remains aligned to the EU as there'll be a want to avoid the flow of undercut, sub-standard UK produce entering the EU market.

I agree. That's sort of what I was getting at in my second paragraph in post #276 above where I said that the north being party to a hard Brexit simply isn't a consideration (for the very reason that such would compromise the soft border maintenance plan). Maybe I could have articulated it better.

If there was a prospect of the north of Ireland diverging from the SM and CU, other EU states would have justifiable difficulty supporting the promised continuation of an open, invisible border in Ireland under such circumstances; it would, as you say, leave the EU market vulnerable to a flow of sub-standard produce from the UK via the Irish border. That option simply isn't on the table though (or so we hope, judging by last week's agreement which clearly sets down the maintenance of a soft border as a prioritised condition to which all possible outcomes must conform), so I don't think it's really an issue.

The effective EU-UK economic border will be down the Irish Sea with the north remaining in or aligned to the SM and CU (if Stormont consents) or Britain will remain within or aligned to the SM and CU along with the island of Ireland; support for a soft Irish border from other EU states within these potential contexts - where there is either British-Irish alignment or all-island alignment with a hard border down the Irish Sea - can be easily reconciled with those states' wishes to protect the EU market and to maintain hard borders with non-EU states (such as Russia, Serbia or Ukraine) that are not party to or aligned to the SM and CU. There's nothing contradictory or unwittingly reckless about it on the part of other EU states, contrary to what GR had been suggesting.

[Gather round]

I highly doubt the Estonians are fretting about the Russian Army invading Tallinn through Dublin airport. Where on earth do you come up with this nonsense?

Didn't I say the Port of Narva, not Dublin? They likely aren't fretting about Ireland at all was my point. Get back to me when you've evolved to read what others actually post.


Formally as far as who is concerned? It would be formal and legal to Ireland and the EU. Quite frankly nobody else matters

A NI 'constituency' in a EU poll after Brexit isn't as straightforward as you suggest. Either you need a replacement bureaucracy to allow Nordies to vote, even in a single all-island set up with mainly postal votes. Or Southern MEPs would be 'representing' Northern electors who hadn't voted at all. It might be legal but also fairly pointless, even absurd.


I don't see any potential clash of interests or whatever for the likes of Estonia or Hungary

*
If, for example, the UK's future trade deal with the States results in the sale of manky, chlorine-washed chicken in the UK, there might be a need to block the flow of sub-standard produce from the UK via the Irish border into the EU

I was suggesting mainly that ee and hu just weren't that bothered given their own preoccupations, not a clash of interests. But yes chlorine canned chicken if it really exists could change things.


There's nothing contradictory or unwittingly reckless about it on the part of other EU states, contrary to what GR had been suggesting

I didn't suggest it was either of those things, just that other EU countries won't necessarily have the same priorities as someone on the Irish border

[DannyInvincible]

I didn't suggest it was either of those things, just that other EU countries won't necessarily have the same priorities as someone on the Irish border

I assume O'Toole simply meant that 26 other members of the EU were strongly behind their ally Ireland as a collective bloc, most likely because it's of mutual benefit to Ireland and the 26 others to support one another's interests, particularly when dealing with states outside the bloc. I don't think anyone would pretend that the likes of Hungary or Estonia would have a special or prioritised interest in what's going on along the A1/N1 between Newry and Dundalk.

[backstothewall]

A NI 'constituency' in a EU poll after Brexit isn't as straightforward as you suggest. Either you need a replacement bureaucracy to allow Nordies to vote, even in a single all-island set up with mainly postal votes. Or Southern MEPs would be 'representing' Northern electors who hadn't voted at all. It might be legal but also fairly pointless, even absurd

At it's most complicated, and with no co-operation at all from the UK, it's a simple matter of using the existing register to allow registration from an additional 6 counties. Such work will need to be done in any event to facilitate northern voters in future Presidential elections

[Gather round]

At it's most complicated, and with no co-operation at all from the UK, it's a simple matter of using the existing register to allow registration from an additional 6 counties. Such work will need to be done in any event to facilitate northern voters in future Presidential elections

1 Elections aren't simple. My Council has hundreds working at them without the added issues of NI

2 Those issues are a big reasons why you haven't yet been involved in the much simpler Pres poll

3 Will other parts of the Diaspora get a vote?

[backstothewall]

1 Elections aren't simple. My Council has hundreds working at them without the added issues of NI

2 Those issues are a big reasons why you haven't yet been involved in the much simpler Pres poll

3 Will other parts of the Diaspora get a vote?

1. They aren't simple, but the awkward bit is the infrastructure and planning. The stuff that goes on between elections. In particular finding people who are capable of running an electoral office. But those people are already all in place, and the work is already on the agenda to be done. Liberia have just held their first democratic election in 70 years from a standing start. If they managed it I'm sure we can.

2. Partly that. Partly politics. But both have changed now. The last opportunity for this sort of thing was 1998, but technology makes this much easier now that it would have been back then (where have i heard that before).

3. No. That probably isn't really practical. This would be an example of special status a unique solution for NI post Brexit

[Charlie Darwin]

Didn't I say the Port of Narva, not Dublin? They likely aren't fretting about Ireland at all was my point. Get back to me when you've evolved to read what others actually post.
Well you didn't really say much is the problem. They don't need to be intensely interested in the Irish border - they appear to agree it's not an issue so Narva is irrelevant.

[BonnieShels]

Newton Emerson got in on our discussion...

https://vimeo.com/247237233

[DannyInvincible]

It's kind of odd (but not unexpected) to see the UK's establishment media pushing the line that Theresa May has been "redeemed" within the past fortnight when she effectively capitulated to, first, the Irish government and, then, the DUP (two relatively minor players in the grand scheme of things) to agree what is in reality a fudge deal that kicks the inherent contradictions and problems of Brexit down the path on a merely temporary basis, but that's politics and perception management for you. This notion of "redemption" and having "tenaciously proved the doubters wrong" seemed to be the consensus on This Week (https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b09jb7m0/this-week-14122017) and the BBC's political editor Laura Kuenssberg has also been pushing it. The tone has been in stark contrast to that of Fintan O'Toole who spelled out the reality of the situation without any bull**** whatsoever the other week.

The only reason May has been left hanging in there is because those on all sides who mightn't be entirely (or even remotely) supportive of what she's doing are too fearful of who or what might replace her. The hard Brexiteers within the Tory ranks would be fearful that any revolt by them might lead to Corbyn becoming PM and the Brexit "dream" completely evaporating into thin air, whilst those Tory Remainers who rebelled in the parliamentary vote last week might be fearful of an all-out revolt from their side leading to a hard Brexiteer taking the reigns.

It is also in the interests of those on the EU side who are looking for as soft a break as possible to lend the weak and compliant May some strength in visible shows of support because, if they were dealing with a much less moderate figure like Johnson, Gove or Rees-Mogg, they know things might be a little more difficult for them. The status quo seems like the safest bet for now for these competing factions.

The applause for May at the summit in Brussels last Thursday served a purpose towards those ends; it was a manifestation of the EU's desire now to frame May as brave, strong and respected, so as to help her domestically re-find her footing and shore up her position. It was a way of helping to keep her and the process on track. Once again then, you could say that May's impotence is actually what is enabling her to cling on to power; paradoxically, weakness is her strength, in other words.

I thought it was astonishing to hear from Nicholas Whyte (https://twitter.com/nwbrux) on the BBC's The View (https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b09hzfkx/the-view-14122017) (in the context of the enhanced all-island role of the Irish government in light of the lack of an executive at Stormont, whilst the Scottish and Welsh governments have reps in Europe making their perspectives heard) that a representative of the Scottish government in Brussels had informed him that they (the Scottish government) got more information on the Brexit process from Dublin than they do from their own central government in London.

George Parker (https://twitter.com/GeorgeWParker) of the Financial Times also said on the programme that he'd been speaking with someone from the UK treasury about the Irish border issue and how the UK was going to resolve it. Their response: "If you've got any ideas, can you put them in a letter and send them in." Not very reassuring.

[DannyInvincible]

'Why is Theresa May protecting the DUP's dirty little (Brexit) secret?': https://www.opendemocracy.net/uk/brexitinc/adam-ramsay-mary-fitzgerald/why-is-northern-ireland-office-protecting-dups-dirty-little


Tomorrow, Theresa May's Northern Ireland Secretary James Brokenshire is going to try to sneak a big favour to the DUP, the small party now propping up May’s government in parliament – and in effect holding the future of Britain, Ireland and Europe hostage.

Hoping that journalists and MPs will be too hung-over after yet another Christmas party to pay much attention to a new legislative detail, Brokenshire has chosen the quiet moment before the break to smuggle through a measure which will deny the people of Northern Ireland the right to know who funds their political parties. And in particular, it will block all of us from knowing who gave the DUP a highly controversial (https://opendemocracy.net/uk/brexitinc/peter-geoghegan-adam-ramsay/meet-scottish-tory-behind-425000-dup-brexit-donation) £435,000 (https://opendemocracy.net/uk/adam-ramsay-peter-geoghegan/secretive-dup-brexit-donor-links-to-saudi-intelligence-service) donation (https://opendemocracy.net/uk/peter-geoghegan-adam-ramsay/mysterious-dup-brexit-donation-plot-thickens) to campaign for Brexit last year.

[DannyInvincible]

A brilliant and fascinating talk here by political scientist Mark Blyth essentially explaining the reason behind things like Brexit, the rise of Trump and economically-suicidal anti-immigrant politics through a detailed empirical look at economic evolution and developments over the past century:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BsqGITb0W4A

He also suggests proper progressive economic policy solutions in contrast to those self-defeating policies (that appear superficially attractive to the many who feel left behind) offered by right-wing populists.

[BelfastCrusader]

Such work will need to be done in any event to facilitate northern voters in future Presidential elections
Only if Southern voters foolishly vote to amend the constitution.

[backstothewall]

Only if Southern voters foolishly vote to amend the constitution.

I've not seen any polling but given it has the backing of every major political party in the state it would be a fairly massive surprise were it not to pass.

[NeverFeltBetter]

Such an amendment wouldn't even be a contest. The only debate would be over how big the turnout would be.

[backstothewall]

Such an amendment wouldn't even be a contest. The only debate would be over how big the turnout would be.

Is there an argument that there ought to be a provision allowing the constitution to be amended without a referendum if a suitable super-majority can be achieved in the Dail? A full national referendum on this seems a little superfluous.

[Eminence Grise]

No, under no circumstances. Once admitted as a principle I'm certain the powers would be extended gradually until referendums were only available for inconsequential issues. There'd be a hollowing out of constitutionalism and two particularly undesirable scenarios: firstly, TDs handcuffed to the iron discipline of the whip system would not buck the party leadership so the referendum would not be the will of the people but the diktat of political elites; and, secondly, TDs would be beholden to whatever local interest groups best offers them a chance of re-election - opening up the possibility of higly mobilised lunatic fringes pulling the puppet strings.

The best way to deal with superfluous votes is not to hold them in the first case, but politicians aren't going to pass up the chance of a populist easy win to take our minds off hospital overcrowding, homelessness and the cost of housing, etc etc.

I wish I'd a higher opinion of the qualities and intellectual capacity of the average Dáil, but for a hundred and one reasons (maybe that should be a hundred and fifty eight!) I keep getting my hopes dashed.

[NeverFeltBetter]

Is there an argument that there ought to be a provision allowing the constitution to be amended without a referendum if a suitable super-majority can be achieved in the Dail? A full national referendum on this seems a little superfluous.

I recall there was once talk of a referendum/constitution day, where a bunch of house keeping votes that were expected to pass easily would all take place at once (woman's place in the home, etc). I think the Oireachtas Committees defeat put the kibosh on that idea, as that was seen as something that should have been an easy win by TDs. The closeness of children's rights too, and the low turnout of that vote.

[backstothewall]

No, under no circumstances. Once admitted as a principle I'm certain the powers would be extended gradually until referendums were only available for inconsequential issues. There'd be a hollowing out of constitutionalism and two particularly undesirable scenarios: firstly, TDs handcuffed to the iron discipline of the whip system would not buck the party leadership so the referendum would not be the will of the people but the diktat of political elites; and, secondly, TDs would be beholden to whatever local interest groups best offers them a chance of re-election - opening up the possibility of higly mobilised lunatic fringes pulling the puppet strings.

The best way to deal with superfluous votes is not to hold them in the first case, but politicians aren't going to pass up the chance of a populist easy win to take our minds off hospital overcrowding, homelessness and the cost of housing, etc etc.

I wish I'd a higher opinion of the qualities and intellectual capacity of the average Dáil, but for a hundred and one reasons (maybe that should be a hundred and fifty eight!) I keep getting my hopes dashed.

I totally share your concerns. I wouldn't trust the *****s as far as i would throw them.

What about if there was a unanimous vote in the Dail? It would mean the people conceding power to the *****s in Leinster House, but it could potentially save a lot of ****ing about with referendums that will obviously pass, and would allow the state to react quicker in a crisis.

[NeverFeltBetter]

I can't imagine any change to the constitution, no matter how minor, would pass unanimously. Even something like "women in the home" would find some maniac.

[NeverFeltBetter]

Ireland in line to get two more MEP's after Brexit: https://www.rte.ie/news/europe/2018/0123/935359-meps/

It's noted there that there is good feeling towards idea of NI citizens having right to EU citizenship as an inherent part of GFA. Could those two extra slots for us become NI MEP's in exile?

[Gather round]

Ireland in line to get two more MEP's after Brexit: https://www.rte.ie/news/europe/2018/0123/935359-meps/

It's noted there that there is good feeling towards idea of NI citizens having right to EU citizenship as an inherent part of GFA. Could those two extra slots for us become NI MEP's in exile?

Probably not because

1) FG and FF haven't yet made any plans to run in NI so

2) any poll in NI alone would presumably return only SF MEPs which

3) would hardly suit FF and FG so

4) they'd prefer the extra members to be elected in the South- maybe in a larger number of smaller seats to squeee the small fry generally

[backstothewall]

Probably not because

1) FG and FF haven't yet made any plans to run in NI so

2) any poll in NI alone would presumably return only SF MEPs which

3) would hardly suit FF and FG so

4) they'd prefer the extra members to be elected in the South- maybe in a larger number of smaller seats to squeee the small fry generally

I'd assume 1 SF, 1 SDLP & 1 Alliance/UUP would be elected if we retained the 3. Can't imagine the DUP would run but the UUP have hinted they would run if the possibility were there. Financially they are pretty dependent on the allowances Jim Nicholson brings in by virtue of their seat in the European Parliament.


The committee noted that although Brexit is to take Northern Ireland out of the EU, Northern Ireland citizens, under the Belfast Agreement and the likely Brexit divorce settlement, would retain a right to Irish and therefore EU citizenship.

The committee also made provision for up to 46 seats to be allocated either to potential new members, or, for the first time, to a pan-EU list to be voted on throughout the union.

I'd say based on those reserve seats being held back, and being specifically mentioned int he resolution, that the battle for the north to retain it's MEPs is long way from being lost.

[Gather round]

I'd assume 1 SF, 1 SDLP & 1 Alliance/UUP would be elected if we retained the 3. Can't imagine the DUP would run but the UUP have hinted they would run if the possibility were there. Financially they are pretty dependent on the allowances Jim Nicholson brings in by virtue of their seat in the European Parliament

I should have added a #2.1 above- ie that even if there was a NI constituency in the 2019 Euro poll I doubt that any Unionist would run. DUP as their 2 main convictions are anti-Dublin and Brussels; UUP because it would drain their support to the DUP. The off-chance of keeping Jim Nicholson's expenses pales by comparison. As there would be only 2 seats not 3, SF might well get close to 2 quotas on the 1st count