General Election 2017?

[backstothewall]

BTTW talks of communities burning down the border posts. I don't consider myself particularly "hard-line" or whatever - I'd like to think I'm generally reasonable - but I'd similarly have no issue whatsoever with border communities disrupting the operation of border posts and removing the physical infrastructure if possible, just like how the same communities removed the British army's divisive and disruptive reinforced concrete blocks from border crossings on "unapproved roads" during the conflict. I'd defend those communities who sought to take such action. Brexit explicitly contravenes the Good Friday Agreement, in which a common EU dimension, upon which much of that agreed is implicitly based, is specifically mentioned, so there's very legitimate anger here.

That's not to say I would condone the threatening or taking of the lives of those staff manning border posts - I wouldn't and would strongly object to that - but I'm sure there are some - "dissident" republicans who have access to explosives and weaponry, perhaps - who would threaten to go further than simply causing infrastructural disruption and damage. All you need is a sniper waiting for an opportunity from the hills or fields around a remote border crossing, most of which are rural. An entire security infrastructure (on top of the customs infrastructure) may well be required to protect against threats such as those I have outlined.

I'm in exactly the same place. Any attack on the staff would be totally wrong, but I'd be perfectly happy the support attacks on the infrastructure of a border, whether it was erected by the UK, EU, or ROI. I'd see a campaign of civil disobedience as inevitable and although I'm nowhere near the border to burn anything down I'll be perfectly prepared to go out of my way to cross the border at unapproved crossing etc to **** with their system if it comes to that. It is not acceptable and we will not tolerate it.

[BonnieShels]

Well that took a turn with those new emails... gonna be interesting to wake up to the next stage tomorrow morning.

[bennocelt]

I'd regard it as a national issue in the sense that it will impact upon the entire Irish economy; the detrimental economic effects won't merely be felt in the border region (where it will also cause daily practical nuisance as well as being politically and culturally incendiary) or by SF voters.

It's that what the Tories and the DUP are pushing for - removal of the north from the single market and customs union - conflict with their claims that they don't want a hard border and they can't and won't provide assurances that a hard border won't be an inevitable consequence of their stated intentions.

Even if that was the case, FG have been taking this firmer stance on the border issue well before there was any talk of a possible election, so it's just conspiracy theory and is part of disingenuous Tory attempts to undermine or discredit genuine concerns in Ireland over their hard Brexit plans.

The border at present is a soft or invisible one. That is highly likely to change for the worse post-Brexit. We don't want that and definitely won't be embracing it. No good can come from a hardening of the border. Partition has hampered the development and prosperity of the border region enough as it is without adding further hardship, impediment and disruption to people's lives.

It is a national issue, yeah thats for sure, but I think some getting a bit bored now at the moment. Surely you know Danny that anything regarding the North can lose the attention span of a good few southerners. That was always the case.

The Tories I am sure are pushing for that so they can set up their own customs unions. As I have said they want rid of anything to do with the EU, warts and all.

FG have, but thats on the advice of their leaders in the EU no doubt. Also the added incentive of hitting SF as well. At once stage Enda Kenny was going on about the hope for a United Ireland, unprecedented for a blueshirt. With Brexit this could happen, and be delivered by FG........what sweet justice that would be!!!

As I have said, I dont think much will change. You disagree. that's fine.

[backstothewall]

She's resigning. Election cancelled. Mince pies all round in Leinster House

[bennocelt]

All parties in Ireland are virtually the same these days, sure they pretend they are left or right but they all seem to end up with the same policies. But SF seem to be really pushing big time, its something for them to remain relevant since they have feck all anything else to offer....especially up north


Yes Switzerland are in the Schengen Area but its still a border, that's very easy to pass and hardly noticeable. Does Ireland n the UK not have some special travel relationship? I remember years ago you could get to England without even bringing a passport, or am i wrong there? I just dont think its in anyone's benefit to have a hard border, not for security or economic reasons, so I dont get the fear about it.


Fg are in competition with SF for votes, in a tight election every vote does count, and its not like SF have radically different policies to FF.

No hard border
https://www.independent.ie/irish-new...-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.

[NeverFeltBetter]

A December election for FG might not have been so bad as it turns out. Maybe they'll pull the trigger in January?

[DannyInvincible]

No hard border
https://www.independent.ie/irish-new...-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.

Whilst the border guarantee is a welcome relief, that is the only concrete guarantee in the agreement text. It's pure fudge otherwise. The Tories and DUP are still giving conflicting messages and paint a different picture from the Irish government. The Tories and DUP are still claiming the UK will be making a break from the single market and customs union whilst the text agreed this morning talks about potential full alignment. You might as well stay operating within those arrangements if you're going to remain fully aligned to those arrangements. What's the practical difference?

So, the fact that the agreement commits to effectively calling off the hard Brexit project potentially in order to safeguard the soft border is proof of the incompatible nature of the Tory's previously stated aims. We're very fortunate the Irish government had a veto as that's what has forced the Tories to capitulate and seriously consider the border matter. The border was very much a tertiary concern otherwise and would not have been prioritised. It was barely mentioned in Britain until recent weeks and certainly didn't enter into the consciousness of the overwhelming majority of Brexit voters at the time of the referendum. The concerns of the Irish government, Sinn Féin, the SDLP, border region dwellers and others were valid, but those fears have now thankfully been dispelled somewhat. Let's see how the assurances are realised.

The text seems to commit the UK government to proposing special solutions for the north or rather paradoxically staying aligned to the single market and customs union if necessary to maintain a soft border, but can we be certain this will be the case if there is no overall trade deal and WTO rules take effect? Could a hard border still arise if there's no overall trade deal?

[BonnieShels]

A December election for FG might not have been so bad as it turns out. Maybe they'll pull the trigger in January?

If the election had been called over the Fitzgerald sitch then the election would have been fought on that basis this bounce for Brexit would not have materialised how it has panned out. Giving it socks to the DUP has always got to be welcomed.

Not a hope of us going in January.