Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Habbaku]

That poll does not include the SNP...is this just England?

SNP maybe gets 3-5% nationally, including Scotland. Scotland just doesn't have that many people.

[Tamas]

The preferred unionist position is ultra-soft Brexit - Norway basically. But if that's not on the cards the want no deal.

If that's the case the DUP's actions make no sense, however. If ultra-soft Brexit was the agenda than they should have loved May's deal. But they seem to be vehemently opposed to the backstop. No backstop means a hard border, so if you rule out the backstop you want a hard border. Maybe not on the level of slogans but definitely in practice.

Also I don't understand how a soft-Brexit preferred option's only viable alternative could be a no deal crashout, for anyone, insane religious nut or not.

[Josquius]

May's deal was hard brexit in a very flimsy disguise of the soft transition.
The way for May's deal to be tolerable would be if it was more permanent and not on a 2 year timer.


A single poll means nothing of course but surprised to see the Lib Dems polling above Labour. I had got the impression Labour had stolen their thunder with it finally pulling its finger out and supporting a new ref. Perhaps people are just so sick of this all that they feel safe enough with just cancelling?

It is concerning. I hope the vote is not split in too many constituencies.

[Tamas]

May's deal was hard brexit in a very flimsy disguise of the soft transition.
The way for May's deal to be tolerable would be if it was more permanent and not on a 2 year timer.

I know we have had this conversation before, but I still think you are dead wrong.

The very reason why even moderates attacked May's deal was that it was entirely up to the EU to agree to end it, meaning that it was NOT on a two-years timer.

There was a transition period lasting two years yes. But then the backstop period would have begun which was exactly the same as the transitional period, except there was no enforced freedom of movement anymore, but there would have been enforced single market and customs union membership due to the backstop.

It has been by far the best proposal presented so far, except for revoking A50.

[Sheilbh]

Poor Northern Irish lawyer got told off for keeping going off topic and talking about Brexit: "don't abuse our politeness and don't abuse Lady Hale's patience."

I think he wrapped up pretty quickly after that.

[Sheilbh]

If that's the case the DUP's actions make no sense, however. If ultra-soft Brexit was the agenda than they should have loved May's deal. But they seem to be vehemently opposed to the backstop. No backstop means a hard border, so if you rule out the backstop you want a hard border. Maybe not on the level of slogans but definitely in practice.

Also I don't understand how a soft-Brexit preferred option's only viable alternative could be a no deal crashout, for anyone, insane religious nut or not.

There's two communities in Northern Ireland with different priorities. For nationalists it is that there is no border or physical infrastructure that symbolises the division of the island of Ireland. For unionists it is jurisdiction and that they are in the United Kingdom and the Republic is the Republic (with the exception of agriculture ).

Unionists are fairly indifferent about whether or not there is border infrastructure, what matters is their legal place in the UK not the Republic. So they are broadly content with there being no border because the UK and Ireland are in the EU or some other Euro-soup of shared laws (EEA etc). Similarly they'll accept a hard border, with all the economic damage and the physical infrastructure that requires because they are part of the UK and subject to UK laws.

Anything in between those two like the backstop is fundamentally unacceptable for them. It, in their view, implies an acceptance of the Republic's jurisdiction over the North, or some need for an all-Ireland law which is separate from the UK. It goes to the heart of everything for them. The DUP's position has always been really consistent since the backstop emerged: Norway or no deal.

But I say this isn't a DUP issue, or just limited to the fundie bit of the unionist community. Lord Trimble, the former moderate Ulster Unionist Party leader who won the Nobel prize for negotiating the Good Friday Agreement tried to take the government to court because, in his view, the backstop breached the Good Friday Agreement.

Edit: And I think one of the big issues with this is that the UK and Ireland have moved on. I think things may have been different, even ten years ago, when you had the people who spent their careers negotiating in Northern Ireland around government. In both Great Britain and the Republic we're a generation away from people who had to care about Northern Ireland.

Similarly the EU was probably a necessary condition of the peace process but it wasn't particularly involved. I don't think the EU negotiating team ever really spent enough time understanding Northern Ireland or the unionist community. As I said there's no way to do Brexit that doesn't fuck with Northern Ireland (except maybe the Norway option). But I don't think the EU realised until too late the extent or reasons for unionist opposition or the extent to which Irish priorities ultimately reflected nationalist priorities (which makes perfect sense, they are nationalists and they were in the room).

That's partly their fault but it's also May's. Both communities should have been engaged very early rather than after the backstop's already been agreed.

[Sheilbh]

On the case consensus seems to be the government will lose, probably 7-4 or 8-3.

Baroness Hale said they won't split the decision from the opinion, so we should hear in full early next week.

[Zanza]

The EU should not directly engage particular domestic factions of member states and should engage with the governments instead. And when became clear, that there was a domestic British issue, the EU accepted the unionists demand and extended the backstop to the entire UK.

Which was a massive concession by the way. The backstop is the closest you will ever come to single market membership without freedom of movement.  Basically the original unicorn.of Leave. But they changed their goalposts and now claim the backstop is the worst thing ever.

[Sheilbh]

The unionists are fine with freedom of movement as I say they've always backed the EEA option as the best choice for Northern Ireland. You just can't reconcile that with the Tory leavers who basically want Canada. As I say my bet would be that, if they get the chance, the Tories betray the unionists. If nothing else the last few years have taught us just how much more they value their Brexit over the union.

The unionists also didn't want what May negotiated on the all-UK member state, which I think was a good compromise. But it still had specific Northern Ireland provisions, such as direct enforcement, and bits of European (thus Irish) law applying to Northern Ireland. Theresa May is not the same as the unionists.

I get what you're saying on negotiating with government. I think it's a mistake (and as I say think the EU, and UK and Irish governments blame for this) if you have preserving the Good Friday Agreement as a priority.

[Tamas]

The EU should not directly engage particular domestic factions of member states and should engage with the governments instead. And when became clear, that there was a domestic British issue, the EU accepted the unionists demand and extended the backstop to the entire UK.

Which was a massive concession by the way. The backstop is the closest you will ever come to single market membership without freedom of movement.  Basically the original unicorn.of Leave. But they changed their goalposts and now claim the backstop is the worst thing ever.

Yeah, as I wrote here earlier, I don't understand why the above wasn't emphasised by May. The WA is single market without dirty East Europeans. Dream scenario during the referendum campaign.

[Sheilbh]

Yeah, as I wrote here earlier, I don't understand why the above wasn't emphasised by May. The WA is single market without dirty East Europeans. Dream scenario during the referendum campaign.

I've no idea why her and her government (with the exception of Rory Stewart) weren't going out to bat for the WA at all.

It was crazy. It would be published. She might make a statement in Parliament. Then you'd get days on the news of remainers attacking it, Mark Francois and the ERG attacking it, Labour attacking it and fuck all of a media operation by the government. It was baffling

[Admiral Yi]

All the sane people who didn't vote for May's agreement have a lot to answer for.

[Grey Fox]

What makes the Canada-EU deal so great that the leavers want it so much?

[ulmont]

What makes the Canada-EU deal so great that the leavers want it so much?

It's not a single market or a customs union, so it's basically just a one-off mostly-free trade deal.  It's also not a border deal, so there's no danger of foreigners getting in that way.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-45633592

[Josquius]

I guess the Canada associations also make their little imperialist hearts flutter.