Brexit, for once some facts.

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,196
30,602
The only party who is terrified of a hard border is the EU. The Irish on both sides are perfectly happy with the way things are at the moment, as is the UK government. The GFA is a binding legal agreement ratified by the UN and is set in stone, with the Republic and GB signing up to it. The GFA requires a seamless and frictionless border. Any move by the EU to impose border controls would be in breach of this legal agreement. In any case, how would they achieve this in practical terms? The EU has no military, the republic is legally constrained from border controls, and the UK government will not put troops on the border on the EU's behalf as they are also similarly constrained.

The open border makes a mockery of the three pillars which the EU trumpets so loudly. This is the true reason why the EU are so terrified of brexit, and why it is such a thorn in their side.
Goods "not approved" by the EU can pour across the border. Likewise goods from all across the world can be made available in the Republic without the huge EU tariffs. Does anyone think the hordes of Mediterranean refugees will suddenly all pile into small boats and land on the shores of the Republic to get into the UK?
That's not going to happen, so there is no reason for anyone in the UK or the Republic to be fearful.

It's the EU that is wetting itself over this.
The GFA was clearly made for an Ireland and UK within the EU and is only set in stone in that context. Nothing, absolutely nothing is ever set in stone for eternity.

The departure from the EU of the UK with Northern Ireland clearly means a very different set of conditions which the UN will no doubt recognise and accept.

Quite how the border conditions will pan out none of us know, but it's certain that the EU will not tolerate completely open access.
.
 

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
The only party who is terrified of a hard border is the EU. The Irish on both sides are perfectly happy with the way things are at the moment, as is the UK government. The GFA is a binding legal agreement ratified by the UN and is set in stone, with the Republic and GB signing up to it. The GFA requires a seamless and frictionless border. Any move by the EU to impose border controls would be in breach of this legal agreement. In any case, how would they achieve this in practical terms? The EU has no military, the republic is legally constrained from border controls, and the UK government will not put troops on the border on the EU's behalf as they are also similarly constrained.

The open border makes a mockery of the three pillars which the EU trumpets so loudly. This is the true reason why the EU are so terrified of brexit, and why it is such a thorn in their side.
Goods "not approved" by the EU can pour across the border. Likewise goods from all across the world can be made available in the Republic without the huge EU tariffs. Does anyone think the hordes of Mediterranean refugees will suddenly all pile into small boats and land on the shores of the Republic to get into the UK?
That's not going to happen, so there is no reason for anyone in the UK or the Republic to be fearful.

It's the EU that is wetting itself over this.
Just one part of your argument doesn't ring true.
The EU are not terrified of Brexit they are afraid of smugglers.
The UK is afraid of Brexit,that's why there is so much fuss and why we will have to comply with whatever the EU wants

As to this nonsense
"
Does anyone think the hordes of Mediterranean refugees will suddenly all pile into small boats and land on the shores of the Republic to get into the UK?
Has some idiot suggested that?
That's not going to happen, so there is no reason for anyone in the UK or the Republic to be fearful..

By the way as far as I can see no one in the UK is fearful that there won't be an accommodation on the Irish Border to suit the EU
 
  • Like
Reactions: robdon

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
But the locals were already working there.They all got finished to be replaced by zero hours agency staff from Poland.
The locals did exactly the same job, but for better wages and not to get sent home without pay when it was raining.
So ask yourself this why would the owner go back to employing locals when after Brexit he has access to non EU immigrants, which the Government has already confirmed the numbers of can be turned up or down as required?
And on past performance they have no intention of reducing?
 
  • Like
Reactions: robdon

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
Well my son worked there.....But to be fair I can't prove he's my son. The ex wife did put it about a bit.
Amusing post, I have however deleted the post it responds to and replaced it with another #38785
And our posts crossed
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: robdon

daveboy

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 19, 2012
952
1,366
pontefract
So ask yourself this why would the owner go back to employing locals when after Brexit he has access to non EU immigrants, which the Government has already confirmed the numbers of can be turned up or down as required?
And on past performance they have no intention of reducing?
Not that I trust the government...But the point of being able to adjust immigration up and down is to fill the jobs the locals can't do.
I'm hoping for a Labour government by the way.
I'm one of the Labour voters that want Brexit (Jeremy being another)
 

Danidl

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 29, 2016
8,611
12,256
73
Ireland
"The Irish on both sides are perfectly happy with the way things are at the moment, as is the UK government".
I fully concur with that statement . The emphasis being on at the moment. The Irish state sees the backstop, which was agreed by the British Cabinet as being the second best way of maintaining things as they are. A position which is concurred with by the NI business community and the rather conservative but pragramatic Farmers Association. The only group in NI I with misgivings is the DUP, who are out of touch with the desires of the NI constituencies,and are seeking to be National playmakers in Westminster.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: robdon and flecc

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
Not that I trust the government...But the point of being able to adjust immigration up and down is to fill the jobs the locals can't do.
I'm hoping for a Labour government by the way.
I'm one of the Labour voters that want Brexit (Jeremy being another)
I want a Labour government too but for the life of me I think it will be a disaster if they assume power outside the EU and carry the blame the Tory party should have
And by the way what is the logic if you want Brexit of having Foreign workers do British Worker's jobs?
How do you balance those two diametrically opposed viewpoints?
What a Fine moral stance, that is certainly not Socialist.

On the one hand we oppose free movement
On the other hand retain the right to not employ locals as we don't want either to train of pay them properly so it therefore is OK to exploit foreigners as they don't matter as human beings?
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: robdon and flecc

Wicky

Esteemed Pedelecer
Feb 12, 2014
2,823
4,011
Colchester, Essex
www.jhepburn.co.uk
I'm not back tracking. Although I'm starting to wonder if English is your first language.

Let me help you out.

As time went by, we were astounded by the freedom we were given. Some of the stuff we broadcast on News Thing was so juvenile, offensive and, sometimes, terrible that we expected to be kicked out at any moment. But we rarely saw the boss; we rarely had any interaction with the channel at all. That was almost suspicious in itself. Everyone on News Thing had worked for terrestrial channels for years; none of us had ever experienced such laissez-faire management.

and for you especially

Conspiracy theorists – and even some mainstream journalists – began to accuse us of being part of what they called Putin’s propaganda machine. This seemed laughable to us. For a start, we had complete editorial independence. Plus, everyone involved in making the show was essentially left of centre, your typical metropolitan liberal dickhead types (including me). Our output was often dumb and sweary, but usually balanced and pretty moderate in its views. We criticised Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn equally. The show was consistently pro-remain. The channel’s marketing slogan was: “Question more”. It was true that programmes such as Going Underground or George Galloway’s weekly discussion show liked to challenge what they saw as the lazy bias of western neoliberals; by comparison, News Thing was positively wishy-washy and mainstream.


Hopefully that wasn't too long for you to read.
From the begining - you wrote: ""Sam Delaneys show as **** as it was, was totally independent of RT "

Totally = completely; absolutely. one hundred per cent;

Independent =

1) free from outside control; not subject to another's authority:

2) not depending on another for livelihood or subsistence: I wanted to remain independent in old age. • (of income or resources) making it unnecessary to earn one's living: a woman of independent means.

Nothing you just wrote / copy pasted indicated he recieved no money from RT/ Russian State for his show. Yes free of editorial control on his say so - but he wasn't entirely independent as he/his show was dependant on being paid to make the show to appear on RT channel which he realised himself when he said "I was, by then, aware of RT’s reputation. The channel is part-funded by the Russian state". (was he duped / naive in not realising the conection between RT > State Media.

Therefore he wasn't totally independant as you claim - partly but not 100%.

Same as if you had kids who'd left home - if they have jobs and pay their own rent they'd be said to be totally independant.

But if you, say, employ them or help pay their rent then they aren't totally independent.
 
  • Like
  • :D
Reactions: robdon and Fingers

Danidl

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 29, 2016
8,611
12,256
73
Ireland
The GFA was clearly made for an Ireland and UK within the EU and is only set in stone in that context. Nothing, absolutely nothing is ever set in stone for eternity.

The departure from the EU of the UK with Northern Ireland clearly means a very different set of conditions which the UN will no doubt recognise and accept.

Quite how the border conditions will pan out none of us know, but it's certain that the EU will not tolerate completely open access.
.
There is as yet another scenario. ..linking two of these strands together. Assuming that the UK seeks to fill it's it's low value positions with low cost Indian and African immigrants and then treat them to the type of conditions as specified in that carrot farm. What is to stop them taking the ferry to Larne, and getting on the bus to Dublin and the EU, where they will be able to avail of human rights.? So a border between alternative employment models will be forced to exist. This is one of the four freedoms of the EU.
 

tommie

Esteemed Pedelecer
Mar 13, 2013
1,760
600
Co. Down, N. Ireland, U.K.
There is as yet another scenario. ..linking two of these strands together. Assuming that the UK seeks to fill it's it's low value positions with low cost Indian and African immigrants and then treat them to the type of conditions as specified in that carrot farm. What is to stop them taking the ferry to Larne, and getting on the bus to Dublin and the EU, where they will be able to avail of human rights.? So a border between alternative employment models will be forced to exist. This is one of the four freedoms of the EU.
why would they want to go to Dublin in the first place?
 

daveboy

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 19, 2012
952
1,366
pontefract
I want a Labour government too but for the life of me I think it will be a disaster if they assume power outside the EU and carry the blame the Tory party should have
And by the way what is the logic if you want Brexit of having Foreign workers do British Worker's jobs?
How do you balance those two diametrically opposed viewpoints?
What a Fine moral stance, that is certainly not Socialist.

On the one hand we oppose free movement
On the other hand retain the right to not employ locals as we don't want either to train of pay them properly so it therefore is OK to exploit foreigners as they don't matter as human beings?
I will try to ring Jeremy again and ask him.:D
 
  • :D
Reactions: flecc

Kudoscycles

Official Trade Member
Apr 15, 2011
5,566
5,048
www.kudoscycles.com
They do say that technology will have caught up by the time we need it to. ie in a couple of years.

I think this hard border nonsense is a wrinkle thrown in by the EU. A dangerous one too. Peace was hard fought for.

We don't want a hard border and niether does EIRE.
Under WTO rules you cannot avoid a hard boder,thats not the EU rules it is WTO rules...by hard Brexit it is the UK that is choosing to leave under WTO.
KudosDave
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: flecc and robdon

Fingers

Esteemed Pedelecer
Feb 9, 2016
3,373
1,552
46
Under WTO rules you cannot avoid a hard boder,thats not the EU rules it is WTO rules...by hard Brexit it is the UK that is choosing to leave under WTO.
KudosDave

Well its certainly a stick rather than the presenting position May has used.

The EU are desperate for a signature on Friday or Saturday.

They will get it too. But its all a waste of time. They know and we know it. It does give them an advantage in as much they can say we offered a deal.

Its is a Tom/Groaner level type of deal though.

Unacceptable
 

Advertisers