[snapdragon]

The EUs red lines are nothing new. Those who blame the EU also complain that our red lines are paramount over theirs. Why?

Because Boris Johnson's funders tell them so through the Sun and Express.

Mays deal is as good as it can get which is why we should have had a confirmatory vote on that deal.

May's deal included adopting the Anti Tax avoidance Directive, so it wasn't possible.

Win an election. No. But he could be PM in a coalition. Although really the Remain parties are fighting amongst themselves than uniting that is stopping a true momentum for their movement and galvanising the Tories I would say.

I admire your optimism. I've given up hoping for it.

[B0ycey]

I admire your optimism. I've given up hoping for it.

Why? The Tories are not on course to win a major which means a rainbow coalition. Although the majority of the public today are remainers and should the Lib Dems sway the undecided their way we could have a remain blood bath.

#nevergiveuphope

[Rich]

- Isn't Stormont the official representative body of NI? The EU acts as if the DUP is some kind of illegitimate political party. But the EU can propose a referendum instead.

Under Stormont rules votes on contentious issues require a majority in both loyalist and Nationalist community representatives. Don't forget that Northern Ireland voted to Remain in the referendum. On this issue the EU has the democratic moral high ground and its the Conservatives that are trying to defend the undemocratic Ulster loyalist establishment.

[SolarCross]

lol

[Atlantis]

The jingoistic section of the British press is now setting up the intransigence of the German chancellor as the cause for a breakdown of negotiations - all based on an anonymous source inside No 10. This sounds like a Cummings ploy.

The whole story is implausible since Merkel would never express herself in those terms. It is even more implausible because Germany has tried to get a compromise while France has taken a hard line. The Brexocritters are whipping up world war-like frenzy. Looks like British politics is set to further degenerate into acrimonious exchanges.

What Boris Johnson’s row with Angela Merkel really means

Despite the spin, the conversation that Downing Street is using as a pretence to collapse negotiations is neither new nor surprising.

Are meaningful talks on Brexit finished not just before 31 October, but for good? That’s what Downing Street would have us believe after a purportedly explosive call between Boris Johnson and Angela Merkel this morning.

In No 10’s telling, the conversation saw the German chancellor reveal the 27 EU member states’ “new position” – that Northern Ireland must remain in a customs union and in full alignment with EU regulations “forever” – and in effect rule out any deal at any time.

Says a self-styled Downing Street source:

“The call with Merkel showed the EU has adopted a new position. She made clear a deal is overwhelmingly unlikely and she thinks the EU has a veto on us leaving the customs union. Merkel said that if Germany wanted to leave the EU they could do it no problem but the UK cannot leave without leaving Northern Ireland behind in a customs union and in full alignment forever.

“She said that Ireland is the government’s special problem and Ireland must have at least have a veto on NI leaving. Merkel said that the PM should tell Northern Ireland that it must stay in full alignment forever, but that even this would not eliminate customs issues.

“It was a very useful clarifying moment in all sorts of ways. If this represents a new established position, then it means a deal is essentially impossible not just now but ever. It also made clear that they are willing to torpedo the Good Friday Agreement.”

The briefing poses many questions, chief among them: did Angela Merkel really say any of those things? And like that?

It is of course possible that Merkel has started conducting her conversations with Johnson in the very specifically belligerent tone that he believes helps him domestically. But ask anyone in any European capital who has ever so much as been in the same room as the chancellor, and they will tell you that the reported remarks are so uncharacteristic as to barely resemble her. “I am confident that Angela Merkel has never spoken like that in her life,” says one EU27 diplomat.

What of the substance? Despite the melodramatic framing, there is nothing new or surprising about Merkel’s remarks. Since the UK agreed not to impose any new checks or infrastructure on the island of Ireland in December 2017, it has always been the case that its government faces a choice between either a customs or regulatory border in the Irish Sea, both, or a soft Brexit for both Great Britain and Northern Ireland. It is not a “new position”, but is in fact still notionally UK government policy. And as for “forever”, there has always been provision to transition to alternative arrangements on the border, but they do not exist.

As long as any prime minister ignores this choice – as Johnson has chosen to – then of course a deal is not going to happen. That isn’t to say that leaning into it solves anything at Westminster, as Theresa May’s calamitous premiership demonstrated – the 2017 parliament has more or less conclusively shown that it won’t wear any of those three options. But an accord with the EU27 is impossible as long as the UK refuses to engage on the terms to which, as far as Dublin and Brussels is concerned, it has already agreed.

That, more than anything Angela Merkel has said today, is the reason there will be no deal before 31 October. Ever since the Benn Act passed last month, it was clear to Brussels, Dublin, and sensible eyes in Whitehall that there would be neither any impetus nor likelihood of meaningful movement towards a deal unless the UK acknowledged the choice before it on customs.

The proposals that the government put forward last week proved that there was no chance of that happening, at least this side of Halloween and an election. With an extension inevitable – as even Dominic Cummings now acknowledges – playing what Donald Tusk has called a “stupid blame game” and ostentatiously collapsing talks that were never going to offer anything approaching a conclusion before this month’s EU Council summit was always the likeliest course of action for Johnson. And so it has proved.

@SolarCross, you folks like war, don't you? Once a warmonger, always a warmonger. We'll keep the peace you will lose, as always.

[Presvias]

(shrugs) I'd rip him to shreds like mr "please leave my town". This really is like watching a slow motion car crash and being unable to do anything about it..

I'm guessing poll tax style riots and mass tax 'avoidance' and every kind of non compliance, when the country goes down the shitter, after ndbrexit, may be the only way to 'affect regime change'. Best stock up on scaffolding poles..

[SolarCross]

@SolarCross, you folks like war, don't you? Once a warmonger, always a warmonger. We'll keep the peace you will lose, as always.

Of course! Why else do you think we keep winning?

[Nonsense]

Well PoFo is an eye opener on how many Brexiteers out there who aren't even British, but he has already declared himself British and I have no reason to doubt that. He is an elderly, deaf gentlemen who hopes Brexit will give him a better pension but hasn't realised he going to be paying more instead with inflation.

Sorry BOycey, I have no expectation of of a better pension than which I already receive, from either the Tories, or, nightmare of nightmares, under a CORBYN administration post Brexit.
Any younger generation of English, or British people,expecting a 'better' state pension in the future, need to be disavowed of that dream, it's not going to happen, ever.
I have to say, though I shouldn't really, my eldest son, a senior civil servant(senior technical services project manager)has 45 years service, he could retire on a 2/3rds pension of £66K, p.a, but has chosen to continue for another five years.

He is a 'go-to' civil servant, to whom select committee's would call upon for advice, he has general service across all sectors of his department, he rarely commutes now, he works from home through computer, or video links,but does commute occasionally for meetings when required, his experience, as well as expertise has been acquired from decades of experience,training & promotion.
His partner is retired, she too was a middle ranking civil servant in a different department, they live a good life, with three or four foreign holiday breaks together each year.
As a former civil servant myself, I pointed him in the right direction ,I advised him how to manage his career within the service, that has stood him in good stead to which I am pleased for him.

I appreciate that not everyone can 'win' in their lifetime, I do know from my children's & grand-children's experiences, that, if you want success, you have to work hard at it, with a degree of luck it will come.

Other than that, the other comments in reference to myself are correct.

As for inflation, we pensioners, like everyone else have paid the price for the inflation over the last decade,for which annual increases do not compensate for.

I could go into the fiscal reasons why many pensioners are actually worse off under the Tories, although that is not a situation that benefits Labour politically, for they are more antagonistic, patronising & negative towards pensioners that built the country from 1945 onwards.

[Nonsense]

I write simplistic and direct. Reason. Clarity. Unlike you who writes ten paragraphs on the same (wrong) point.

So, you are unable to count (paragraphs)as well, that would look good on your C.V.


Well, 'simplistic' gobbledygook, indirect waffle, more like it(unravel that one).

[Atlantis]

So, you are unable to count (paragraphs)as well, that would look good on your C.V.


Well, 'simplistic' gobbledygook, indirect waffle, more like it(unravel that one).

I believe that concision in combination with precision is a virtue and a sign of respect for others, but I understand that not everybody appreciates it.

[Rugoz]

The power-sharing agreement in NI means that both sides have to agree to important decision. It doesn't mean that one side gets to dictate it's will on the other. Those who pretend that NI is to decide its own future ought to respect the referendum result, or shut up.

Funny, the EU wants to do exactly that, dictate the nationalist solution. What referendum result? No referendum has been held on the status of NI. Again, the EU can propose such a referendum instead of letting Stormont decide. Maybe it would even win.

As to the rest, it is pure nonsense to separate the customs from the regulatory border. In reality, both depend on each other. A customs border is a legal border and not some sort of technical device. Even in the unlikely event that there will be zero tariffs, there still needs to be a customs border. An FTA is not a customs union, no matter how low the tariffs are set.

It's not "pure nonsense", it's being done elsewhere, Norway being only one example. Or do you still deny that.
There will almost certainly (like 99%) be zero tariffs between the EU and the UK, but there will be different tariffs with third countries. Those tariffs have to be collected somehow.

[Rich]

Funny, the EU wants to do exactly that, dictate the nationalist solution. What referendum result? No referendum has been held on the status of NI.

Oh I thought there was, I guess I must have been wrong. I thought there was a referendum on the 23rd of June 2016, as to whether Northern Ireland should remain in the EU or not.

[Rugoz]

Oh I thought there was, I guess I must have been wrong. I thought there was a referendum on the 23rd of June 2016, as to whether Northern Ireland should remain in the EU or not.

The referendum was about Brexit, not about NIexit. Those are two different things. Why peddle this obvious nonsense.

[B0ycey]

So, you are unable to count (paragraphs)as well, that would look good on your C.V.


Well, 'simplistic' gobbledygook, indirect waffle, more like it(unravel that one).

If you understood how the Internet works...

I will write more depending on the circumstances. But you'll find users (lurkers), will read short concise posts and ignore long waffle. I am someone who caters for an audience.

[Atlantis]

What referendum result? No referendum has been held on the status of NI. Again, the EU can propose such a referendum instead of letting Stormont decide. Maybe it would even win.

I'm sure the EU would be fine with holding as many referendums you like. Unless the Brits allow another referendum, there is nothing the EU can do. Thus, the only expression of the "will of the people" is the last referendum in which the people of NI clearly decided to stay in the EU. The DUP only holds 27 seats in the 90-seat Stormont, which can't decide on anything anyways.

By making an absurd proposal that will never work, Johnson wants to abort the talks, nothing else.

There is a hard border between Norway and Sweden. Even if there wasn't, it wouldn't make the least bit different because the UK doesn't want EEA membership.

[snapdragon]

It seems Nonsense's son is an old man himself. He must approaching 70 if he's had 45 years service. You don't get to be on £100k pa without a good degree.

In which case, it's not surprising you're not worried about your future pension, Nonsense.

Anyway, there is to be a special sitting of Parliament on the 19th October - the same day as the march.

I feel a bit more cheerful this morning, Boycey.

[Rugoz]

I'm sure the EU would be fine with holding as many referendums you like.

Yeah right

Unless the Brits allow another referendum, there is nothing the EU can do.

The Brits recommended Stormont to decide. For the EU this would be the opportunity to propose a referendum instead. If the EU actually wanted one.

Thus, the only expression of the "will of the people" is the last referendum in which the people of NI clearly decided to stay in the EU.

NI wanted the UK to stay in the EU, but that is not for NI to decide. It also doesn't mean NI decided to separate from the UK and join Ireland or enter the EU as an independent country. Stop peddling this nonsense already.

[Potemkin]

NI wanted the UK to stay in the EU, but that is not for NI to decide. It also doesn't mean NI decided to separate from the UK and join Ireland or enter the EU as an independent country. Stop peddling this nonsense already.

Indeed. From a legal point of view, it's irrelevant how the constituent nations of the UK voted. The UK entered the EU as a unitary state, and it must and can only leave as a unitary state. However, the fact that NI, Scotland and Wales voted to remain in the EU, while having no legal force, places enormous political pressure on Westminster, and also places dangerous strain on the constitutional basis of the UK as a unitary state. In a worst- (or best-, depending on one's point of view) case scenario, Brexit could conceivably lead to the breakup of the UK. This possibility, combined with the antics of the UK Tory Party leadership, probably played a role in Ruth Davidson's decision to retire from politics. For a party whose official title is "The Conservative and Unionist Party", the Tory's Party's antics over Brexit have been and still are extraordinary.

[Beren]

Wales voted to leave actually, @Potemkin.

Ruth Davidson retired from politics because she realised she couldn't get any further in her career as a (Tory) politician in Scotland.

[ingliz]

Wales voted to leave actually, @Potemkin.

Research suggests English offcomers swung the vote. The Welsh voted Remain.