9 minutes ago, JAG said:

The Republic formally relinquished that claim as part of the Good Friday Agreement.

There does seem to be a citizen path to Republic of Ireland for some Northern Irelanders.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/moving_country/irish_citizenship/irish_citizenship_through_birth_or_descent.html

1 hour ago, Srikcir said:

There does seem to be a citizen path to Republic of Ireland for some Northern Irelanders.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/moving_country/irish_citizenship/irish_citizenship_through_birth_or_descent.html

Yes indeed, in fact, although English I am so entitled as my paternal grandmother was born in what is now The Republic of Ireland. But the formal claim to the territory was relinquished.

1 hour ago, Srikcir said:

There does seem to be a citizen path to Republic of Ireland for some Northern Irelanders.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/moving_country/irish_citizenship/irish_citizenship_through_birth_or_descent.html

 

as far as I can see the door to Irish citizenship is open to almost everybody from NI

 

23 hours ago, My Thai Life said:

> I believe the issue was control of borders, rather than closing borders.

> Trafficking? Ireland is not in Schengen, but it is in the Common Travel Area with the UK, and this situation is unlikely to change. Consequently, people trafficking and illegal immigration over the border will be no more an issue than it is now.

> The NI/Ireland border has a comparatively low volume of trade, and the trade is much more homogenous than other UK-EU trade - in other words it is much moe manageable than other UK-EU trade borders. There are already cross border differences and checks, for example VAT and animal checks; these can be built upon to create an invisible border after the UK exits. Various solutions have been put forward to maintain an invisible border. The Irish border "issue" is a good example of the EU's politicking and cherry-picking.

Maybe you can explain how cattle will differentiate between one agricultural policy and another. First sign of a problem and there will be a fence across Ireland before you know it.

 

As for your views on 'smuggling', in whatever form it takes, there are those that would not agree with you.

 

People smugglers are “abusing” soft border controls between Ireland and the UK to get their human cargo past authorities, the National Crime Agency (NCA) has warned.

Officials told The Independent they were concerned about an increase in the number of gangs found to be working through the common travel area, which the government has said it wants to maintain after Brexit.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/ireland-uk-border-passports-people-smuggling-common-travel-area-nca-a8433286.html

Whoa, post Brexit UK is saved! For a while I was a bit worried what happens to our island brothers and sisters. Fortunately Michael Gove has a plan how to get UK back to prosperity!  

 

Quote

 

Michael Gove’s hot tip: hunt for gold in others’ rubbish

Michael Gove has a plan to boost post-Brexit Britain — open the nation’s waste dumps for business.

The environment secretary wants all council waste sites to let people pick over reject appliances, old TVs and half-used paint cans to find things they can use.

If some find the idea Dickensian, they could be right. Gove is a fan of Charles Dickens one of whose books, Our Mutual Friend, is about a family who become rich by sifting rubbish for valuables.

 

 

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/a6c046c4-c998-11e8-87c7-eeebbaac8ad7

16 minutes ago, oilinki said:

Whoa, post Brexit UK is saved! For a while I was a bit worried what happens to our island brothers and sisters. Fortunately Michael Gove has a plan how to get UK back to prosperity!  

 

 

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/a6c046c4-c998-11e8-87c7-eeebbaac8ad7

 

here is another great biz opportunity for UK after Brexit;

 

https://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/1060375-lonely-female-shoppers-in-china-can-now-rent-‘shopping-boyfriends’-by-the-hour/?tab=comments#comment-13431499

 

lots of Chinese lasses would just love to hire a brit to carry their parcels . . .

 

11 hours ago, mommysboy said:

I think this what he means:

 

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/poll-northern-ireland-voters-will-back-united-ireland-after-brexit-37275256.html

 

 

 

Thank you for the link.

 

It will be interesting to see what happens in the next few months that Brexit is running.

49 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

here is another great biz opportunity for UK after Brexit;

 

https://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/1060375-lonely-female-shoppers-in-china-can-now-rent-‘shopping-boyfriends’-by-the-hour/?tab=comments#comment-13431499

 

lots of Chinese lasses would just love to hire a brit to carry their parcels . . .

 

Perhaps especially those in the Hong Kong area? A bit of pay-back for all those sunken ships and opium-dependent compatriots in the 19th century?? ???? 

I doubt it would catch on as a wider scheme, but if they were attractive enough I, for one, might be available for hire. ???? 

1 hour ago, sandyf said:

Maybe you can explain how cattle will differentiate between one agricultural policy and another. First sign of a problem and there will be a fence across Ireland before you know it.

 

As for your views on 'smuggling', in whatever form it takes, there are those that would not agree with you.

 

People smugglers are “abusing” soft border controls between Ireland and the UK to get their human cargo past authorities, the National Crime Agency (NCA) has warned.

Officials told The Independent they were concerned about an increase in the number of gangs found to be working through the common travel area, which the government has said it wants to maintain after Brexit.

> There are already cattle checks, one proposal is to increase the use of  existing locations for checking cattle.

> I haven't given you an opinion on smuggling, but if you want one: there are already checks for VAT fraud,  one proposal is to increase the use of such checks for smuggling.

> Regarding human trafficking or people smuggling or illegal immigration across the Irish border: Brexit will not affect this one way or the other, as exactly the same provisions are expected to apply after Brexit, to wit Ireland will remain in the Common Travel Area with the UK, and outside of Schengen, as I've already mentioed. This is not a Brexit issue.

23 hours ago, oilinki said:

Some answers for you

 

Thanks for the link Oilinki. I watched it in it's entirety.

This is my appraisal (of the content) of what Mr.O'Sullivan said... very articulately, I might add.

 

He is a very smooth talking Irishman indeed, he commented that Brexit negotiations were complex due to the unwinding of so many areas of joint enterprise and interest; that's more or less the only point on which I was in agreement. He claimed that the UK was exercising the freedom to leave the EU but not extending that freedom to countries within the UK; he must have a foggy memory as he's  forgetting the Scottish referendum only 4 years ago! His assurance that there were no punitive measures being taken nor was there any ill feeling toward the UK seems to me to be false. He may himself not harbour any ill will etc., but the same can't be said of his colleagues in the top echelons and in the EU Parliament. The language used by many who are in positions of power, and the general attitude from these people toward Brexit and those who voted for it, has been very spiteful and condescending, at times.

 

I disagree with the proposal that the EU should take credit for the upholding of peace in Europe since 1945; Europe and USSR very nearly came to blows during the period up to 1989 but European leadership did not play much of a role in negotiation or peacekeeping, . He and others like to take credit for the EU keeping Europe free of war etc., but the former Yugoslavia genocides (though not technically part of the EU at that time) were never intervened in and were left to play out unabated, these atrocities happened on the EU’s doorstep let’s not forget. The primary, and only effective force, involved in the peacekeeping and military intervention processes was NATO, which to be fair to him, Mr.Sullivan does credit with some commendation in his address.

 

Still, he lauds the European project as being a peace keeper and is effectively trying to assign credit to the EU for preventing something that hasn't happened and probably couldn't have done anyway. Europe was militarily, financially, economically and civically spent after two world wars - and remained so for many years following them. The EU's forerunner was set up in their wake after all, and did some good work to rebuild and reorganise economies, but this peacekeeper accreditation is bogus IMO. To me, the relative peace in Europe is something the EU has no right to take credit for, it is the result of many factors, not least the extreme expenditure of lives, resources and exhaustive economic/national output that the 1st and 2nd world war brought about, therefore further international conflict would have always been very unlikely to happen. Plus, the cold war introduced the threat of nuclear war which acted as far more of a deterrent to war than the EU has ever acted as an insurer of peace. So, his remarks on this topic I felt were misleading, untrue and even a little arrogant. Especially when it is the continued effort toward 'ever closer union', or forced homogenisation as many would call it, that has produced this recent period, in which we still reside, that has seen perhaps the worst internal national tensions within Europe since the 1930s.

 

The rise of the far right in all the major nations and many others too, is due in no small part to EU policy and its consequences, such as the immigration crises, which has polarised many member states and affected the poorest people the most. Disenfranchising swathes of society and creating palpable civil unrest and political turmoil. THIS it seems to me is one of the most obvious consequences of EU policy and yet O'Sullivan attempts to spin things the other way - trying to take credit for a negative action outcome. The old Soviet bloc and EU having tensions hasn't gone away since 1990 either, in recent years, as I’m sure you’ll remember, the Ukraine-Crimea debacle was escalated by both the EU and Russia, as the EU attempted to make the Ukraine a healthier offer than the Russians, urging them to become full members of the European project. They declined in favour of Vlad's supposedly more generous deal. This is another political issue that would probably divide a great many opinions, much like Brexit, but there’s much more to it than was reported by the biased MSM. The EU's involvement (along with the US and NATO) in this very ambiguous international situation, along with creating an 'EU military', again, to me, hints at their nascent imperial/federalist ambitions.

 

Sullivan is wrong about the economic picture also, he even included Greece in his assessment of improved economic conditions; a country with 45-50% youth unemployment, unrepayable debt, having become a debt colony of the EU in effect; he describes their condition as being much improved "despite short term difficulties"! Ha! Although O'Sullivan may well have good intentions (as I'm sure a fair few in the EU do) he seems totally ignorant of the facts of the situation, whether willfully or not I couldn't say. For him to say that Greece was a far worse place to live in and (in his case) visit in the 80's/90's than it is now seems an almost obscenely flippant remark to make, utter bo***cks too, of course.

 

When we separate and become sovereign once again we can deal with the EU at arm's length and, I hope, in a friendly way, but I doubt that the European project will continue 'as it is' for too much longer anyway. Even someone as slick as Sullivan will be forced to confront the truth sooner or later when the s**t really starts to hit the fan.

 

It's in the post at this point.

 

 

18 hours ago, tebee said:

According to the latest polls there is now a majority for union with the South if the UK leaves the EU.

 

16 hours ago, Stupooey said:

Possibly the only good thing to come out of Brexit if that happens.

I agree insofar as  it would undoubtedly be a good idea to hold a referendum in N. Ireland (after the uk has left the eu), on whether they would prefer to remain with the uk or, prefer to unite with S.Ireland.

 

I'm pretty sure the majority of the English population would be more than happy if N. Ireland voted to join S. Ireland!

1 hour ago, dick dasterdly said:

 

I agree insofar as  it would undoubtedly be a good idea to hold a referendum in N. Ireland (after the uk has left the eu), on whether they would prefer to remain with the uk or, prefer to unite with S.Ireland.

 

I'm pretty sure the majority of the English population would be more than happy if N. Ireland voted to join S. Ireland!

 

yeah, sure

another expense gone

 

3 hours ago, My Thai Life said:

> There are already cattle checks, one proposal is to increase the use of  existing locations for checking cattle.

> I haven't given you an opinion on smuggling, but if you want one: there are already checks for VAT fraud,  one proposal is to increase the use of such checks for smuggling.

> Regarding human trafficking or people smuggling or illegal immigration across the Irish border: Brexit will not affect this one way or the other, as exactly the same provisions are expected to apply after Brexit, to wit Ireland will remain in the Common Travel Area with the UK, and outside of Schengen, as I've already mentioed. This is not a Brexit issue.

You seem to have forgotten that the cattle north of the border are still in the EU.

You are perfectly free to believe that anything that happens post brexit is not a brexit issue.

2 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

 

I agree insofar as  it would undoubtedly be a good idea to hold a referendum in N. Ireland (after the uk has left the eu), on whether they would prefer to remain with the uk or, prefer to unite with S.Ireland.

 

I'm pretty sure the majority of the English population would be more than happy if N. Ireland voted to join S. Ireland!

Which pretty much strengthens the Scottish argument for another vote on devolution and I guess by default the same option for Wales too.  I am not against any of that if that is the will of the people.  I am sure we can all see how frustrating it is for those parts of Britain being governed by that shower in the Houses of Parliament.  I know many of the English find that. ????

Mr Barnier last November.

 

Let me say a few words on Ireland specifically.

We need to preserve stability and dialogue on the island of Ireland.

We need to avoid a hard border.

I know that this point is politically sensitive in the UK.

It is not less sensitive in Ireland.

Some in the UK say that specific rules for Northern Ireland would “endanger the integrity of the UK single market”.

But Northern Ireland already has specific rules in many areas that are different to the rest of the UK.

Think of the “all-Island” electricity market, or of the specific regulations for plant health for the whole island of Ireland.

Think of rules that prevent and handle animal disease, which I know well as a former Minister for Agriculture.

There are over one hundred areas of cross-border cooperation on the island of Ireland.

Such cooperation depends in many cases on the application of common rules and common regulatory space.

We have nearly finished our common reading of the Good Friday Agreement. We have agreed on the principles for the Common Travel Area.

The UK and the EU have recognised that Ireland poses specific challenges. And that the unique circumstances there require a specific solution.

On the EU side, we must preserve the integrity of the Single Market and the Customs Union at 27. The rules for this are clear.

The UK said it would continue to apply some EU rules on its territory. But not all rules.

What is therefore unclear is what rules will apply in Northern Ireland after Brexit. And what the UK is willing to commit to, in order to avoid a hard border.

I expect the UK, as co-guarantor of the Good Friday Agreement, to come forward with proposals.

The island of Ireland is now faced with many challenges.

Those who wanted Brexit must offer solutions.

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-17-4765_en.htm

2 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

 

I agree insofar as  it would undoubtedly be a good idea to hold a referendum in N. Ireland (after the uk has left the eu), on whether they would prefer to remain with the uk or, prefer to unite with S.Ireland.

 

I'm pretty sure the majority of the English population would be more than happy if N. Ireland voted to join S. Ireland!

What's with the S. Ireland? It's the Republic.

1 hour ago, sandyf said:

You seem to have forgotten that the cattle north of the border are still in the EU.

You are perfectly free to believe that anything that happens post brexit is not a brexit issue.

> The cattle "north of the border" are not necessarily destined for Ireland, and vice versa, so checks aren't and will not be necessary for those cattle. There are cattle checks currently, it has been proposed that where necessary existing checking points continue to be used. The "single market" is not quite as single as some people may believe: different EU countries currently maintain different veterinary regulations with regards to livestock. 

 

> The issue of people crossing the Irish border post-Brexit is not a Brexit issue, because nothing will change post-Brexit: Ireland will remain in the Common Travel Area with the the UK, and outside of Schengen. It is not a Brexit issue. I've said this three times now:  Irish citizens will continue to have the right to move freely between Ireland and the UK just as they currently do, and vice versa for UK citizens.

4 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

 

I agree insofar as  it would undoubtedly be a good idea to hold a referendum in N. Ireland (after the uk has left the eu), on whether they would prefer to remain with the uk or, prefer to unite with S.Ireland.

 

I'm pretty sure the majority of the English population would be more than happy if N. Ireland voted to join S. Ireland!

Wouldn't that be ironic; our biggest stumbling block to leaving the EU being the Irish border, possibly leading to many complications and potentially a worse deal - then the Irish go and unite the island anyway!

Good to see the Japanese still recognise the UK as a global player. Pity these positive Brexit stories are rather hidden on the BBC website, whereas they give any negative story front page billing!

 

Brexit: Japan 'would welcome' UK to TPP says Abe

While the UK would lose its role as a gateway to Europe after Brexit, it would retain its "global strength", Shinzo Abe told the FT.  

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45780889

15 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

Good to see the Japanese still recognise the UK as a global player. Pity these positive Brexit stories are rather hidden on the BBC website, whereas they give any negative story front page billing!

 

Brexit: Japan 'would welcome' UK to TPP says Abe

While the UK would lose its role as a gateway to Europe after Brexit, it would retain its "global strength", Shinzo Abe told the FT.  

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45780889

Abe does see a negative impact of Brexit, or he wouldn’t have said that "I truly hope that the negative impact of Brexit to the global economy, including Japanese businesses, will be minimised."

1 hour ago, My Thai Life said:

> The issue of people crossing the Irish border post-Brexit is not a Brexit issue, because nothing will change post-Brexit: Ireland will remain in the Common Travel Area with the the UK, and outside of Schengen. It is not a Brexit issue. I've said this three times now:  Irish citizens will continue to have the right to move freely between Ireland and the UK just as they currently do, and vice versa for UK citizens.

I understand your frustration. Some people on TVF (and of course the wider world) simply don't want to listen to fact and reason. It must threaten both their perceived identity & personal world view too much to base opinions they hold about Brexit on fact rather than their own emotional reaction to it. 

 

That, in my opinion, is why we've seen such little informed, fact based debate coming from the remain camp and vastly more identity politics and slander.

10 minutes ago, damascase said:

Abe does see a negative impact of Brexit, or he wouldn’t have said that "I truly hope that the negative impact of Brexit to the global economy, including Japanese businesses, will be minimised."

I'm sure we all hope both sides will come to a sensible agreement, leading to an orderly exit.  I think that’s becoming more and more likely.

I was also alluding to the fact that many Remainers (and some Finns/Belgians ????) continually suggest the UK is no longer a global force.

28 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

I was also alluding to the fact that many Remainers (and some Finns/Belgians ????) continually suggest the UK is no longer a global force.

You called? ????

 

 

11 hours ago, JAG said:

The Republic formally relinquished that claim as part of the Good Friday Agreement.

But if the UK government breaks the agreement through brexit, then all bets are off.   

1 hour ago, CG1 Blue said:

I'm sure we all hope both sides will come to a sensible agreement, leading to an orderly exit.  I think that’s becoming more and more likely.

I was also alluding to the fact that many Remainers (and some Finns/Belgians ????) continually suggest the UK is no longer a global force.

Well, in theory one might ask: what's the big deal? 

 

But the reality is vested interests- political, national, and economic.  Added is the fact that Brexit has been hi-jacked by the right wing which is intent on a plan that is basically not wanted by a big majority of the electorate, and certainly not wanted in N.Ireland, and Scotland.

 

It's worth saying too that Remainers are right in a key aspect, in that a web of whopping lies was spun.

 

Leavers, who after all won the right to Brexit, look to the opposition all round, but isn't it more the case that they are trying to foist a deal that most people simply don't want?  That's why there has been so much bitterness and acrimony.

 

I truly hope Labour stick to their guns and demands any deal meets their 6 tests. This needs to go back to the people. It's not that I am opposed to Brexit as such, but not one at any cost, and certainly not one that threatens the integrity of the UK.  I want a Great Britain (in or out of the EU) not a little England.

 

 

53 minutes ago, oilinki said:

You called? ????

 

 

 

interesting up to the point when Ms shadow started on middle east - jeez what waffle

3 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

Well, in theory one might ask: what's the big deal? 

 

But the reality is vested interests- political, national, and economic.  Added is the fact that Brexit has been hi-jacked by the right wing which is intent on a plan that is basically not wanted by a big majority of the electorate, and certainly not wanted in N.Ireland, and Scotland.

 

It's worth saying too that Remainers are right in a key aspect, in that a web of whopping lies was spun.

 

Leavers, who after all won the right to Brexit, look to the opposition all round, but isn't it more the case that they are trying to foist a deal that most people simply don't want?  That's why there has been so much bitterness and acrimony.

 

I truly hope Labour stick to their guns and demands any deal meets their 6 tests. This needs to go back to the people. It's not that I am opposed to Brexit as such, but not one at any cost, and certainly not one that threatens the integrity of the UK.  I want a Great Britain (in or out of the EU) not a little England.

 

 

A web of whopping lies was spun by both sides. Ultimately people voted with their gut, and more Brits are anti-EU than are pro-EU.  

I think the chances of a 2nd referendum are slim to zero now.

 

29 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

Well, in theory one might ask: what's the big deal? 

 

But the reality is vested interests- political, national, and economic.  Added is the fact that Brexit has been hi-jacked by the right wing which is intent on a plan that is basically not wanted by a big majority of the electorate, and certainly not wanted in N.Ireland, and Scotland.

 

It's worth saying too that Remainers are right in a key aspect, in that a web of whopping lies was spun.

 

Leavers, who after all won the right to Brexit, look to the opposition all round, but isn't it more the case that they are trying to foist a deal that most people simply don't want?  That's why there has been so much bitterness and acrimony.

 

I truly hope Labour stick to their guns and demands any deal meets their 6 tests. This needs to go back to the people. It's not that I am opposed to Brexit as such, but not one at any cost, and certainly not one that threatens the integrity of the UK.  I want a Great Britain (in or out of the EU) not a little England.

 

 

 

Labour and testing;

 

1. Does it ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU?

2. Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union?

3. Does it ensure the fair management of migration in the interests of the economy and communities?

4. Does it defend rights and protections and prevent a race to the bottom?

5. Does it protect national security and our capacity to tackle cross-border crime?

6. Does it deliver for all regions and nations of the UK?

 

pretty tall call me thinks.

 

dream on

 

1 hour ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

Labour and testing;

 

1. Does it ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU?

2. Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union?

3. Does it ensure the fair management of migration in the interests of the economy and communities?

4. Does it defend rights and protections and prevent a race to the bottom?

5. Does it protect national security and our capacity to tackle cross-border crime?

6. Does it deliver for all regions and nations of the UK?

 

pretty tall call me thinks.

 

dream on

 

It's simply Starmer's ready made excuse to reject any deal.  The only way to pass the 6 'tests' is to remain in the EU.

1 hour ago, CG1 Blue said:

A web of whopping lies was spun by both sides. Ultimately people voted with their gut, and more Brits are anti-EU than are pro-EU.  

I think the chances of a 2nd referendum are slim to zero now.

 

'Ultimately people voted with their gut'.

 

But that's really not enough is it? I mean it's so much more than just wanting, and wishing! It's an interesting point though, because I think another referendum would produce much the same result. However, when we come down to specific issues, such as the type of deal, it's funny that people are resoundingly behind the single market option, or more precisely against anything that smacks of hard Brexit. I guess the questions are a reality check.

 

Yes, it should be noted there were lies on the Remain side too, as big, maybe bigger.  But what can you say?... two wrongs never made a right.

 

If Labour dig their heels in, and why shouldn't they because the likely plan simply won't meet what was envisaged (as we might politely say). and is simply not what people want, then anything could happen, so to say there won't be a second referendum of some sort is somewhat optimistic imo. What we saw last week was a show of stability and calm, but how long will that last?

 

At root, Brexit in anything other than single market form is simply unpopular, and so too is staying in the EU. A poison chalice made worse by toxic lies on both sides.