Jump to content

UK Politics - Not a Special Relationship


Werthead

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

So the GFA doesn't include free movement of Irish across the border in both directions?

No. I don't think it was really considered an issue since travel between Ireland and UK has never been subject to immigration controls.

ETA: And there's nothing really preventing the UK from continuing to allow the free movement of people over the border if they want. It's the movement of goods that presents a legal issue in the absence of a trade deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ljkeane said:

No. I don't think it was really considered an issue since travel between Ireland and UK has never been subject to immigration controls.

ETA: And there's nothing really preventing the UK from continuing to allow the free movement of people over the border if they want. It's the movement of goods that presents a legal issue in the absence of a trade deal.

No, there is nothing to prevent it, except for Brexit being about controlling the UK's borders specifically in regard to people, which this wouldn't be, since any EU citizen could hop over to Ireland then waltz over the NI border then slip into mainland UK. Seems a little bit counter to one of the principle reasons for the whole Brexit enterprise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the Lords have voted down the offending clauses of the Internal Markets bill. As Youtube has explained it to me the bill with the clauses put back in can't be re-presented to the Lords before the end of the transition period. So, what is the fate of the bill now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Interesting, I just had a short conversation with an English colleague in the office and he actually believes it is the EUs fault if there is a hard border between NI and Ireland and that the UK won't have broken the GFA. I pointed out that every country has a hard border between it and the rest of the world (Except for  the EU of course because it's essentially a super-state), and without a hard border you have you have a free movement people in and out of the UK. And at the very least Brexit was about preventing the free movement of people from the EU into the UK. Not having border somewhere on either side of NI means free movement of people. He thought a hard border in Ireland was only about the EU protecting the single market and that the UK have no problem with a great big Northern Ireland sized hole in its border with the EU.

Yes, this is an issue. It's not come up hugely in the press, but it's something hardcore Brexiters fret about. At the moment there is nothing stopping a bunch of, say, Romanians or Poles jumping on a plane to Dublin, transferring to a coach or train to Belfast and then catching the ferry over to the UK mainland. It's quite a gaping hole in our borders if we do want to "take back control."

Brexiters seem divided between those who'd happily sacrifice Northern Ireland for control of our borders and others who don't want the territorial integrity of the UK reduced.

Quote

So the GFA doesn't include free movement of Irish across the border in both directions?

This point is contentious. The actual legalese of the document suggests no, it doesn't require free movement, but it does require that the border be "non-militarised." Some argue this means no border at all, but others believe it permits border checks/crossings and "normal" infrastructure, just not the miles of barbed wire, fencing and watchtowers that used to exist during the Troubles. The problem is that the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic is extremely long, crosses hundreds of tiny roads, pathways and private properties (at one point the border literally goes through someone's front room), so if you are trying to create border infrastructure of any kind, it's extremely difficult and expensive. You'd need dozens of border checkpoints.

There's more of a much more difficult point involved as well. The Good Friday Agreement created a situation where people in the North and south could travel back and forth at will with no border in place. For Republicans it created a fiction that there was no border and the island of Ireland was united, whilst in technical legal terms they are not (and there are enough adjustments between the two sides, down to motorway numbers, distances switching from km to miles, and the currency switch, so that's clear). The GFA was effectively sold to Republicans as being an intermediary step between the North remaining part of the UK and becoming part of the Republic. They'll see any further introduction of anything on the border as a backwards step away from that.

There's also the fact that how the UK interprets the wording may be less important than how the USA does, which guarantees the GFA, sees it, and Biden is vehemently pro-Irish.

The UK also has the headache that, should the Northern Ireland Assembly request a referendum on Irish reunification, they are bound by the GFA to grant them one, so anything they do to fuck up the situation, risk the return of violence and so on, risks losing Northern Ireland altogether, which the British government would take as a humiliation (although a fairly substantial number of people on the British mainland wouldn't give a flying toss).

Quote

So the Lords have voted down the offending clauses of the Internal Markets bill. As Youtube has explained it to me the bill with the clauses put back in can't be re-presented to the Lords before the end of the transition period. So, what is the fate of the bill now?

They can ram it through with the Parliament Act, but it does appear they've run out of time to do that. The only thing they can do is accept the Lords' amendment and run it through ASAP.

It might even give Boris a bit of cover and excuse for watering it down. It's clear the American election has upset the calculus on the UK getting a good free trade deal with the US, so we really need to get one with the EU and that means a climbdown.

I think the majority of British people on the street, including most Remainers and the fairly lukewarm and moderate Brexiters, will be perfectly happy with that. A tiny hardcore will bitch about it but things will move on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Werthead said:

and he has also been a strong proponent of tackling climate change. He's mishandled both, of course, because he is awful at following through in detail on his big picture ideals.

My point was, when in the last four years did he tell Trump climate change was a shared priority?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Fragile Bird said:

My point was, when in the last four years did he tell Trump climate change was a shared priority?

None that we know. Theresa May did, but it fell on deaf ears.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brexiteers saying Lords are unelected and unaccountable. They're right. So why are they still part of the legislative process? I wonder if Conservatives (and conservatives) would be down for passing a law to disestablish the HoL, or at least take it out of the legislative loop? If they are a rubber stamp then they are a pointless and expensive waste of time and space.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't know if anyone mentioned this yet;

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-54874541

A member of the House of Lords, Lord Kilclooney, has been told to apologise for referring to US vice-president-elect Kamala Harris as "the Indian".

Kinda interesting to note he says he experienced an explosion in the amount of twitter followers he has. That's a little unfortunate that his racism could get him applause.

28 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Brexiteers saying Lords are unelected and unaccountable. They're right. So why are they still part of the legislative process? I wonder if Conservatives (and conservatives) would be down for passing a law to disestablish the HoL, or at least take it out of the legislative loop? If they are a rubber stamp then they are a pointless and expensive waste of time and space.

What would fill the vacuum if the hol? If it needs to be filled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Don't know if anyone mentioned this yet;

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-54874541

A member of the House of Lords, Lord Kilclooney, has been told to apologise for referring to US vice-president-elect Kamala Harris as "the Indian".

Kinda interesting to note he says he experienced an explosion in the amount of twitter followers he has. That's a little unfortunate that his racism could get him applause.

What would fill the vacuum if the hol? If it needs to be filled.

A house where seats are assigned proportionately to the vote would make most sense.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, ljkeane said:

The common travel area with Ireland predates the EU by a few decades. I doubt anyone really cares about it carrying on.

It wasn't an issue when Ireland and the UK joined the EU because they did it at the same time. Both out, both in, either way it's not a problem. But with Ireland in the EU and the UK out, it becomes a really big problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is an aside, but I find it odd that I can't travel to the Republic of Ireland when I have a work visa in the UK. You can apparently travel to ROI if you're in the UK on a visitor visa. It's just odd that you can't on a work visa.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Don't know if anyone mentioned this yet;

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-54874541

A member of the House of Lords, Lord Kilclooney, has been told to apologise for referring to US vice-president-elect Kamala Harris as "the Indian".

Kinda interesting to note he says he experienced an explosion in the amount of twitter followers he has. That's a little unfortunate that his racism could get him applause.

What would fill the vacuum if the hol? If it needs to be filled.

Is he the same racist Lord who called Leo Varadkar "the Indian" a couple of years back?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Denvek said:

Is he the same racist Lord who called Leo Varadkar "the Indian" a couple of years back?

Think so.

His excuse this time is that he forgot Harris’ name. Because her name totally isn’t all over news sites everywhere, and he clearly didn’t have time to do a ten second check. Or the tact to just say ‘the VP-elect’

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Denvek said:

Is he the same racist Lord who called Leo Varadkar "the Indian" a couple of years back?

Yep.

17 minutes ago, Derfel Cadarn said:

Think so.

His excuse this time is that he forgot Harris’ name. Because her name totally isn’t all over news sites everywhere, and he clearly didn’t have time to do a ten second check. Or the tact to just say ‘the VP-elect’

He was so concerned about the transition of power if Biden dies, he couldn't grapple with the prospect that obviously the VP would take his place.

But he's not racist. He does business with some none-whites.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What an asshole. I know I'm being naive, but sometimes I can't wrap my head around the fact that such people still exist. They should've become obsolete a long time ago. 

Also read his 'I have black friends' defence: said he has Indian tenants, so obviously he can't be racist! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently, our government is so competent, we can even fuck uo a congratulatory tweet sent an hour late.

 

https://www.thenational.scot/news/18860021.boris-johnsons-congratulations-joe-biden-message-meant-donald-trump/

 

Actually, with a little thought, I'm more annoyed by the incompetence. For the last 6 months, we've know that he's going to have send one of 2 tweets, 1 to a personal friend, another to someone he knows personally hates him. But we couldn't even authorise 2 tweets to be written up and ready to fire... With 6 months notice...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This article is best read with a laughter track. It's hilarious, and the tinge of panic in the writer's voice as he realises that the US election means his dreams of the hardest of hard Brexits have gone down the toilet and no, Britain does have to listen to what Ireland wants because they now have the upper hand in the relationship, is most entertaining.

38 minutes ago, mormont said:

I thought Biden and Johnson had never met? 

They haven't, so Biden probably doesn't "personally" hate Johnson. He did indicate he through Johnson had a lot in common with Trump last year though, and Biden is bonkers about his (fairly marginal, many-generations removed) Irish background, which seems to make him less well-disposed to the British POV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...