14stFlyer

Not sure this is ironic. I certainly do not see the tactics of the Johnson government as either surprising or amusing.

70/30 in favour of remaining outside the EU in the most recent opinium poll. Not that polls are “facts” of course. https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/should-britain-rejoin-the-eu-remain-outside-but-negotiate-a-closer-relationship-remain-outside-with-the-same-relationship-as-now-or-remain-outside-and-negotiate-a-more-distant-relationship/?removed=removed&groups[0][1]=We%2Bshould%2Bremain%2Boutside%2Bthe%2BEU%2Bbut%2Bnegotiate%2Ba%2Bcloser%2Brelationship%2Bwith%2Bthem%2Bthan%2Bwe%2Bhave%2Bnow&groups[0][2]=We%2Bshould%2Bremain%2Boutside%2Bthe%2BEU%2Band%2Bkeep%2Bthe%2Bsame%2Brelationship%2Bwith%2Bthe%2BEU%2Bas%2Bwe%2Bhave%2Bnow&groups[0][3]=We%2Bshould%2Bremain%2Boutside%2Bthe%2BEU%2Band%2Bnegotiate%2Ba%2Bmore%2Bdistant%2Brelationship%2Bwith%2Bthem%2Bthan%2Bwe%2Bhave%2Bnow The only poll I have seen that gets close to “a half of the population wants to rejoin” is a strange one where people are asked a question about leaving or remaining in the EU which gives about 40% for remain and 40% for leave with 20% saying don’t know (probably because they are aware that we have already left! )

Such confidence.

That would involve breaking the GFA. It woud still be a choice of the two from three And this is why UKGovt could never choose no deal. However much they may have wanted to. Hence the malicious agreement and then search for compromise.

These checks are on U.K. territory. Why should they not be covered by U.K. law? The rest of it appears to be signalling intent to me. I see this command paper as basically saying “this is what we are going to do unless you change from obstructionist to helpful on all current Brexit related issues”.

I completely agree here and will not defend the actions of the U.K. government in this instance in any way.

In what way have they resisted and in what way have they chosen to enter conflict? Please answer. As requested I will answer as best I can by continuing with the Devil’s Advocate position. The EU would not agree to SM/CU without dynamic alignment, ECJ control and U.K. being an EU satellite: clearly unacceptable. The EU would not agree a FTA without the creating of an internal U.K. border in the Irish Sea in order to protect the EU SM: clearly unacceptable. So, the U.K. could not leave. It is in this way they have resisted the reality of the U.K. as a sovereign equal after Brexit. Enter BJ and his pals. Political expediency says have to leave. So, sign something that contains clauses that are clearly unacceptable and unenforceable with the expectation that a working compromise will be found. EU (surprise, surprise) want deal enforced as written, with clear diversion of trade, and barriers to the U.K. internal market: clearly unacceptable. So we are where we are today. Obviously both U.K. and EU have choices from here. U.K. could do their best to fulfil the NIP knowing that this will result in serious economic and political difficulties in NI. Or they could choose a route of non compliance and see what reprisals come from EU. They appear to be going for the latter. EU could do their best to make the implementation of the NIP as easy as possible and move towards a normalised trade with the U.K. again. Or they could ask for every i to be dotted and t crossed and thereby go down a route of legal reprisals, and, in the longer term, a trade war. They appear to be going for the latter. I hope you can see both my anger with the UK govt’s malicious agreement, and also with the EU’s intransigence.

Nope. The U.K. position can be simply rationalised as “we want to be treated as economic equals”. The EU has so far resisted this and so has chosen to enter a conflict. No one knows where this conflict will lead us, but there is no doubt that positions like not allowing U.K. medicines to be used in U.K. territory and effectively stopping U.K. sausages being eaten in U.K. territory is not the way to diffuse such a conflict. i M playing Devil’s advocate to a degree, but there is no doubt in my mind that this is a valid position to take if you start from the assumption of U.K. and EU as sovereign equals.

I agree. A good definition for me is “Leadership is the art of motivating and uniting a group of people to act toward achieving a common goal”. I see BJ’s influence as divisive and directionless, both for Brexit, and for other aspects of his premiership such as CoVid. For me, he does not have a clear vision or goal and is simply seeing where events take him, and then reacting in the most politically expedient way. I suppose it is possible to say there is more of a plan. In which case, he is using division and xenophobia to motivate a more selective “we”. But then I am definitely a “they”!

If we are not coercing NI to leave the U.K. then NI is part of U.K. That means that the border with Ireland is the border with the EU. Your own inflexible logic can be used both ways Bob8. It essentially proves that the current NIP is unenforceable and contravenes the Belfast (Good Friday) agreement. But I completely agree with your logic as stated in previous posts (repeatedly). The U.K. cannot leave. And yet it has. So what remains? How long can the fudge of our leaving (without creating / enforcing a border) be sustained? I think Boris and other Brexiteers think it can be sustained for long enough for an “on the ground” reality to form. In effect they are saying “Let’s do as little as possible and see what things look like in ten years’ time... “.

Dominic Cummings @Dominic2306 Think outcome wd have been Macron insisting on checks between Ireland and the SM! Cos we'd have refused ANY checks anywhere & Ireland wd not have dared build anything either So Bob8, it is clear that, at least for “mastermind” Cummings, your impossible combination has different outcomes. How can he not see that this is an unacceptable outcome for the EU? I believe that the outcome that our government actually may now be hoping for is a fudge where we are in/out of the single market and customs union (according to how you read the small print) and also not accepting/accepting EU regulations (according to how to read the small print). Duplicity of the worst kind.

Utter nonsense. If you believe that the EU are moving ahead completely unguided then fine. I believe they are smart enough to have guessed that we would end up here (either in “unicorn territory” according to thecrashingisles, or “a horrible messy compromise “ according to Bob8). I am sure they are following a route, as I said before, I am just confused as to where they think it will end up. “The EU has not taken any offensive action, it is simply wanting the UK to stick to the agreement it signed.” Agree with this. I would claim that the U.K. government has not taken any offensive action yet either. Just offensive inaction!

Sorry Yelims. I still don’t see an end point from the EU view and approach. What is the EU trying to do by going down this route? How does it think we will end up? Is a complete breakdown in relations and a hard border in Ireland an acceptable outcome? Is a collapse of the U.K. to their advantage? in contrast, I can see the British government end point reasonably clearly (effectively EU and U.K. treated as equals through recognition of standards and joint resolution). I don’t necessarily like the tactics employed, but the end point is at least a realistic and might be considered “fair” outcome.

I completely agree. Except with your last comment that EU digging its heels in will be bad for Boris. This last is not in my mind a proven fact, just your hope (and mine!)

I am still not clear where the EU think this will end up. The path has been, in my view, pretty predictable until now, and all I can see ahead is further lack of implementation, delay and disagreement, followed by yet another kick of the can down the road and into the long grass. When, if ever, will the U.K. government and EU finally accept that we can never truly leave as a United Kingdom? And what will their response be when they do accept this?