# Brexit



## cremeegg

Much has been said about the downside for Ireland of the potential exit of the UK from the EU.

It seems to me that our civil service should have as its main priority the drafting of a "British-Irish Free trade agreement". To be presented to the Brits for signing as soon as (if) they take the decision to leave, and long before they actually begin the leaving process.

With such a high percentage of our exports and imports coming from Britain it is essential that there is certainty about the regulations that will be in place long before it becomes a live issue.

Ideally the new agreement should replicate the existing EU arrangements on a bilateral basis.


----------



## Jim2007

Well given that protocol 20 would no longer apply, under what provision of the treaties would they be entitled to negotiate and agree such an agreement with a third country?


----------



## Gerry Canning

cremeegg.
If Brexit happens , will we not be bound by EU rules and that means as per jim,we just can,t unilaterally do a {free trade agreement}.

If Brexit happens , UK will have 2 years to sort the issue, ie mostly their issue.

If Brexit happens , nothing to stop UK accepting our imports.

If Brexit happens , UK will be bound on their exports  by EU import rules ie.they still tow the eu line.

If Brexit happens , I fear UK will irk the rest and their exports to EU (including Irl) will get tricky.

This Brexit issue in Uk has rumbled since Thatchers time , so I hope UK either embrace EU or float alone, ie get it over with!
It is Uk,s Call.


----------



## KlausFlouride

If Brexit passes (i.e. UK votes to leave), suspect there will be a second referendum within 18 months.


----------



## newirishman

KlausFlouride said:


> If Brexit passes (i.e. UK votes to leave), suspect there will be a second referendum within 18 months.



Why do you think that? I would be surprised if that would be the case. I'd see a "Brexit" Yes vote as a sign that UK/GB/(England) is secretly longing to get their "Empire" days back; something a long the lines of "The EU is holding us back from being Great again".
Not sure how far the other EU countries would go to re-negotiate the position of the UK in the EU in order to make another vote a useful exercise. Or do you see that Brexit vote just as an (arguably OTT) negotiation tool?


----------



## KlausFlouride

It's just a guess at this point, my thinking is that influential bodies in industry and politics would prefer the UK within the EU. As an example, if English people suddenly need holiday visas to visit France/Spain (not sure if this will come to pass, but not sure if anyone knows in truth), the nuisance factor might favour reversing the initial vote.


----------



## Jim2007

KlausFlouride said:


> If Brexit passes (i.e. UK votes to leave), suspect there will be a second referendum within 18 months.



Two problems:   There is no mechanism in UK law for having any referenda and the second thing is that all that would be on offer is full membership including acceptance of the Euro etc...

I cannot see that flying.


----------



## Jim2007

KlausFlouride said:


> As an example, if English people suddenly need holiday visas to visit France/Spain (not sure if this will come to pass, but not sure if anyone knows in truth), the nuisance factor might favour reversing the initial vote.



I would imagine the bigger issue is what will happen to all those UK person who have retired abroad.  I would expect that those with at least 5 years residence will receive permanent residence status.  But what about the payment of their pensions, healthcare etc...  Then there are those who have sold up in the past four years and moved to places like Slovenia... will they be forced to return?  On top of this there are those person in the UK who's pension entitlement is a combination of EU contributions and UK contributions, who will they fair out.   

A lot of issues to be addressed in the event of a BrExit


----------



## KlausFlouride

Jim2007 said:


> A lot of issues to be addressed in the event of a BrExit



That's the bizarre thing, there seems to be very little idea of how a post Brexit EU-UK relationship would function. I would have thought those looking to stay in would be pointing out the uncertainties, inconveniences & potential EU backlash of a 'Yes' vote.


----------



## odyssey06

KlausFlouride said:


> That's the bizarre thing, there seems to be very little idea of how a post Brexit EU-UK relationship would function. I would have thought those looking to stay in would be pointing out the uncertainties, inconveniences & potential EU backlash of a 'Yes' vote.



That's the thing though... the 'remain' side are raising all these uncertainties but it's unknown exactly how they will manifest themselves, so not gaining that much traction.
Even in their worst case scenarios, the 'remain' side point to Switzerland and Norway as current examples of a future UK relationship to the EU. Hardly likely to scare anyone.
The 'leave' side point to Australia and Canada, smaller English-speaking nations than the UK which are managing in a globalised world with trade deals but not as formal members of a political organisation. Somehow the remain side expect people to believe that Australia and Canada can forge their own path but not the UK? It's a very weak argument in favour of remaining.

Also, if the UK remain in the EU, as the 'leave' side point out, you cannot assume that things will continue as they were in the last 5 years. It is not static.

The 'leave' side point out that if you are worried about an EU backlash now, is that really an organisation you want to get further embedded into? Better to get out now and take the consequences that be party to such a petty minded organisation.

Any EU backlash against the UK would likely hurt EU member states more than the UK. Any restriction on trade will hit Ireland massively. Any restriction on tourism will hit France, Spain, Greece, Malta etc. The EU would be cutting off their nose to spite their faces, so I couldn't rule it out entirely!

The UK has been one of the relatively sane voices in the EU. An EU without UK will be to the detriment of Ireland. As an Irishman, I'm very concerned about a Brexit.
If I lived in UK, I suspect I would vote to leave though.
It is a pity that Cameron could not secure a stronger negotiating position from the EU e.g. enough to keep people like Boris Johnson on the 'remain' side. I think that would certainly have swung things to 'remain'.

None of the arguments I have heard in favour of 'remain' have been particularly persuasive, they are very much presenting a negative view of the consequences of exiting and not a very good one at that. It is the leave side that are making a much more persuasive, positive case, for a UK outside the EU.
That's not to say which side is right or wrong, just in terms of presenting their case, the 'leave' side is miles ahead right now.
I suspect it will come down to how optimistic or pessimistic UK voters feel in the run up to the vote. If things are going well at home and only bad news is coming from the continent, then I can see 'leave' winning.


----------



## Gerry Canning

odyssey.

Even if Uk leave EU , they will,
1. Have to conform to EU import regulations = no extra gain for UK.
2. Will have to pay to access EU markets = without having a seat @ decision tables.
.

the (remain) side have not presented the negatives of leaving , what they present are the potential negative consequences of so doing.

Sadly the (remain) side seem to (without facts) present a better future
1. Outside of the biggest free market in the world?
2.That EU will negotiate a better deal for Uk than the EU will for its current members ?
3. That Uk will in some way set the agenda for 500 million others?

I do not think it is not up to anyone to present good arguments why UK should remain ,
Rather it is up to the leave side to present VERY good arguments to justify leaving.

Thus far, most of the leave arguments are heart rather than head , and when it comes to business the head should always win.

I just hope there is a clear winner either for yes or no .

ps.Yes Irl will be hit,  but surely since UK exports more pro-rata to us and indeed to rest of the  EU than we and rest of EU export to UK,theirs will be the greater pain?


----------



## thedaddyman

I lived and worked in the UK for many years and scarcely a day goes by when I am not talking to someone over there. What surprises me is the amount of people over there who still seem to think they have an empire. If I'm ever on a conference call with someone over there and they mention "the mainland" I sometimes like to remind them that the mainland starts at Calais and they are just on an island like we are. They almost seem surprised to be told this.

Much of the Brexit debate and decision making will be less around economic logic and more about refugees, social welfare payments to foreigners and other emotive topics like that.


----------



## Delboy

Brussels attacks this AM will swing a few more 'Dont knows' over to the Brexit side


----------



## so-crates

Which is daft, the 7-7 bombers were all English, born and bred.


----------



## so-crates

Which is daft, the 7-7 bombers were all English, born and bred.


----------



## Gerry Canning

Delboy,

You are probably correct.
I really don,t see how Brexit in a (free) moving world will give UK citizens any comfort , but fear is a dangerous motivator. eg Mr Trump is thriving on it.
The sad part is that in Uk they have their own {dissidents} , be they reincarnation of IRA or other home bred dangerous nutters..


----------



## Slim

thedaddyman said:


> I lived and worked in the UK for many years and scarcely a day goes by when I am not talking to someone over there. What surprises me is the amount of people over there who still seem to think they have an empire. If I'm ever on a conference call with someone over there and they mention "the mainland" I sometimes like to remind them that the mainland starts at Calais and they are just on an island like we are. They almost seem surprised to be told this.



'Mainland' is very much a relative term. Those living on the Aran islands or such like refer to the island of Ireland as 'the mainland' etc. There is, as you say, a belief over there that England won WWs I&II, glossing over the contribution of USA, Russia etc. Much of the Brexit debate is a reaction to UKIP rabble rousing about the cost of UK contributions to EU and 'foreigners swarming' to the UK to avail of liberal social welfare policies, a hangover from (A) Empire/Commonwealth and (B) Labour governments and councils.


----------



## Delboy

so-crates said:


> Which is daft, the 7-7 bombers were all English, born and bred.


I doubt they saw themselves as 'English'.

Anyways, many in the UK fear they will have no control over their borders whilst they remain in the EU. And the events of the past 18 months have really strengthened that notion for them


----------



## odyssey06

thedaddyman said:


> Much of the Brexit debate and decision making will be less around economic logic and more about refugees, social welfare payments to foreigners and other emotive topics like that.



One could legitimately argue that the cost to the UK of such things is an economic issue... and that dismissing legitimate concerns about UK borders is being emotive merely because they are being made by 'little Englanders'.
Besides, who says political decisions have to be based purely on economic logic?


----------



## odyssey06

Gerry Canning said:


> I do not think it is not up to anyone to present good arguments why UK should remain ,
> Rather it is up to the leave side to present VERY good arguments to justify leaving. Thus far, most of the leave arguments are heart rather than head , and when it comes to business the head should always win. I just hope there is a clear winner either for yes or no .



This isn't just about business. Canada might very well benefit economically from being part of the US, or may not.
But I would not argue that it is illegitimate for Canada to wish to remain separate to the US even if it would be economically beneficial for it to join up.
So I think economic issues should be part of the debate, but not the sole arbiter.

Agreed that a clear winner here would be for the best in terms of certainty for the UK and the EU.



> ps.Yes Irl will be hit,  but surely since UK exports more pro-rata to us and indeed to rest of the  EU than we and rest of EU export to UK,theirs will be the greater pain?



Actually, the 'leave' side argue the opposite. If not in the EU, UK will import proportionately less from the EU in the event of a trade war, so stands to benefit from a better balance of payments . I thought I read there was a €5 billion balance of payments difference in favour of the EU - but open to correction on that. Maybe the 'leave' side included contributions to the EU budget as part of the balance of payments?
By leaving CAP, the UK will save €3 billion a year whilst being able to maintain the same level of subsidy to UK farmers.

I think we will be in trouble because of our location and language, economies of scale mean we are tied to Boots, Tesco etc. I don't see continental companies making a push for the Irish market in the event of Brexit. So I think we will be left importing almost the same but paying more for it if there are tariffs \ barriers to trade.


----------



## Sophrosyne

Two articles from the Irish Times both predicting pain for Ireland in the event of Brexit.

*Ireland likely to be Brexit’s silent victim*

“Ireland’s high exposure to “Brexit” risk is set out in new research by Oxford Economics, a consultancy linked to the Oxford University business school.

Leaving aside the potential impact on Britain itself, the study finds Ireland is more susceptible than any other country in an exit scenario. Such findings mirror similar research by the London School of Economics published last week. “

*Ireland’s biggest companies begin to feel chill wind of ‘Brexit’*

“Ireland’s largest companies are beginning to feel the effect of Britain’s division over whether to remain in the European Union.

Concern about the outcome of the UK referendum in June has helped push the pound down 10 per cent against the euro since November. About 60 per cent of Irish companies selling goods overseas are already affected, according to a national trade association.

“Sterling has deteriorated and that’s tough for Irish exporters,” Richard Pym, the English-born chairman of Allied Irish Banks, said in an interview in Dublin this month. “Upon Britain leaving EU, one would anticipate that sterling would come under pressure again. “

Dublin-based Dalata Hotel Group, which operates in London, Manchester and Leeds, warned this month that the UK might generate less revenue as sterling slides. Ryanair Holdings gets about 27 per cent of its sales from the UK and will be the biggest Irish loser along with drinks company C&C Plc and agricultural products company Origin Enterprises, according to securities firm Investec.

“We don’t think it would have an immediate impact on our business,” Ryanair’s chief marketing officer, Kenny Jacobs, said in an interview with Bloomberg Television. “In the medium and longer term, it would create some uncertainty if Britain were outside of Europe.”

Not all Irish companies will lose out from a depreciating pound, and Paddy Power Betfair, DCC and Grafton could even gain. All three have substantial operations inside and outside the UK and they now report their earnings in pounds.


----------



## Gerry Canning

Odyssey,
I think we can agree on this = we don,t know and our musings are gleaned from unsafe info !.
Agreed economics should not be sole arbiter, but its a very strong one, particularly since UK is still in the EU.
Agreed UK may import less from EU , the BIG but , is that EU is the worlds largest trading block ,would it be sensible to drift somewhat from that bloc?
The Uk contributions to EU budget are less than most other large countries in EU, and that is why the leave side have been fairly quiet on that,
what UK would after Brexit have to pay  to buy their way into EU , is from my reading a lot more than their present contributions.

We are in no way tied to Tesco eg Lidl/aldi/Dinnes/Supervalu.Nor Boots , I see plenty Pharmacists.

I hope they stay, but it is their choice.
If they go I think they should expect zilch trade favours.


----------



## thedaddyman

There are also potential opportunities for Ireland, RBS for example are reportedly looking to see if the will have to direct any lending to EU states via Ulster Bank.


----------



## cremeegg

Well I just hope that our Civil Servants are planning to mitigate the problems for Ireland that might arise from a Brexit, and that they don't wake up on 24th of June and ask themselves, "well what does this mean for Ireland"

I hope someone is on the ball.


----------



## Delboy

cremeegg said:


> Well I just hope that our Civil Servants are planning to mitigate the problems for Ireland that might arise from a Brexit, and that they don't wake up on 24th of June and ask themselves, "well what does this mean for Ireland"
> 
> I hope someone is on the ball.


Like they all were between the time of Lehmans collapse and the night of the bank guarantee


----------



## cremeegg

I was speaking to a senior civil servant recently. He was outlining the CS thinking in regard to Brexit, lots of analysis, lots of ideas, mostly in conjunction with other Euro countries, No sense of urgency or that this would be first and foremost an Irish problem more than a European one.

However it does seem some one at least gets it. Brian Hayes in todays IT.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/poli...-needs-to-prepare-a-plan-for-brexit-1.2612016

Good to see politicians getting their ideas from AAM, again.


----------



## Gerry Canning

Beginning to look like the (leavers) will win.

Our trade with Uk ,seems to involve a lot of stuff not made in Uk , just passing through it.
If so, then other channels will arise quickly if transport/purchasing  via Uk becomes a future issue.
It appears we import more from Uk than we export ,so if £stg drops that suits us.
The Leave side want Uk to control its destiny free of EU , but surely they risk Scotlands departure from Uk? Not a great outcome.

a big issue will be the (war) that will erupt in Tories ,that creates uncertainty and on balance will surely harm Uk more than us.

There is a minimum 2 years to sort things and I have no doubt most things will get resolved before that without the houses collapsing. 

The sad part is that there was no need to call a Referendum.
The Uk might realise that being an island has its drawbacks ?


----------



## odyssey06

I didn't expect to see polls like this at the start of the campaign.
But the 'remain' side has been appalling. They are so bad I think they are pushing people to leave rather than pulling them to remain.

People expect nonsense from Nigel Farage.
But the official remain side and Cameron and Osborne have completely destroyed their credibility and reliability - which was one of their main assets - with absolute nonsense scaremongering.
If Cameron believed the things he is saying now, that voting to leave risks war, why on earth did he ever propose a referendum?
Osborne is making up figures out of thin air and he is the Chancellor of the Exchequer. When he does this, it costs votes in the way it does not if it is Boris Johnson or Farage.

I think the 'remain' side are so used to have an easy side from the press, and in debates, that they haven't figured out yet they can't throw up weak arguments and expect to get away with it anymore.

The UK is the world's 5th largest economy.
But apparently it cannot "go it alone" when Canada and Australia do?
The remain side point to Norway & Switzerland as if that is going to scare anybody into voting to remain.

Whatever about the ultimate rights and wrongs of the issue, when it comes to the 'campaign', the remain side are having a nightmare so far.


----------



## Brendan Burgess

The bookies still expect the Stay side to win although the odds on leaving are shortening.


----------



## Firefly

I wonder what will happen if England get knocked out of the Euros early, or even worse if there's a "Thierry Henry" incident against them? Would this impact the referendum? Who in their wisdom picked the date for the referendum during the Euros too - seems a bit risky. However, having said that, maybe more of those who would vote No will be too busy watching the football...


----------



## Sophrosyne

A friend who lives abroad gave a rather garbled account of why British ex-pats living in other EU countries, including Ireland, fear a Brexit and will vote to remain in the EU.

Would a Brexit affect them adversely?


----------



## joe sod

I think that was a serious mistake not anticipating effect of the euros. It always fires up nationalism. Maybe in the final week if it looks like they are leaving, Brussels will throw in big concessions on migration allowing the Brits to restrict the flow into their country. George soros has said if they leave the european project is finished.


----------



## cremeegg

cremeegg said:


> Well I just hope that our Civil Servants are planning to mitigate the problems for Ireland that might arise from a Brexit, and that they don't wake up on 24th of June and ask themselves, "well what does this mean for Ireland"
> 
> I hope someone is on the ball.



Credit where it is due. The Irish Civil Service could have hardly done a better job so far.

After todays EU summit Donald Tusk has outlined the EUs 3 priorities in the Brexit negotiations as People, Money and Ireland.

There is a long way to go yet but today was a  great achievement for Irish diplomacy.


----------



## Jim2007

cremeegg said:


> There is a long way to go yet but today was a  great achievement for Irish diplomacy.



True, even our politicians are for the most part at least demonstrating that they have good grasp of how things work (EU, treaties etc.) unlike those across the water!  

I've seen a few comments here in German, questioning if the UK has sufficient an understanding of the subject matter to be able to negotiate in the first place!


----------



## odyssey06

Jim2007 said:


> I've seen a few comments here in German, questioning if the UK has sufficient an understanding of the subject matter to be able to negotiate in the first place!



That just sums up German arrogance and half of what's wrong with the EU in the first place and what prompted the Brits to leave.

The Brits never learned the German trick of ignoring whatever EU laws and treaties they don't like... such as the Dublin convention, the remit of the EU Central Bank, the Growth and Stability pact. 
The Brits naively seem to think it they sign up to a treaty they should honour it, instead of just ignoring it like the rest of Europe do. 
They'll be better off out of it in the long run.


----------



## Jim2007

odyssey06 said:


> That just sums up German arrogance and half of what's wrong with the EU in the first place and what prompted the Brits to leave.



I never said they were Germans....  



odyssey06 said:


> The Brits naively seem to think it they sign up to a treaty they should honour it, instead of just ignoring it like the rest of Europe do.



Well I guess that Boris must have a different copy of the treaties then, ya know the one that does not include FMOP and the single market requirements...


----------



## Sophrosyne

At least the UK can set its own tax rates without them being threatened or dictated by EU "anybodies".

“Speaking at a news conference in Toulouse on the second last day of campaigning, Mr Macron said the European Commission had taken "a very important decision a few months ago regarding state aid and precisely the current [tax] organisation of Ireland.

"I do believe that what we have to do in the coming years is to reduce the different gaps in social and tax considerations between member states.”


----------



## Jim2007

Sophrosyne said:


> At least the UK can set its own tax rates without them being threatened or dictated by EU "anybodies".



You obviously missed the warnings to the U.K. should it attempt to become a tax haven then....

In any case just like Switzerland's bank secrecy, Ireland's tax rates are no longer acceptable... And if the US tax reform is pushed through the game will have truly changed.


----------



## Sophrosyne

Jim2007 said:


> Ireland's tax rates are no longer acceptable...



Why?


----------



## Jim2007

Sophrosyne said:


> Why?



There is enough material out there for you to read up on it all by yourself.


----------



## odyssey06

If Ireland's tax rates are no longer acceptable then France should start looking at its own effective tax rates which in many instances are less than Irelands. This just sums up the hypocrisy of our EU neighbours, why Britain could not longer put up with them and why Ireland needs to get better at playing defense and offense in the EU instead of our pathetic attempts to be 'good european's which get us nowhere.


----------



## cremeegg

Sophrosyne said:


> At least the UK can set its own tax rates without them being threatened or dictated by EU "anybodies".



For a poster with a history of good posts, this is just pathetic.

Ireland is perfectly entitled under EU law to set its own tax rates. It is not unreasonable for our neighbours to say that they feel we are deliberately setting corporate tax rates low to make Ireland more attractive to foreign investment, that if every country followed that route, every country would loose out.

It is illegal under EU law for Ireland to offer tax deals to individual companies. The law should be the same for every company, we are close enough to crony capitalism in this country without special tax deals for individual companies.



Sophrosyne said:


> "I do believe that what we have to do in the coming years is to reduce the different gaps in social and tax considerations between member states.”



That is not an unreasonable policy goal. It will certainly have to be looked at in the context of proposed Eurobonds.


----------



## cremeegg

odyssey06 said:


> If Ireland's tax rates are no longer acceptable then France should start looking at its own effective tax rates which in many instances are less than Irelands. This just sums up the hypocrisy of our EU neighbours, why Britain could not longer put up with them and why Ireland needs to get better at playing defense and offense in the EU instead of our pathetic attempts to be 'good european's which get us nowhere.



Nowhere except the fastest growing economy in Europe, again.

Nowhere except a change from ghost estates and no money for public expenditure, problems of a failing economy, to housing shortages and what to do with the fiscal space, problems of a thriving economy.


----------



## Purple

The Brits still haven't fully engaged with the EU on how they are going to separate their regulatory systems, be it food safety standards, financial regulations or environmental standards. I can see the whole Brexit can being kicked down the road again and again over the coming years. I don't see a complete divorce anytime within the next 10 years.


----------



## Leo

Purple said:


> The Brits still haven't fully engaged with the EU on how they are going to separate their regulatory systems, be it food safety standards, financial regulations or environmental standards.



Not alone are they failing to at least be seen to make progress setting up their own regulatory and standards authorities, they still seem convinced that European standards bodies currently based in the UK (European Medicines Agency & European Banking Authority) should remain based there post-Brexit, and any move from the UK should form part of the negotiations.


----------



## Firefly

Looks like a hung parliament in the UK. May has lost her mandate. Odds on another referendum must be shortening...


----------



## odyssey06

Firefly said:


> Looks like a hung parliament in the UK. May has lost her mandate. Odds on another referendum must be shortening...



Or another election. Or Conservatives being in hock to the Ulster Unionists... so much uncertainty 

Lesson to politicians, don't call an election when the public don't want one.


----------



## Firefly

odyssey06 said:


> Or another election. Or Conservatives being in hock to the Ulster Unionists... so much uncertainty
> 
> Lesson to politicians, don't call an election when the public don't want one.



What about SF and their 7 (?) seats - they could stir things up too.


----------



## odyssey06

Firefly said:


> What about SF and their 7 (?) seats - they could stir things up too.



Maybe... if they turned up in parliament instead of just taking the Queen's shillings!

I thought DUP would make return of a hard border more likely, but Telegraph seems to think the opposite.
So maybe from an Irish perspective the Unionists in a coalition will be a good thing:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...portant-democratic-unionist-party-could-hold/


----------



## Nordkapp

Firefly said:


> What about SF and their 7 (?) seats - they could stir things up too.


They won't turn up, confirmed by chucky Adams on the radio. That is another 7 seat majority.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

Firefly said:


> Looks like a hung parliament in the UK. May has lost her mandate. Odds on another referendum must be shortening...


No way whatsoever.  DUP & May have already agreed a Government (took our lot months).  The DUP are instinctively possibly even more Brexit than UKIP (Treaty of Rome and all that).

This is not a good result for ROI.  The DUP have paid a certain lip service to no hard border but the reality is that hard border defines them, given a chance they'd probably build a wall.

But watch for sneaky ways in which they will try and stab ROI.  For example they will most likely look for a big farmer subsidy post Brexit.  This would be a big win-win for them, good for their constituency and very bad for ROI.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

And while I'm on the subject this in every sense was a massive win for the DUP.  Following on the triumphalism of SF at the Assembly elections (only 1,000 votes behind DUP) and with talk of a United Ireland Referendum, this was in effect a proxy UIR, a real Orange/Green bear fight.  First casualties were the "moderate" parties who were wiped out but the clear winner was Orange in the shape of the DUP who have restored normal service in terms of lead in votes.  As an enormous bonus they get a pivotal role at Westminster.

SF will make the most of their three gains but the reality is they are now on the back foot.  Letting devolution happen would be very silly, handing almost complete control to the DUP.  They will now have to come off their high horse and do a deal to keep NI executive in place - that is if the DUP still want that!


----------



## odyssey06

That was quick...
http://www.thejournal.ie/may-dup-deal-3435082-Jun2017/

_"Theresa May reaches deal with DUP and will visit Buckingham Palace to form government"_


----------



## Nordkapp

DUP have the upper hand and will suck it to SF and their voters. DUP will never go to the labour side so they are a sure bet. Business as usual but no hard Brexit.


----------



## TheBigShort

Duke of Marmalade said:


> And while I'm on the subject this in every sense was a massive win for the DUP.  Following on the triumphalism of SF at the Assembly elections (only 1,000 votes behind DUP) and with talk of a United Ireland Referendum, this was in effect a proxy UIR, a real Orange/Green bear fight.  First casualties were the "moderate" parties who were wiped out but the clear winner was Orange in the shape of the DUP who have restored normal service in terms of lead in votes.  As an enormous bonus they get a pivotal role at Westminster.
> 
> SF will make the most of their three gains but the reality is they are now on the back foot.  Letting devolution happen would be very silly, handing almost complete control to the DUP.  They will now have to come off their high horse and do a deal to keep NI executive in place - that is if the DUP still want that!



I would  disagree with this analysis. The Brexit process is a shambles, has been from day 1. Firstly, the PM campaigned to Remain in the EU. Then, following the result she set out to get the best deal for Britain. She set out her plan, sought a renewed and strengthened mandate and didn't get it!
The reality is, the Tories, DUP, SF, Irish government, EU Commission are all on record as wanting a 'frictionless' or as soft as border as possible for Ireland. If they all want it, and they are the decision makers, then a soft border it will have to be - and as a consequence, we are looking at a very soft Brexit.
Germany and France have indicated possible rule changes to the Treaties. I suspect restrictions on immigration where the immigrant does not have a job offer may be a carrot. There is precedent when Romania and Bulgaria joined the EU, for a number of years restrictions on free movement were in place.

Further to political status in Ireland. It should be noted that SF has a TD and MP on each side of all border counties. When you think about it, out of 32 Irish counties, the union with Britain is only reflected in 3 of those counties.


----------



## TheBigShort

Firefly said:


> Looks like a hung parliament in the UK. May has lost her mandate. Odds on another referendum must be shortening...



Undoubtedly. We are back to square one. What is Brexit?
Certainly not what May outlined last March, or may be it is? Who knows?
But outside the soundbites of 'frictionless' borders and immigration control, there hasn't been one single scrap of detail of how any of this is to work. Its a shambles.
May is cooked goose!


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

B/S what exactly in the analysis do you disagree with?

Possibly you are disagreeing with my earlier assertion that the DUP are closet hard border junkies, which I admit is a tad controversial.


----------



## TheBigShort

Duke of Marmalade said:


> B/S what exactly in the analysis do you disagree with?
> 
> Possibly you are disagreeing with my earlier assertion that the DUP are closet hard border junkies, which I admit is a tad controversial.



I don't see it as a massive win for the DUP. Certainly the dice would appear to have fallen kindly for them. But the overall Unionist vote continues to decline.
As far as a proxy UI vote, it is the DUP that is running scared of a border poll. For sure, such a poll if held today would carry the status quo. The issue the DUP have with a border poll is that if one were held, they would have no option then to recognise such polls a the means to determining the future of NI. If they accept the result of such a poll today (because it would be in their favour) then would then have to accept the result of such a poll in the future if it ever went against them. That is their fear. They believe the sovereignty of NI lies with the British monarch, not with the people. That is why they are against a border poll.
And while the DUP may never agree to a border poll, there is a strong case now I believe to bring the matter to the courts for a decision. The British government is legally bound to facilitate such a poll if there are reasonable grounds to suggest there is a need for one. SF hold 7 Westminister seats, in assembly elections, they are 1 seat behind and 1,000 votes behind. 
The conditions for a border poll are emerging fast, in my opinion.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

TheBigShort said:


> I don't see it as a massive win for the DUP. Certainly the dice would appear to have fallen kindly for them. But the overall Unionist vote continues to decline.
> As far as a proxy UI vote, it is the DUP that is running scared of a border poll. For sure, such a poll if held today would carry the status quo. The issue the DUP have with a border poll is that if one were held, they would have no option then to recognise such polls a the means to determining the future of NI. If they accept the result of such a poll today (because it would be in their favour) then would then have to accept the result of such a poll in the future if it ever went against them. That is their fear. They believe the sovereignty of NI lies with the British monarch, not with the people. That is why they are against a border poll.
> And while the DUP may never agree to a border poll, there is a strong case now I believe to bring the matter to the courts for a decision. The British government is legally bound to facilitate such a poll if there are reasonable grounds to suggest there is a need for one. SF hold 7 Westminister seats, in assembly elections, they are 1 seat behind and 1,000 votes behind.
> The conditions for a border poll are emerging fast, in my opinion.


I am presuming, possibly unfairly, that you *want* to believe this narrative.  A few numbers.  In the Assembly elections DUP got 225k to SF 224k a lead of 1k.  And boy did SF crow about it.  I know from visiting friends in NI a couple of weeks ago that there was a definite thrill at the possibility of SF beating the DUP this time round - tiocaigh ar la! I presume across the divide this thrill was matched by a dread.  The result.  DUP got 292k to SF's 239k a quite massive gap of 53k or nearly 25% more than them from being only neck and neck just a few weeks ago.  Ok so you don't see this as a massive win for the DUP, let's not spend pages discussing what constitutes "massive"

The overall pro UI vote is 41.1%, maybe slightly ahead on the Assembly, a bit hard to compare, but a long way short of where a border poll would be justified under the GFA.

Naturally Unionists do not want a Border poll.  In fact I believe SF are the only party on the island that do want one.  Let's hope this salutary demonstration of Orange voting power, when put to the test, will persuade SF to put that one back in its box.

As an aside, it does amuse me that TM refers to the historic relationship between the DUP and the Tories.  The UUP for sure.  But it is only a few years since Ian Paisley's creation was toxic to all main stream parties.


----------



## TheBigShort

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Ok so you don't see this as a massive win for the DUP, let's not spend pages discussing what constitutes "massive"



Agreed. I do think there is a big difference between first-past-the-post and PR. Accepting a UI referendum would be a straight Y/N and currently in favour of the status quo.



Duke of Marmalade said:


> The overall pro UI vote is 41.1%, maybe slightly ahead on the Assembly, a bit hard to compare, but a long way short of where a border poll would be justified under the GFA.



Well that's for legal argument. There is no explicit level of support outlined - how could there be? We can only know the explicit level of support for or against a UI _after _a referendum.



Duke of Marmalade said:


> Naturally Unionists do not want a Border poll.



Why?



Duke of Marmalade said:


> In fact I believe SF are the only party on the island that do want one.



Actually, all parties in the Dail plus SDLP want a UI. Not only that, under the Constitution, which affords their authority to govern in the first place, there is an article declaring the firm will to unite all of the people of Ireland



Duke of Marmalade said:


> Let's hope this salutary demonstration of Orange voting power, when put to the test, will persuade SF to put that one back in its box.



Why?
I can confirm that SF will continue to pursue a border poll. Regardless of the result from such a poll, the principle of deciding the future of NI through the will of the Irish people, and not at the behest of the British monarch, will be established.
This is the DUPs Achilles heel. SF will continue to drill away at it, through the courts if necessary.


----------



## galway_blow_in

Duke of Marmalade said:


> No way whatsoever.  DUP & May have already agreed a Government (took our lot months).  The DUP are instinctively possibly even more Brexit than UKIP (Treaty of Rome and all that).
> 
> This is not a good result for ROI.  The DUP have paid a certain lip service to no hard border but the reality is that hard border defines them, given a chance they'd probably build a wall.
> 
> But watch for sneaky ways in which they will try and stab ROI.  For example they will most likely look for a big farmer subsidy post Brexit.  This would be a big win-win for them, good for their constituency and very bad for ROI.



i disagree , i think we ( ireland ) are in a considerably better place than two days ago , not only does a reduced tory majority bring the hardline brexiteer wing of the conservatives to heel to some degree , the need for the DUP should reduce the chances of a hard border , despite all the rhetoric and predictable siege mentality sloganeering , the DUP know their own constituency do not want increased barries to trade with the south , UKIP are also not the force they were 

stocks have reacted positively today , the pound has also recovered much of what it lost


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

B/S

FPTP vote share is quite comparable with PR first preferences.  SF would certainly claim so if it suited them.

Those in favour of the status quo would *naturally* not want a referendum to change it.

All parties except SF are against a border *poll *as I stated.  You have changed my assertion.

B/S these rebuttals of your points are so obvious that I start to suspect you are trolling me.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

galway_blow_in said:


> i disagree , i think we ( ireland ) are in a considerably better place than two days ago , not only does a reduced tory majority bring the hardline brexiteer wing of the conservatives to heel to some degree , the need for the DUP should reduce the chances of a hard border , despite all the rhetoric and predictable siege mentality sloganeering , the DUP know their own constituency do not want increased barries to trade with the south , UKIP are also not the force they were


I hope you are right on the border thing, but the primal instinct of Paisleyite backwoodsmen is to build a wall with the devil's playground, the higher the better.
I think you are wrong though on the Brexit political dynamic.  One of the reasons May called the election was to minimise the influence of her hard Brexiteers.  Instead  it has got even worse, she is relying on the DUP which I believe are even more hard Brexit than UKIP.

PS I note from RTÉ that mainstream thinking is along your lines. I hope you are right but there could be a bit of wishful groupthink here.


----------



## TheBigShort

Duke of Marmalade said:


> FPTP vote share is quite comparable with PR first preferences.



Yes, but  most first preferences don't guarantee election, aside from ignoring the impact of second, third, fourth preferences etc.




Duke of Marmalade said:


> Those in favour of the status quo would *naturally* not want a referendum to change it.



Fair point. But that is to ignore the reality of northern politics.
Those in favour of the status quo in Britain to remain in the EU, namely the Tories, Labour, Lib Dem, SNP succumbed to the demands of an apparent rump in the Tory party and UKIP and afforded, through a democratic principle, to allow the people a say on EU membership.
Typically the DUP certainly don't want to go down that road  - but it is not for the DUP to decide, it is for the NI Secretary to decide. Low and behold, considering the democratic principle afforded to the Tory rump and UKIP for a EU referendum, does that offer a framework, consistent with the principle of democracy, consistent with the legally binding GFA, of offering the UI 'rump' in NI the chance of a say on their future through the ballot box? I would say it does.
But critical to all this is the DUPs refusal to accept the outcome of such a referendum.
The DUP does not want a border poll for fear of it back-firing. The DUP simply does not recognize the right of the people to have such a poll. It never signed up to GFA. It does not recognize the right of the people to decide the future of NI, that is the sole prerogative of the British monarch.



Duke of Marmalade said:


> All parties except SF are against a border *poll *as I stated.



All parties (except DUP) support the GFA which recognizes that any change in the constitutional status of NI will be through a border poll.
True, FF, FG, Lab may not support a border poll at this time, but if such a poll was called regardless, they are constitutionally required to support any proposition in favour of uniting Ireland.



Duke of Marmalade said:


> B/S these rebuttals of your points are so obvious that I start to suspect you are trolling me.



Far from trolling you, I was hoping that you could think deeper than the headlines.

http://m.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/new...after-loyalist-murder-in-bangor-35776873.html

This is the reality of DUP thinking. Shoring up support from terrorists in return for guaranteed to block a border poll.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

B/S I do not support the DUP and I do not support talking to gangsters/terrorists.  Of course it would be a bit rich for SF or its supporters to wring their hands at such activity.

You make an interesting point about DUP not signing up to GFA.  On the border poll thing that is not very relevant, it is the governments who have undertaken to respect any border poll. It is indeed possible that unionists would vigorously oppose a positive outcome of such a poll, possibly some even with violence.

Anyway this is all bit off track since everyone including your good self accepts that a border poll would fail at the present time.


----------



## TheBigShort

galway_blow_in said:


> i think we ( ireland ) are in a considerably better place than two days ago , not only does a reduced tory majority bring the hardline brexiteer wing of the conservatives to heel to some degree , the need for the DUP should reduce the chances of a hard border , despite all the rhetoric and predictable siege mentality sloganeering , the DUP know their own constituency do not want increased barries to trade with the south



I would broadly agree with this. From the DUP to SF to Dublin, London and Brussels, no-one wants a hard border.
Hard to see anything other than a very soft Brexit now, if at all. 
It's beginning to remind me of Y2K bug - no-one knew what it was or what it would do.
In the end, it came to very little.


----------



## TheBigShort

Duke of Marmalade said:


> it is the governments who have undertaken to respect any border poll. It is indeed possible that unionists would vigorously oppose a positive outcome of such a poll, possibly some even with violence.



Yes, but it remains to be seen how beholden are the governments to any implied threat of violence from Unionists.
We are supposed to be past all that, but as with Home Rule, the threat of Unionist violence is ever present and a usurpation of democratic principles that we believe are upheld in the GFA. It is quite sinister actually.
I mean, if a rump like UKIP and bunch of Tory dissenters can force a referendum on Brexit, then surely a border poll on the future of NI is not out of the question?



Duke of Marmalade said:


> Anyway this is all bit off track since everyone including your good self accepts that a border poll would fail at the present time.



Most people thought Brexit would fail, then Trump, so who knows? We won't know until a poll is held.
Regardless of the outcome, it is the principle of establishing the future of NI through a democratic border poll, that is important.


----------



## odyssey06

Lads, I thihk Brexit is massive enough to keep this thread reserved for it... I'm sure ye would like to continue the border poll discussion nearby


----------



## Leper

The more I read the British newspapers and listen to UK television current affairs programmes the more I reckon the British public used a referendum and a general election as a protest vote which went disastrously wrong. I don't think any fair minded Brit wants to leave the EU. 

Let's get back to Brexit. Over the next 18 months or so things are going to get so complicated for the Brits in their negotiating with exiting the EU that their most favourable way forward is to have another referendum on their future in the EU. I believe they will vote to remain within the EU then.

Things will have to play out with compromise on all sides.  And whatever way we Irish look at the situation we need the UK within the EU.


----------



## Jim2007

That ship has sailed at this stage.  The only way back is to reapply for membership and except the Euro etc. and that is not going to happen.

The mind set in mainland Europe has changed too.  We need to get on with reform and that will not be in the direction that the U.K. wants so having them around to continually object to this and that is no longer acceptable to most Europeans.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

_Leper_ Brexit is happening. One of the many messages from the election is the rout of UKIP.  This is not out of remorse for what they have done but a recognition that that fight has been won and is no longer relevant. And the majority appeared to have gone to Labour which was technically a Remain party, but clearly no more.  In fact the two Remain parties still standing, the SNP and the Lib Dems, had very disappointing outcomes.

But I share your skepticism on the negotiations.  The "wogs begin at Calais" faction of the Tory party will be reinforced by the Paisleyites in adopting a No Surrender position.  The odds against "no deal" have considerably shortened.


----------



## TheBigShort

odyssey06 said:


> Lads, I thihk Brexit is massive enough to keep this thread reserved for it... I'm sure ye would like to continue the border poll discussion nearby



Granted. But as a side, the spotlight on DUP extremist views and terror associations is garnering a lot of negative publicity in Britain.
This deal isn't done yet, and if she can't do one, her mandate to negotiate Brexit is in tatters. I do think the whole Brexit issue is now in jeopardy. There is talk, from Tories, of neither a hard nor soft Brexit, but a 'common mutual understanding' between the UK and EU.
German and France have signalled a change to the treaties.
Sounds like it is all gearing up for a UK/EU Treaty, whether neither party are bound to each other but will apply common rules where required - Brexit in name, but in practical terms, UK/EU laws will be agreed to mutual benefit.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

TM's days are surely numbered but in many ways the Paisleyite dimension is a lucky break for the Tories.  Outside UKIP the Paisleyites were the only party for Leave last June.  Now if UKIP had 10 seats I would think a "coalition" would be unacceptable.  The natural coalition partners are the Lib Dems but with these still totally against Brexit that isn't even considered.

And then from the Paisleyites' viewpoint this is a bit of a no brainer, they don't even need a token quid pro quo.  To keep out IRA supporter, JC, is good enough for their constituency.


----------



## TheBigShort

Duke of Marmalade said:


> And then from the Paisleyites' viewpoint this is a bit of a no brainer, they don't even need a token quid pro quo. To keep out IRA supporter, JC, is good enough for their constituency.



For political expediency it is a perfect fit. But I suspect TM is simply showing her hand at being best equipped at making the wrong decision at the wrong time. 
Mays reliance on the DUP on this occasion is clutching at straws on her part. Two-thirds of Tory membership are reported to want her out. The DUP have enough baggage to equip any potential heave against her with ammunition if needed. 
A new leader will emerge, and a new mandate sought. By which time Brexit will be a holy shambles.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

TheBigShort said:


> For political expediency it is a perfect fit. But I suspect TM is simply showing her hand at being best equipped at making the wrong decision at the wrong time.
> Mays reliance on the DUP on this occasion is clutching at straws on her part. Two-thirds of Tory membership are reported to want her out. The DUP have enough baggage to equip any potential heave against her with ammunition if needed.
> A new leader will emerge, and a new mandate sought. By which time Brexit will be a holy shambles.


At last one of your posts with which I can completely agree


----------



## TheBigShort

Duke of Marmalade said:


> At last one of your posts with which I can completely agree



Great, be sure to return the favour one day!


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

Irish Times letters said:
			
		

> Will 2017 go down as the year when the end of May came on June 8th?
> 
> Does this mean Breggsit will be hard, soft, or maybe scrambled?


----------



## Nordkapp

Think Brexit is scrambled eggs at this stage.

1. Tories weak hand for negotiation

2. 50% of people don't want it

3. City doesn't want it

4. Likely to be a 2nd referendum if Tory government falls


----------



## Jim2007

Nordkapp said:


> 4. Likely to be a 2nd referendum if Tory government falls



What would the point of an referendum be?  It would be non binding and in any case they have a sovereign parliament which mean any newly elected government would have the mandate in any case.

Revoking A50 is not an option, no matter what they think - there is no provision for them to do so nor for the EU to accept it. Any EU citizen could bring a case against it, so the thing would become an even greater farce!


----------



## Leper

Jim2007 said:


> . . . . .
> 
> Revoking A50 is not an option, no matter what they think - there is no provision for them to do so nor for the EU to accept it. Any EU citizen could bring a case against it, so the thing would become an even greater farce!




another referendum never stopped us . . . . I reckon it's coming in the UK.


----------



## huskerdu

Brexit is a shambles and will get worse. 
None of the major players in the Tory party want to take over the shambles so will be happy to allow TM to carry the can for the moment so they can take over in the year and attempt to blame her for everything. 

Another poll might be the right thing to do, but the Tories wont allow it, not now. 
Everything might change in a year when they are mired in negotiations and realise the mess they are in 

I also think that the DUP will do what NI politicians have done for decades - look for the UK gov to pay them off. The payoff might benefit enough people across all sectors of the NI economy to mollify them for a while. Another can kicked down the road. 

On the day after the referendum, I predicted ( here and elsewhere) that the UK would still be a member of the EU in 2020, in some shape or form.


----------



## Purple

I can’t see the Tory/DUP dynamic working. David Cameron said that he wouldn’t countenance  going into power with them due to their stance on marriage equality.

The Conservatives have emerged from this election with a degree of credibility solely due to their fantastic performance in Scotland. The only reason for that is the very competent and likable Ruth Davidson. Not only is Ms. Davidson gay, she is also engaged to an Irish Catholic. The 13 seats she brings to the Party are more valuable than the 10 that the DUP brings. To the rest of the people in the UK the DUP are utter dinosaurs. They are incompatible with the moderate and progressive majority in Britain. 

Ms May will be gone in the medium term. The big question is will her successor be from the Brexit or remain camp.


----------



## T McGibney

Purple said:


> David Cameron said that he wouldn’t countenance  going into power with them due to their stance on marriage equality.



Cameron isn't Tory leader anymore, because the small c conservatives in his own party forced him to commit to a Brexit referendum as a quid-pro-quo for supporting a same-sex marriage legalisation that he (or more particularly his wife) wanted but that they most certainly didn't want and barely tolerated.

The DUP are more or less indistinguishable from a large and possibly dominant element of the Tory party.


----------



## Purple

T McGibney said:


> Cameron isn't Tory leader anymore, because the small c conservatives in his own party forced him to commit to a Brexit referendum as a quid-pro-quo for supporting a same-sex marriage legalisation that he (or more particularly his wife) wanted but that they most certainly didn't want and barely tolerated.
> 
> The DUP are more or less indistinguishable from a large and possibly dominant element of the Tory party.


Well aren't you the ray of sunshine...


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

I think TM underestimates just how unacceptable (IRA supporter) JC would be to the Paisleyites.  She didn't have to make any overtures to them, they would always have ensured that she would stay PM.


----------



## T McGibney

All they need do, even yet, is to hint that they won't support May, and she's toast within her own party.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

T McGibney said:


> All they need do, even yet, is to hint that they won't support May, and she's toast within her own party.


I think that's right.  The Tory party are dead safe here for another 5 years, unless they rashly call another election on the back of good polls.  It is TM trying to secure her own position that has produced this unseemly rush to embrace the Paisleyites.

Bringing in Michael Gove is another attempt to hold onto power for with him in the tent it is less likely that Bojo can mount a coup.


----------



## galway_blow_in

Purple said:


> I can’t see the Tory/DUP dynamic working. David Cameron said that he wouldn’t countenance  going into power with them due to their stance on marriage equality.
> 
> The Conservatives have emerged from this election with a degree of credibility solely due to their fantastic performance in Scotland. The only reason for that is the very competent and likable Ruth Davidson. Not only is Ms. Davidson gay, she is also engaged to an Irish Catholic. The 13 seats she brings to the Party are more valuable than the 10 that the DUP brings. To the rest of the people in the UK the DUP are utter dinosaurs. They are incompatible with the moderate and progressive majority in Britain.
> 
> Ms May will be gone in the medium term. The big question is will her successor be from the Brexit or remain camp.



that the tories have had a resurgence in scotland ( its probably relatively soft however )  would suggest to me that ( ruth davidson aside ) , scotland is the one place which will be happy to see the DUP supporting the tories , scotland is the spiritual home of northern evangelicals of the kind in the DUP , its always had a calvinist constituency which is completely absent in england and wales for example

im actually happy about the situation , the DUP are quite practical on many issues once they get assurances on some key social issues and they only want those to apply in northern ireland , besides , the catholic population in northern ireland are considerably more socially conservative than the population in the republic and way more so than SF would have you believe based on the sounds they put out about various progressive topics , the demand for marriage equality is not the same in northern ireland as it was down here


----------



## galway_blow_in

T McGibney said:


> Cameron isn't Tory leader anymore, because the small c conservatives in his own party forced him to commit to a Brexit referendum as a quid-pro-quo for supporting a same-sex marriage legalisation that he (or more particularly his wife) wanted but that they most certainly didn't want and barely tolerated.
> 
> The DUP are more or less indistinguishable from a large and possibly dominant element of the Tory party.



not true , the DUP were never to the right on economic matters , the UUP were the party of business in northern ireland , the DUP are only to the right on social issues , they are if anything quite left wing on the economy , not corbyn left but well to the left of the tories , thats for sure , they are not thatcherites by any measure


----------



## T McGibney

galway_blow_in said:


> not true , the DUP were never to the right on economic matters...they are not thatcherites by any measure



Are the Tories?


----------



## Jim2007

Leper said:


> another referendum never stopped us . . . . I reckon it's coming in the UK.



Ireland has a sovereign people, the U.K. has a sovereign parliament and therefore U.K. referenda can only ever be advisory!  Furthermore there is no mechanism for A50 to be revoked and even if the commission were to accept an attempt to revoked it, it could be challenged at any time by an EU citizen in the ECJ and thus would be an unstable basis going forward.

And at this stage things have moved on and given the kind of reform envisaged I doubt there would be much welcome for their obstructionism going forward.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

This is what TM is up against


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

Interesting take on DUP


----------



## Nordkapp

Insightful for those who don't know Ulsters history and origins


----------



## cremeegg

I must admit that I am stunned by how badly the DUP did in their deal with the Tories.

They got increased flexibility to spend an existing €500m, just enough to cover the cash for ash scheme, and a further €2bn over 2 years.

Thats 5% of the existing grant. The DUP put the Tories into government for a 5% pay rise. Unbelievable ! A once in a generation opportunity and they settled for 5%. I thought they would screw far more out of Theresa.

The Tories got to form a government, Theresa gets to be PM, appoint the entire cabinet, all the probably thousands of patronage jobs and the DUP settled for a 5% pay rise. I thought they're made of sterner stuff.


----------



## galway_blow_in

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Interesting take on DUP



galloway is a pretty dreadful individual


----------



## TheBigShort

The power sharing executive is not being re-established. Direct rule is likely, and this will mean additional money for NI, and what it is being spent on, will be under the focus of WM. 
This means for May to stay in power, the money will still have to be forthcoming, but under direction of WM. This will put pressure on Scottish and Welsh conservatives. Why support additional funding to NI at behest of DUP, who are against equal marriage, against language rights.


----------



## Purple

Who/what is WM?


----------



## Firefly

Purple said:


> Who/what is WM?



Westminster? Or maybe WOMEN?


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

galway_blow_in said:


> galloway is a pretty dreadful individual


Agreed, but as an idiot's guide to 400 years of NI politics, not to mention his pen picture of the Paisleyites, this piece was superb and compulsory viewing for Irish history Leaving Cert students.


----------



## TheBigShort

Purple said:


> Who/what is WM?



Sorry, my bad -- Westminster. I use it for Twitter abbreviation.


----------



## galway_blow_in

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Agreed, but as an idiot's guide to 400 years of NI politics, not to mention his pen picture of the Paisleyites, this piece was superb and compulsory viewing for Irish history Leaving Cert students.



well he demonised the ulster scots to a pretty offensive degree , what was the point of taking a dig at those who emigrated to appalachia centuries ago ?


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

cremeegg said:


> I must admit that I am stunned by how badly the DUP did in their deal with the Tories.
> 
> They got increased flexibility to spend an existing €500m, just enough to cover the cash for ash scheme, and a further €2bn over 2 years.
> 
> Thats 5% of the existing grant. The DUP put the Tories into government for a 5% pay rise. Unbelievable ! A once in a generation opportunity and they settled for 5%. I thought they would screw far more out of Theresa.
> 
> The Tories got to form a government, Theresa gets to be PM, appoint the entire cabinet, all the probably thousands of patronage jobs and the DUP settled for a 5% pay rise. I thought they're made of sterner stuff.


Agreed.  Changing all the street signs to Irish/English, having Irish/English announcements on public travel, providing an Irish alternative to all public service interactions etc. will swallow that up in no time.  Notice how down here we get away with pretending Irish/English equality; up there you can bet the shinners would grind the system to a halt in exercising their rights to have all communications in Irish.
Basic fact, the shinners aren't fit for power North or South.


----------



## TheBigShort

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Changing all the street signs to Irish/English, having Irish/English announcements on public travel, providing an Irish alternative to all public service interactions etc. will swallow that up in no time. Notice how down here we get away with pretending Irish/English equality; up there you can bet the shinners would grind the system to a halt in exercising their rights to have all communications in Irish.



Of course most of this is BS. The notion that Acht na Gaeilge will be some administrative burden, draining the resources of stormont, is lame at best.
As for 'down here', it wasnt that long ago that the Dáil stood in unison to acknowledge the 80,000 Traveller community as an ethnic race, but the 80,000 native Irish speakers are somehow not to be afforded the same status in their own country?
Perhaps I'm in the wrong place? AAM is what it says on the tin  - about money. Nothing else, the profit and loss, the maths, the bottom line.
Sad really, because all of it (money) is worth zero without the confidence and support of society - without socialism all profiteers and capitalists are redundant.


----------



## Purple

TheBigShort said:


> because all of it (money) is worth zero without the confidence and support of society -


 I don't think many people would disagree with you.



TheBigShort said:


> without socialism all profiteers and capitalists are redundant.


 What on earth does that mean? Socialism is a political and economic doctrine. Are you saying that society can't function without it? Does society not function now?


----------



## Purple

TheBigShort said:


> it wasnt that long ago that the Dáil stood in unison to acknowledge the 80,000 Traveller community as an ethnic race, but the 80,000 native Irish speakers are somehow not to be afforded the same status in their own country?


 Are you suggesting that people should be afforded an ethnic identity based on their mother tongue and that should be on par with a distinct ethnic group whose identity can be traced back to the bronze age?


----------



## Firefly

TheBigShort said:


> without socialism all profiteers and capitalists are redundant.



    You've made my day with that one. One of your better ones I must say. Do us all a favour and post your Twitter handle...we could all do with some mind-bending today!


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

B/S according to Wiki 1,500 people in NI speak Irish as their first tongue.  I'm ignoring people from the jailtacht like Grizzly.  By contrast 30,000 speak Polish.  My guess is that more people speak Mandarin.

In NI the Irish thing is very much the counter on one side to the Flags thing on the other.  The British government is partly to blame for committing to an ILA in the St Andrews agreement, when will they learn that you should not feed the crocodiles?

As for simple Simon, Varadkar should have known not to give someone from the Rebel County a sensitive NI posting.


----------



## TheBigShort

Purple said:


> I don't think many people would disagree with you.
> 
> What on earth does that mean? Socialism is a political and economic doctrine. Are you saying that society can't function without it? Does society not function now?




The fabric of a society is based on common aims and goals. The laws of the land are a reflection of the commonality between us all. If we ever get to a free-for-all, do as you please, do as you see fit, type of society then the society will collapse.

Taxation is a form of socialist ideology. The basic premise being that we all need to collectively contribute some of our individual wealth in order to protect and prosper that wealth.

In other words, without the direct and indirect input of all citizens, everything we own individually is worthless. From the clothes on our backs, the food we eat, the roof over our heads – it is a societal collective that facilitates it all, every bit of it. That to me, is socialism.



Purple said:


> Are you suggesting that people should be afforded an ethnic identity based on their mother tongue and that should be on par with a distinct ethnic group whose identity can be traced back to the bronze age?




This is to do with the Irish language. It is part of our culture, it is a language that is under threat and needs protecting. We have similar protections here under the Official languages Act. There may only be some 74,000 native speakers, but in the last census, some 1.6m people answered that they had the ability to speak Irish. It is a language that its roots can be traced back to the 3rd and 4th centuries. So just because a small minority only use the language, does not mean we, as a society should just ignore their rights. That is why I used the Traveller comparison, only a small minority, but they deserve their rights to be recognised and protected. The gay community, a small minority, they deserve their rights to be recognised and protected. Native Irish language speakers, a small minority, deserve their rights to be recognised and protected.



Duke of Marmalade said:


> B/S according to Wiki 1,500 people in NI speak Irish as their first tongue. I'm ignoring people from the jailtacht like Grizzly. By contrast 30,000 speak Polish. My guess is that more people speak Mandarin.




So what? What is your point?



Duke of Marmalade said:


> In NI the Irish thing is very much the counter on one side to the Flags thing on the other



Its not a ‘thing’, not more than the Traveller ethnicity is a ‘thing’, or gay rights is a ‘thing’.
It has nothing to do with flags. It is about basic rights, for Irish language speakers living on the island of Ireland.



Duke of Marmalade said:


> The British government is partly to blame for committing to an ILA in the St Andrews agreement,



No they are not to blame for anything re ILA. They were in a set of negotiations that at least one major party, representing its constituency, are mandated to pursue an ILA. Another major party, as facilitators of those negotiations, namely the Irish Government, also support the introduction of an ILA in the North. Seeing as it is Ireland, and there is legislative protections of the Irish language in the South, it would be nothing short of hypocrisy for the Irish government not to support an ILA. And it would nothing short of hypocrisy of the British government not to facilitate the democratic will as presented by the elected representatives in Ireland, as it did with Welsh language rights and Gaelic Language (Scotland) Act 2005.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

B/S
Answering some of your points.  As oft before I find some of them so obtuse that I suspect I am being trolled.

If 1,500 Irish speakers have the "right" to conduct their affairs with public officials and utilities in Irish do not 30,000 Polish speakers have an even greater similar right.  Does the Chinese community have similar rights?  Or do rights only apply to natives?

I think you know what I mean when I refer to the Irish "thing" or the Flags "thing".

It was this morning's IT where I read that the Brits committed to an ILA.  But you have corrected that.  This obsession with an ILA is then solely at the jaws of the crocodiles.

If 1.6M people in the census describe themselves as Irish speakers then I'm afraid the census must take its place alongside lies, damned lies and statistics.  I did Irish up to NI Junior Cert but no way would I describe myself  as an Irish speaker, but I suspect I have more focail than many of that 1.6M.


----------



## Jim2007

TheBigShort said:


> This is to do with the Irish language. It is part of our culture, it is a language that is under threat and needs protecting.



It is part of our our historical culture and it is decline because people have neither the need for nor interest in, it.  We spent a 100 years trying to turn back the tide on this one and it has not made a blind bit of difference other than delaying the enviable.  At this stage it is a hobby project for some people and it should be seen for what it is.



TheBigShort said:


> but in the last census, some 1.6m people answered that they had the ability to speak Irish.



And if you asked them if they spoke French they'd probably say yes too.  But if you dropped them in the middle of France they'd struggle, just as they would with Irish too.  I spent about 14 years learning Irish in total, but it was only when I went to work in an Irish speaking environment that I actually learned to speak it properly.  And even then it was a joke, letters sent to government departments or clients had to be translated because our Irish was not good enough and then responses were slow because we had to wait until someone in the dept who's Irish was good enough could answer us.


----------



## Firefly

Jim2007 said:


> I spent about 14 years learning Irish in total, but it was only when I went to work in an Irish speaking environment that I actually learned to speak it properly.  And even then it was a joke, letters sent to government departments or clients had to be translated because our Irish was not good enough and then responses were slow because we had to wait until someone in the dept who's Irish was good enough could answer us.



Yeah, but look at all the value-added jobs it created!


----------



## TheBigShort

Duke of Marmalade said:


> If 1,500 Irish speakers have the "right" to conduct their affairs with public officials and utilities in Irish do not 30,000 Polish speakers have an even greater similar right. Does the Chinese community have similar rights? Or do rights only apply to natives?




Yes they do, if that is their wish. I have no objection to it do you. What they can do is, like the Irish language supporters, is lobby their local representatives for Polish or Chinese or whatever language rights they wish. Their local representatives, if they wish, can make it a priority to establish Polish language rights in Ireland if they wish. They can put this to the public, and if elected, they can present it in policy form in the Dáil. Exactly the same way Irish language activists have lobbied their own public representatives (many of whom are fluent speakers of Irish).

So if you want Polish people to have the same language rights as Irish language speakers, the democratic institutions are open and available to you to pursue it. I certainly wont be objecting if you do.
I suspect they don't, I suspect Polish people are satisfied with having Polish recognized as an official EU language. I suspect that seeing as that part of their culture is not under threat, there is no great impetus on their part for such rights in Ireland.
But by all means, if you wish to pursue it go ahead, I wish you the very best.



Duke of Marmalade said:


> I think you know what I mean when I refer to the Irish "thing" or the Flags "thing".



Yes, you are flippantly dismissing the cultural values held by many people on this island. In case you hadn’t noticed, such intolerance has led to bloodshed in the past. Time you opened your mind somewhat to more tolerance.



Duke of Marmalade said:


> If 1.6M people in the census describe themselves as Irish speakers then I'm afraid the census must take its place alongside lies, damned lies and statistics. I did Irish up to NI Junior Cert but no way would I describe myself as an Irish speaker, but I suspect I have more focail than many of that 1.6M.




You accuse me of trolling, but then put out this stuff.

Firstly, the 1.6m did not describe themselves as Irish speakers, they described themselves as having the ability to speak Irish. There is a difference, yes it could mean that someone with no more than “Sláinte” class themselves as having the ability to speak Irish, but the critical thing here is the question is open to everyone and you have to ask, why, if most of these 1.6m people cannot actually speak Irish, would they indicate on a census form that they can speak Irish? Are they just bare faced liars as you have implied? In which case then if they lie about that question what else are they lying about? Are you suggesting that the census is actually obsolete, a waste of time?

Or would it by any chance indicate a strong, underlying support to maintain the language, regardless of their ability or lack of ability to speak it? I would suggest it would.
Just because someone cannot do Irish dancing, does not mean they don’t enjoy watching it or that they wouldn’t support government funding to protect and support it.
Just because someone cannot play Irish music, does not mean they don’t enjoy listening to it or that they wouldn’t support government funding to protect and support it.
Just because someone cannot speak Irish, does not mean they don’t appreciate its cultural significance or that they wouldn’t support governemtn funding to protect and support it.


----------



## TheBigShort

Firefly said:


> Yeah, but look at all the value-added jobs it created!



Yes, and look again at the lack of foresight, the lack of imagination, the lack of any ability to observe and appreciate matters outside of the profit and loss account.
Everything boils down to $$$, like the good free-market capitialist that you are.
Irish traditional music in the 1950's was also on its deathbed, until a little known trad band called The Chieftans re-generated the interest in it. Not only are they Internationally multi-award winning musical performers, the interest in the Irish trad music has never been greater. With it creating jobs, not only in music, but in tourism too. It is a huge pull-factor for tourists to this country.

Irish dancing, has also seen a surge in popularity, in no small part to shows like Riverdance etc. This is also a major pull-factor for tourists to this country and there are thriving international competitions held every year in Irish dancing. Jobs, jobs, jobs.....$$$$$, you should be happy about that.


----------



## TheBigShort

Jim2007 said:


> It is part of our our historical culture and it is decline because people have neither the need for nor interest in, it.



Why would 1.6m people indicate in a census that they have the ability to speak Irish, if they neither have the need nor the interest in it?


----------



## Purple

TheBigShort said:


> The fabric of a society is based on common aims and goals. The laws of the land are a reflection of the commonality between us all. If we ever get to a free-for-all, do as you please, do as you see fit, type of society then the society will collapse.


 You sound like a FG'er law and order man.
I agree; we are a Nation of laws or we are nothing. Without that you'd have people refusing to pay their water charges and socialists encouraging them to break the law.  



TheBigShort said:


> Taxation is a form of socialist ideology. The basic premise being that we all need to collectively contribute some of our individual wealth in order to protect and prosper that wealth.


 No it isn't; socialism is about the people (the "wurker") owning the means of production. Since everyone with half a brain now accepts that that is a stupid idea socialism has morphed into the people owning or controlling or, now, regulating the means of production. 



TheBigShort said:


> In other words, without the direct and indirect input of all citizens, everything we own individually is worthless. From the clothes on our backs, the food we eat, the roof over our heads – it is a societal collective that facilitates it all, every bit of it. That to me, is socialism.


 Fair enough but it's a very a la carte version of socialism. 



TheBigShort said:


> This is to do with the Irish language. It is part of our culture, it is a language that is under threat and needs protecting. We have similar protections here under the Official languages Act. There may only be some 74,000 native speakers, but in the last census, some 1.6m people answered that they had the ability to speak Irish. It is a language that its roots can be traced back to the 3rd and 4th centuries. So just because a small minority only use the language, does not mean we, as a society should just ignore their rights. That is why I used the Traveller comparison, only a small minority, but they deserve their rights to be recognised and protected. The gay community, a small minority, they deserve their rights to be recognised and protected. Native Irish language speakers, a small minority, deserve their rights to be recognised and protected.


The Brehon Laws are also part of our historical culture but we don't use them any more.
I absolutely reject the notion that Irish speakers are somehow more Irish than non-Irish speakers. It's 200 years since anyone in my family spoke Irish as a first language. It is not part of my Irish identity. We protect Irish speakers in that we do not oppress them of discriminate against them. Not facilitating them is not the same as discriminate against them. Should Shelta (Cant) also be a protected language? What about Ullans (Ulster-Scotts)?


----------



## odyssey06

TheBigShort said:


> Why would 1.6m people indicate in a census that they have the ability to speak Irish, if they neither have the need nor the interest in it?



Because they weren't asked if they need it or have an interest in it, they were asked if they had the ability?


----------



## Jim2007

TheBigShort said:


> Why would 1.6m people indicate in a census that they have the ability to speak Irish, if they neither have the need nor the interest in it?



Because that was not the question they were asked.


----------



## TheBigShort

Purple said:


> The Brehon Laws are also part of our historical culture but we don't use them any more.
> I absolutely reject the notion that Irish speakers are somehow more Irish than non-Irish speakers. It's 200 years since anyone in my family spoke Irish as a first language. It is not part of my Irish identity. We protect Irish speakers in that we do not oppress them of discriminate against them. Not facilitating them is not the same as discriminate against them. Should Shelta (Cant) also be a protected language? What about Ullans (Ulster-Scotts)?




Brehon laws are part of our culture and we don't use them any more – but if you, or anybody else, wishes to advocate a return to using those laws, you are protected in your rights to pursue that matter through the democratic process.

I absolutely reject the notion that Irish speakers are somehow more Irish than non-Irish speakers. Its about 70 years since Irish was a native language in my family. My grandmother on my mothers side grew up in an all-Iirsh speaking household in east Kerry.

It is part of my identity. I have intermediate Irish as measured by the NUI. I am not a native speaker nor fluent, but it is a big part of identity, historically and culturally.

The issue raised was of ILA in NI. Anyone who uses and supports the Irish language in this country will know that there is widespread support for its preservation and its progress. The problem is that we have not developed a program to effectively reverse the decline in native speakers. It is not just an Irish problem, it is extremely difficult to reverse the use of minority languages when in decline. That is recognised internationally.


----------



## Firefly

TheBigShort said:


> Everything boils down to $$$, like the good free-market capitialist that you are.



I believe in a free market economy for the majority of things yes, but I also believe in having a fit for purpose and affordable government that can educate and protect us. That would put me to the right of centre I guess, aligned with FG thinking I suppose, but far from a free-market capitalist.



TheBigShort said:


> Irish traditional music in the 1950's was also on its deathbed, until a little known trad band called The Chieftans re-generated the interest in it. Not only are they Internationally multi-award winning musical performers, the interest in the Irish trad music has never been greater. With it creating jobs, not only in music, but in tourism too. It is a huge pull-factor for tourists to this country.
> 
> Irish dancing, has also seen a surge in popularity, in no small part to shows like Riverdance etc. This is also a major pull-factor for tourists to this country and there are thriving international competitions held every year in Irish dancing. Jobs, jobs, jobs.....$$$$$, you should be happy about that.



And well done to both the Chieftans and Riverdance who both spotted lucrative markets that ensured their offerings were desired by people willing to pay for them...market forces in other words. Perhaps the Chieftans and Riverdance might have continued to produce what they did in a socialist state but I would have my doubts. In any case, I fail to see how these examples relate to the issues the OP posted about?

For the record, I hated Irish in school and tought it a complete waste of time at the time. However I think differently now. I think it should be cherished as our national language. Yes it may not be used internationally and the rest but look how proud the Welsh are of their language. I'm not sure of the solution, but one thing that's certain regarding young people, if someone could make it cool it would take off.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

B/S you have an amazing knack of stirring it considering that most of your utterances are B/S.

I note now that you do not regard it as a "right" that Irish speakers can communicate in Irish with the organs of the State. Rather you believe they have the "right" to lobby for that facility.  That rather neatly deals with the Polish question but do you not get a slight stench of B/S from that odd nuance.

Look,  I understand the obsession down here with promoting the Irish language.  It has a slight linkage to anti British sentiment but it is not really maliciously targeted at any section of the Southern populace.

In the NI however the Irish thing has nothing to do with protecting the "rights" of 1,500 folk who use it as their first language but is all about rubbing the noses of one community in the manure, showing them who won the war.  Just as the Flags thing has nothing to do with paying homage to Her Majesty but all to do with rubbing the noses of the other community in the manure, showing them that they didn't win the war.


----------



## TheBigShort

odyssey06 said:


> Because they weren't asked if they need it or have an interest in it, they were asked if they had the ability?



Yes, and thinking about it logically – a native speaker or fluent speaker will obviously answer Yes, if they are being truthful.
A person who has reasonable level of Irish will also, most likely answer Yes, if they are being truthful.
A person with a poor level of Irish will, if being truthful, could answer Yes or No.

Technically speaking, if I can say one word in Irish, then being truthful, I should answer the question – Yes.
Logically speaking, if I only have a few words, then being truthful, I should answer the question – No.

So while technically the 1.6m understates the ability of Irish people to speak Irish (I would say 4m+ would be a closer figure as most people can speak a few words of Irish). Logically, the 1.6m overstates the number of Irish people with the ability to speak Irish (effectively).

So why are all these people, answering a very simple logical question as Yes, when they should be answering No?

Alternatively, why are all these people, answering a very simple technical question as No, when they should be answering Yes.

I put it down to this, either you are a person who is broadly supportive of the preservation of Irish language, someone who acknowledges its cultural significance, someone who can identify with as being part of their culture or,

You are someone who see’s little value in its continued existence, who thinks it is a dead language and has no future, who cant identify with it as being part of your culture.

Im guessing the former, in answering the census question, will tend to qualify their cúpla focal as Yes - I have the ability to speak Irish. The latter will answer, most likely, as No, I have not the ability to speak Irish.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

B/S  I believe that the support for the Irish language has broad consensus across the Republic - no need for forensic analysis of the census to assert that.

I think I started this Irish thing in the context of NI which is an entirely different kettle of fish as explained in my previous post.


----------



## cremeegg

Duke of Marmalade said:


> B/S you have an amazing knack of stirring it considering that most of your utterances are B/S.
> 
> I note now that you do not regard it as a "right" that Irish speakers can communicate in Irish with the organs of the State. Rather you believe they have the "right" to lobby for that facility.  That rather neatly deals with the Polish question but *do you not get a slight stench of B/S from that odd nuance*.



On the contrary, I thought he skewered you rather neatly there.


----------



## TheBigShort

Duke of Marmalade said:


> B/S  I believe that the support for the Irish language has broad consensus across the Republic - no need for forensic analysis of the census to assert that.
> 
> I think I started this Irish thing in the context of NI which is an entirely different kettle of fish as explained in my previous post.



I don't see it as a different kettle of fish. These are Irish people, living in Ireland, with rights and entitlements like everyone else. They have successfully mandated their political representatives to pursue an Irish language Act to such a point that it is part of negotiated settlement supported by the British and Irish governments.


----------



## TheBigShort

Duke of Marmalade said:


> B/S you have an amazing knack of stirring it considering that most of your utterances are B/S.



An amazing knack of ‘stirring things’ he says, while demeaning my contributions in derogatory form.



Duke of Marmalade said:


> I note now that you do not regard it as a "right" that Irish speakers can communicate in Irish with the organs of the State. Rather you believe they have the "right" to lobby for that facility. That rather neatly deals with the Polish question but do you not get a slight stench of B/S from that odd nuance.




The Polish language, the last time I checked, was not in danger of extinction anytime soon. So that is why I wouldn’t think there to be any great impetus from Polish people to pursue similar legislative rights in Ireland for their language. I don’t know about you, but I think that is a pretty logical view to have.

Certainly, if there was an attempt, to wipe Poland, its people and culture off the face of the earth, save for the last remaining Poles living in Ireland, then Im sure that would change. I would certainly support such a campaign.

And for your information, here is some detail of how the Russians tried to do exactly that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russification#Poland_and_Lithuania



Duke of Marmalade said:


> Look, I understand the obsession down here with promoting the Irish language. It has a slight linkage to anti British sentiment but it is not really maliciously targeted at any section of the Southern populace.



Yes, there are those who use it as a banner, or cover to express their identity and who can only speak a few words at best. But that is not any reason to deny those native speakers, or those fluent speakers who wish to genuinely promote and support the Irish language in its own right.



Duke of Marmalade said:


> In the NI however the Irish thing has nothing to do with protecting the "rights" of 1,500 folk who use it as their first language but is all about rubbing the noses of one community in the manure, showing them who won the war. Just as the Flags thing has nothing to do with paying homage to Her Majesty but all to do with rubbing the noses of the other community in the manure, showing them that they didn't win the war.




That is your view, and I accept that there are those who use the Irish language as a cloak for more nefarious means. But again, it is no excuse to deny those who genuinely support the language and who have lobbied successfully to have legislative protections put in place.

It is not a SF project, it is supported by the SDLP and Irish Government and the Alliance Party and the Green Party. It has broad-based support.


----------



## Firefly

TheBigShort said:


> The Polish language, the last time I checked, was not in danger of extinction anytime soon.



What about socialists? Do you think they are in danger of extinction at this stage? Time to gather your comrades I think and start lobbying before those greedy capitalists, in pursuit of unfettered profits, take over!


----------



## Firefly

TheBigShort said:


> Certainly, if there was an attempt, to wipe Poland, its people and culture off the face of the earth, save for the last remaining Poles living in Ireland, then Im sure that would change. I would certainly support such a campaign.



Jees, that's a bit harsh on the Poles


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

TheBigShort said:


> It is not a SF project, it is supported by the SDLP and Irish Government and the Alliance Party and the Green Party. It has broad-based support.


That is a fair point.  But I suspect that the Alliance idea of an ILA is quite different from the Shinner idea.  My guess is the former would support funding education programs and things like that whereas I suspect the Shinners are looking for a far greater "rub their noses in it" version. It's about time, if NI wants to think of itself as a transparent democracy, that the detailed differences of opinion by the parties on this issue, which seems to be the stumbling block, were made known to the people at large.


----------



## TheBigShort

Duke of Marmalade said:


> if NI wants to think of itself as a transparent democracy, t



That's the problem with NI. It's very existence is predicated on one thing, the refusal of Unionists to accept to live in equal partnership with their neighbours. If they ever accept this, NI will fold in the morning. It will have no basis to exist.
Brexit is a fools gold for NI.


----------



## Jim2007

TheBigShort said:


> It's very existence is predicated on one thing, the refusal of Unionists to accept to live in equal partnership with their neighbours.



And that is exactly the problem - the assumption that it is all the other sides fault.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

B/S I think I see your perspective.  You are talking about the rights of the *language/culture *itself rather than of its speakers.  Thus if Polish as a language found that Ireland was its last bastion you yourself would campaign for its survival. I was more referring to the rights of people who speak Irish being able to engage with the organs of the state in their first language.  From that perspective Polish speaking people have much greater claim than Irish speaking people in NI.

As I understand your perspective, even if, indeed especially if, nobody at all spoke Irish in NI you would want an ILA.


----------



## TheBigShort

Jim2007 said:


> And that is exactly the problem - the assumption that it is all the other sides fault.



Yes, but in a democratic society we can lay blame on each other all day long without resorting to gerrymandering, sectarian discrimination, denial of right to protest, internment, collusion, censorship, shoot to kill...and now, refusal to recognize the reality of marriage equality, language rights, abortion rights etc.
If NI wants to survive (and basically only a small minority of Irish people actually support the partition of the island and it's people's) it has to embrace the reality of 2017 and on, and stop embracing ( as opposed to commemorating) the past of religious supremacy as the means of controlling society.
By all means, worship and pray, but NI needs to acknowledge diversification. If (when) it does, NI will collapse. 
As long as the Republic remains socially progressive, the collapse of NI is inevitable.


----------



## TheBigShort

Duke of Marmalade said:


> You are talking about the rights of the *language/culture *itself rather than of its speakers.



To a point, yes, but one without the other is somewhat moot.



Duke of Marmalade said:


> Thus if Polish as a language found that Ireland was its last bastion you yourself would campaign for its survival.



I wouldn't object to such a campaign, certainly I couldn't think of any reason not to offer some form of support to achieve such rights in this republic.



Duke of Marmalade said:


> I was more referring to the rights of people who speak Irish being able to engage with the organs of the state in their first language. From that perspective Polish speaking people have much greater claim than Irish speaking people in NI.



But is anybody denying Polish people that right? I haven't heard of anything like that, have you? 
If there is a movement for Polish speakers to obtain the similar rights as Irish language speakers to engage with state services then I have no objection to that, would you?
The distinguishing features in all of this is that Irish is a language in decline, as distinct to Polish (despite the efforts of Russia), and even more, if Irish people don't organise to protect the Irish language, will anybody? 
So it is incumbent of us who support the preservation and promotion of the Irish language to do all we can, through the democratic process, to achieve our aims.
It is incumbent of those who wish to see the back of the Irish language, and let it die out completely, to do all they can, through the democratic process, to achieve their aims.
Currently, the Irish language has substantial support, primarily from Irish people, but not exclusively.



Duke of Marmalade said:


> As I understand your perspective, even if, indeed especially if, nobody at all spoke Irish in NI you would want an ILA.



No, one without other is superficial.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

TheBigShort said:


> No, one without other is superficial.


So if only one person spoke Irish in NI (in practical terms that is the case) you would support an ILA. But if she got run over by a bus the need for an ILA disappears?


----------



## TheBigShort

Duke of Marmalade said:


> So if only one person spoke Irish in NI (in practical terms that is the case) you would support an ILA. But if she got run over by a bus the need for an ILA disappears?



Now who is trolling?

As an individual I support the concept of an Irish language Act on the basis that as a language, it is in decline _and _I recognize it as part of my culture. This is regardless of how many people actually speak it.
It transpires, that aside from the 74,000 native speakers (who deserve their rights, regardless of my own aspirations) there is a sizeable body of Irish people, who are not native speakers, not fluent speakers, but yet support the notion of an Irish language Act (or Official Language Act in the Republic).
The native speakers combined with the learned speakers have, collectively, agitated for, and to a greater or lesser degree, succeeded in keeping the Irish language from extinction. They have used the legislature, through democratic means, to assist with their aims.
I am supportive of those aims.
This process is open to all in a republic.

So here is a question for you.

If Polish, or Chinese people began a campaign for language rights, equal to Irish language rights, would you object?


----------



## TheBigShort

Firefly said:


> What about socialists? Do you think they are in danger of extinction at this stage?



No, do you?


----------



## galway_blow_in

Duke of Marmalade said:


> B/S you have an amazing knack of stirring it considering that most of your utterances are B/S.
> 
> I note now that you do not regard it as a "right" that Irish speakers can communicate in Irish with the organs of the State. Rather you believe they have the "right" to lobby for that facility.  That rather neatly deals with the Polish question but do you not get a slight stench of B/S from that odd nuance.
> 
> Look,  I understand the obsession down here with promoting the Irish language.  It has a slight linkage to anti British sentiment but it is not really maliciously targeted at any section of the Southern populace.
> 
> In the NI however the Irish thing has nothing to do with protecting the "rights" of 1,500 folk who use it as their first language but is all about rubbing the noses of one community in the manure, showing them who won the war.  Just as the Flags thing has nothing to do with paying homage to Her Majesty but all to do with rubbing the noses of the other community in the manure, showing them that they didn't win the war.



if loyalists are made insecure by a collective will to maintain and grow the irish language , they are a pretty paranoid  bunch , i dont vote SF and are unlikely ever to but i have zero time for the DUP view on this one


----------



## TheBigShort

Firefly said:


> Yeah, but look at all the value-added jobs it created!



There must be money in this somewhere for someone?

https://www.google.ie/amp/www.rte.i.../834370-duolingo-language-learning-app-irish/


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

TheBigShort said:
			
		

> So here is a question for you.
> 
> If Polish, or Chinese people began a campaign for language rights, equal to Irish language rights, would you object?


Absolutely.  The idea that doing your Leaving Cert Maths or whatever using Irish, Polish, Chinese or whatever gains you bonus points seems so unfair to me.

And here's where NI politics is so poisoned.  A bonus for doing A Levels in Irish is clearly of advantage to only one community so that, as with most things up there, an ostensibly noble cause takes on a distinct sectarian hue.

Reverting to topic.  DUP have prioritised Ulster farmers in their Brexit stance.  I am surprised no-one has picked up on this for again whilst appearing harmless it is in fact deeply sectarian.  Not only are that constituency largely from one community but a situation where Ulster farmers where subsidised and Irish farmers where subject to tariffs would be disastrous for the latter and a wet dream for Paisleyites.

I repeat my suspicion that the DUP wouldn't mind a wall between NI and ROI provided WM subsidised any economic loss.  Of course it won't come to that but with their new found power you can can be sure that ROI's interests in Brexit negotiations are at considerable risk.


----------



## cremeegg

Moving right along from the future for the Chinese language, Mandarin or Cantonese, fascinating though it undoubtedly is.

Up to this point one of the many odd things about Brexit has been that one could produce a coherent outline of what might happen next. Not just whether there would be a hard or soft Brexit, but what either of these things might mean.

A clean break can at least be understood. Britain leaves the EU and all associated bodies with no agreement as to the future relationship. This could easily come about, but no one or very few want that. The Brexiteers having their cake but with nothing for the rest of Britain to eat afterwards.

The other alternative was continuing in the Single Market and or the Customs Union with the involvement of the ECJ, or some watered down version of this. This seemed to be desired by all, depending on the exact version, but impossible to achieve. Little or no cake for the Brexiteers but something left to eat afterwards.


----------



## cremeegg

Now there seems to be another possibility emerging. A deal on the divorce terms and a transitional period, membership in fact, without representation but not in name.

David Davis says this will be for a maximum of three years. Phil Hammond thinks it will be for four years.

My forecast is that Britain will not exit the transition for many years. Could work well to Irelands advantage.


----------



## TheBigShort

cremeegg said:


> My forecast is that Britain will not exit the transition for many years. Could work well to Irelands advantage.



If a hard Brexit is undesirable to most, then my forecast is that Brexit won't occur at all. I cannot see anything but a hard Brexit as being the only logical outcome if the UK is to leave the EU. A soft Brexit, a Norwegian or Swiss type arrangement could not, by any stretch of imagination, be considered a Brexit if the purpose of Brexit is take control of borders, courts, trade etc...etc...


----------



## Firefly

TheBigShort said:


> No, do you?


Tongue in cheek, and we'd never be that lucky!


----------



## galway_blow_in

i think brexit might be the brits version of our water charges

the focus of a building frustration over many years and which certain politicians fed off


----------



## cremeegg

Now where ever did you get that idea.

https://www.askaboutmoney.com/threads/martyrs-no-more-jobstown-acquittals.204151/#post-1521104


----------

