web analytics

BORIS SMOKES’EM OUT

By Pete Moore On October 17th, 2019

REMAINERS: “We must have a deal we can’t crash out with no deal we can only leave with a deal we must have a deal we must we must we must have a deal …”

BORIS: “Here’s a deal.”

REMAINERS: “Erm … no not that deal!

Boris is a chaotic charlatan, they said. The EU will not re-open the withdrawal treaty, they said. His so-called negotiations with the EU are a sham, Grandad Semtex said. As with everything the anti-democrats have claimed these last three years, they were wrong.

Under the threat of a Clean Brexit, the EU re-negotiated and Boris has a deal. There are horrors in it. Anything acceptable to the EU will involve contamination. The question is whether or not this treacherous Parliament of crooks and wrong’uns will pass it. Others who get paid to read these things will have to point out the horroes. I don’t have time to read a hundred pages of legalese.

The DUP will vote against it, which is understandable. It gives the gangsters of Sinn Fein/IRA too much of a say. Labour will whip against it, but some Labour MPs will ignore that. So Boris will turn on the charm. Parliament sits on Saturday.

For the anti-democrats it’s all on their Loser’s Vote. If the deal is approved we leave the EU and the Tories win the General Election. If it’s voted down without an extension then we have a Clean Brexit. Having spent three years pretending to be in favour of a deal, their only way out is to vate against a deal and hope for yet another extension.

75 Responses to “BORIS SMOKES’EM OUT”

  1. Apart from the generous side order of gammon the post is correct. The Left needed a leader like Keir Starmer to unite the opposition. It’s all over now.

  2. “Under the threat of a Clean Brexit, the EU re-negotiated and Boris has a deal.”

    Actually the opposite. Only when Boris had no deal removed by the Benn Act and was faced with either ending the rule of law or asking for a humiliating extension did he remove the UK red lines that was blocking a deal.

  3. Seamus –

    What are you on about? The EU has admitted that the Surrender Act persuaded them to push for more in the negotiations!

    FFS, tell a car salesman that under no circumstances will you leave his dealership without buying one of his motors. See what you get.

  4. The EU wanted to avoid a customs or regulatory border on the island of Ireland. They have. It is Boris who has caved in that issue.

    Yes the EU renegotiated. And got everything they were looking for with that.

  5. So which circle is the UK sliding across to?

    http://www.atangledweb.org/?p=63675

    http://www.atangledweb.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/european-circles.png

  6. Which one do you think Fews?

    Pete Moore, on June 20th, 2016 at 9:48 PM Said:

    Phantom –

    The EU has no say in it. Membership of the European Economic Area (which is seperate from the EU) gives us full access to the entire market.

    Nothing happens to EU nationals in the UK. Their residency is an “acquired right” under the Vienna Convention and therefore protected. Same goes for British expats.

  7. their only way out is to vate against a deal and hope for yet another extension

    Juncker made it very clear today that this was the final deal and no “prolongation” should be required. Of course it’s not his call to refuse an extension, but it most certainly is Macron’s call. I have a hunch we will hear from him by tomorrow to the effect that he will veto any extension request. Johnson spent an hour on the phone to him yesterday, and an “understanding” like this would explain his confidence that Parliament will pass the deal on Saturday, because if it is voted down there will be a no-deal exit on 31 October. The Remainers will huff and puff and abstain.

  8. The DUP will vote against it, which is understandable. It gives the gangsters of Sinn Fein/IRA too much of a say

    Yes, gangsters with too much of a say……

    http://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2019/10/16/news/dup-defends-arlene-foster-s-astonishing-meetings-with-senior-loyalists-1739844/

  9. Arlene Foster and other senior party figures are reported to have held talks in recent days with high-ranking figures from the UVF and UDA – including south Belfast’s Jackie McDonald.

    Ahh

  10. Others who get paid to read these things will have to point out the horrors. I don’t have time to read a hundred pages of legalese.

    Here is The Spectator take:

    “Boris Johnson’s deal is the opposite to that struck by Theresa May in that the more you look at it, the better it seems. Legally, we would leave the European Union at the end of this month. There follows a transition period: 14 months, rather than 21 months (ie, until the end of next year). Thereafter, the UK would have control over its borders, its waters, its farms and more. You can search in vain in the pages of the agreement for hidden nasties. There had been talk that France wanted access to British fish: there is no such concession. There are others, but not new ones. We continue to pay quite a lot of money, but the sum goes down quickly and we should save at least £70 billion over the next decade. Money that could be put to better use redressing the effects of a globalisation that has made London too powerful relative to the rest of the country.

    The biggest concession, on our part, is that Northern Ireland can stay in an all-Ireland economy and would follow EU regulations on agriculture and industrial goods. But it also stays part of the UK Customs Union, meaning a two-border system with the UK/Northern Ireland regulatory border fairly lightly patrolled. Crucially, it can opt out of the all-Ireland system by means a simple majority vote in Stormont. So the backstop has gone: the Prime Minister has executed the “backstop-ectomy” that he promised. Democratic control stays in the UK, albeit under our devolved system. There is no unionist veto on the Stormont vote, to the dismay of the DUP. But to agree to Belfast’s control took a big concession from Leo Varadkar, the Taoiseach, who deserves credit in moving so quickly in the end. The deal was made possible by genuine and significant compromise, from all sides.”

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/2019/10/the-vindication-of-boris-johnsons-brexit-strategy/

  11. And here is a columnist from The Guardian:

    “Johnson’s deal is predicated on the fiction that Britain has more to gain from new trade deals with faraway countries than from maintaining frictionless trade with our nearest neighbours, which already account for half our trade, as part of the world’s most powerful trading bloc. The government’s own figures show that a hard Brexit – outside the customs union and single market – will leave every household more than £2,000 poorer.

    In truth, Brexit is best understood as a prism through which an argument about the future of the country has been refracted. That’s why the argument over the level playing-field provisions in the political declaration is so important. For the ERG, the strategic purpose of Brexit has always been to deregulate at home in order to strike trade deals with the US and emerging markets, since most modern trade deals are less about tariffs and more about regulation, and their political goal is to realign Britain from the EU to the US.

    Meanwhile, wavering Labour MPs have sought assurances on high standards, workers’ rights and environmental protections – which are all essential to keeping Britain a social democracy with a mixed economy. But both versions of the future cannot be true. This isn’t a matter of opinion but logic. Britain cannot be Sweden and Singapore at the same time. It can’t be in the US regulatory sphere and the EU sphere simultaneously…”

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/oct/17/boris-johnsons-plans-fall-apart

  12. Boris Johnson’s a Lundy!!

  13. Peter –

    Looking around, genuine and strong (non-Tory) Leavers seem broadly in favour of the deal.

    Nigel Farage has come out with his customary strategic error at the 11th hour. He rejected it and has received a lot of criticism from Brexit Party MEPs and members.

    The mood in the EU seems to be that the UK will be out on the 1st November.

  14. The mood in the EU seems to be that the UK will be out on the 1st November.

    Maybe, but the vote in Parliament is very tight on Saturday and could easily be lost. Unless Macron intervenes to confirm that he will veto any request for an extension. Then it’s game over for Remain as there would be no time for a second referendum and the choice will be Johnson’s deal or no-deal on 31 October.

  15. Peter –

    Boris has almost two days to peel away enough nays from the other side. MPs have almost two days to consider putting an end to the agony or prolonging it. That’s a long time. Emotions are high today, tomorrow will be more contemplative. I think it’ll pass.

  16. It will pass, because nobody seriously thought he could do it. Even probably his own side thought he’d fail, and claim he tried prepping the No-deal.
    I didn’t want a Brexit, but am ok tonite as there’s no border in Ireland; and I never thought I’d live and see the day when a Brit Gov’t finally, finally said to the DUP
    “Ah sod yuz, ya muzerable bastids”

  17. @matthew_elliott

    “Massive congratulations to @BorisJohnson for securing a good Brexit deal.”

    That’s the bloke who ran the Vote Leave campaign.

  18. Will the DUP get any kind of payoff

  19. They’ve had enough already. If Boris can get 15-20 Labour MPs to vote for the deal he doesn’t need the DUP anyway.

  20. Good

    Hopefully this is something that all sides can’ be happy enough with

  21. Boris has almost two days to peel away enough nays from the other side.

    Yes Pete, and he might manage it. But the opposition of the DUP will mean that at least some of the ERG ultras will also vote against. That will leave him relying on Labour defections which could be as few as 10, which would mean defeat. He will need at least 20 from Labour to stand a decent chance of winning.

    And it looks like Corbyn is ready to withdraw the whip from any Labour MP who votes for the deal on Saturday. If true, this will greatly limit Labour defectors. Johnson can’t complain, Corbyn is just doing the same as he did a few weeks ago. What goes around usually comes around.

  22. Yeah phantom funny game politics, isolating the DUP has brought a kind of healing on the Mainland and also the Irish are quite happy about it to. A united Ireland now makes complete sense of course more than it ever did before . DV won’t be happy but as he’s gone global with RT/Putin this won’t bother him that much, he’s a superstar with 128K followers = 1/8th of a million. Islam is his main target.

  23. Do you think that the DUP have finally realised yet that they’re nothing more than Paddies thrown under a Wrightbus?

  24. to the irish lads on ATW , 1st gen, 2nd gen ++ even those with passports but self-loathe
    Martina Anderson on a hard or soft border in Ireland

    https://twitter.com/LADFLEG/status/1184956465808904193?s=20

    Maybe Arlene missed a trick there 🙂

  25. As someone (ahem) predicted here recently, Johnson was always going to reverse-ferret and throw the DUP under the bus. Like the Arab general who swore that he would be 100% loyal to his president, until the day for treachery arrived.

    Johnson was guest speaker at the DUP conference in Belfast a year ago. Here he is promising them that there would not be a border in the Irish Sea. And of course they lapped it up and supported his Tory leadership challenge. He repeated the promise a few weeks ago at the DUP fringe meeting at the Tory conference.

    https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/politics/watch-boris-johnson-tell-the-dup-in-2018-he-would-never-put-border-in-the-irish-sea-today-he-put-a-border-in-the-irish-sea-1-9110754

  26. The DUP played this very poorly and made things even worse by meeting with loyalist terrorists. Nobody will want anything to do with them and they will probably suffer if and when there is an election. This deal is economically beneficial to NI. Business and agriculture will be for this deal and not forget the DUP was against it.

    If SF took their seats in WM and voted for this deal it they would be appreciated. Despite the fact they take their seats in Dublin and Brussels they appear afraid to take their seats in London to benefit their constituents. They will join the DUP as a party on the wrong side of history.

  27. //Looking around, genuine and strong (non-Tory) Leavers seem broadly in favour of the deal.//

    Is that what made to switch to supporting it, afer rejecting it only yesterday?
    ——————–

    Well said, New Yorker, on all points.

    “Crucially, it can opt out of the all-Ireland system by means a simple majority vote in Stormont.”

    …celebrates the Spectator. But that’s more than Irish Republicans could have wished for.
    The Unionist veto is gone, and there’s going to be a vote on the border by the representatives of the people of NI every four years!

    That inserts a question on the status of the border firmly in NI politics permanently. The border question will be kept alive, and will be seen to relate also to membership of the EU, which a majority supports.

    Meanwhile, for Britain this will be somewhat harder Brexit than the May Brexit, and it’s accordingly only making the Scots even more angry with London. If the Scots go, NI will be so close behind them it’ll be indecent.

    There’s also the fun of watching the DUP, who voted against the May deal three times, now facing a deal that is much worse for them, as they admit themselves.

    But NY is right. Every sane poliician in NI is responsible for ensuring this deal passes. If SF can’t make an exception and take their seats just for this one vote, they should at least take up the Fintan O’Toole idea and be represented by proxies until the next GE.

  28. = Is that what made YOU switch..

  29. If SF can’t make an exception and take their seats just for this one vote, they should at least take up the Fintan O’Toole idea and be represented by proxies until the next GE.

    Noel,

    Paul McMahon, on October 16th, 2019 at 5:23 PM Said:

    Are you sure that’s the case Noel? I haven’t done any looking into it recently but I rem Mary Lou replying to Fintan O’Toole’s suggestion that 7 MPs wouldn’t make a difference to the Brexit majority in Westminster.

    And, as Pete says above,

    If Boris can get 15-20 Labour MPs to vote for the deal he doesn’t need the DUP anyway.

  30. All things must pass

  31. Colm you’re on form ,
    even farts have their own dispersal equations
    and they too must pass:

    https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/288747/how-quickly-do-farts-spread

  32. //And, as Pete says above,

    If Boris can get 15-20 Labour MPs to vote for the deal he doesn’t need the DUP anyway.//

    Exactly. What if he gets only 12?

  33. I see where you’re going Noel, it will be galling if the deal numbers required the SF votes and SF don’t vote; then we’re in GE election territory which means No Deal if Bojo wins, which is highly likely.

  34. John Mann says more than nine Labour MPs will vote for Johnson’s deal

  35. What are the predictions – Will this thing pass or not. When is the vote

    If SF’s antiquated antics lead to an outcome that most Irish strongly oppose, here’s hoping that they pay a big political price for such rigidity.

  36. Exactly. What if he gets only 12?

    To quote al old Belfastism ‘if your granny had balls she’d be your granda’

    I suspect that Boris deal will be accepted or rejected by a margin of more than seven but we’ll have to wait to see.

  37. Paul I think SF should vote, its a once in a life-time event
    Should no-deal occur there will be a border North South in Ireland
    That will be a catastrophe
    Do you agree ?

  38. I don’t think that SF should vote as it would set a precedent and would absolutely be used as a whipping boy by SF’s enemies on all sides as a whipping boy.

    I think that Fintan O’Toole proposed a sensible compromise but it has been left too late to implement and if Johnson’s deal fails by more than seven votes SF will have to take responsibility for that.

  39. * SF’s enemies on all sides as a whipping boy

    Bollocks! Apologies.

  40. If SF’s rigidity leads to a new border, they own that pig.

  41. the blow back could well be worse if in the future there is a hard border and everyone knows SF had the chance to stop it, but they didn’t.
    I think they can ride out some flack short term

  42. SF will have to take responsibility for that

    That blame should also be apportioned appropriately. Let’s not forget that it’s the DUP who are the crux of this and that they shouldn’t be let off the hook either.

  43. So SF would be the rigid equals of the DUP, endlessly stubborn actors who collaborated on building a new borderb that no one wanted

    That’s what history would see them to be

  44. //To quote al old Belfastism ‘if your granny had balls she’d be your granda’ //

    Paul, that’s a counterfactual and isn’t at all applicable in this case, which deals with a definite possibility.

    It should also be said that, while the question of whether it’s the best possible deal for NI in general will depend on your pov, there is no doubt that the deal the Irish government negotiated is the best possible deal for Northern Nationalists but a worse deal, generally speaking, for the rest of Ireland.
    NI Nationalists are in fact now even in a better situation than if there had been no Brexit, both from a constitutional and an economic point of view. In fact, they’re in the best situation since NI was set up.

    (NI will probably also become a smugglers and tax avoiders haven, so someone’s going to benefit from that as well)

    As far as the RoI as a whole is concerned, however, May’s deal was better. Now, there will in a year or two be tariffs on goods crossing the Irish sea, and that ain’t good for anyone.

    Phantom, the vote on this deal is tomorrow.

    It’s impossible to tell at this stage how it will go.

    As I said, this deal makes for a harder Brexit than May’s deal did, so Johnson will pick up some of the hardline votes while maybe losing more of the moderate and Remain votes within his party. DUP MPs are definitely going to vote against, and BJ will need the votes of some Labour members and the 21 Conservatives he kicked out of the parliamentary party last month for supporting the Benn Act (which obliges the PM to seek another extension if no deal is agreed and approved-)

  45. At least the DUP would be delivering the new partition that their voters want

    What would SF’s excuse be For enabling a new level of partition

  46. oh DUP are getting hit, i hear alot of them want to turn to TUV or not vote.
    But even perhaps more importantly ( hope someone does a post on it )
    Gay Marriage and abortion laws in line with the UK are coming to NI on Monday.

    DUP thought they could play a blinder by collapsing Stourmont 😉
    and its totally backfired. The EU and HMG have factored that in as regards the terms of this Tory Deal. and its right there should be no rewards for those who have denied representation for voters

  47. // SF’s enemies on all sides as a whipping boy//

    So SF is more concerned about possible loss of face for itself than about doing what’s best even for its own supporters? OK.

    //That blame should also be apportioned appropriately. Let’s not forget that it’s the DUP who are the crux of this and that they shouldn’t be let off the hook either.//

    Paul, You mean the DUP will be blamed if there’s a hard border?
    Are you serious? Many DUP people would like to see a Trump-model wall along the entire border.

    There’s no comparision about the shame of SF – the all-Ireland party with the traditiion of killing and being killed attacking the border – for being responsible for setting up a new border in Ireland and the responsibility for the party of uncompromising Unionism.

  48. SF building a border would be a bit like Republicans intentionally harming the health care of Americans, For Craven and purely political reasons

  49. //SF building a border would be a bit like Republicans intentionally harming the health care of Americans,//

    Far worse, the entire raison d’etre of SF for almot the past century has been to get rid of the border.
    It would be more like the Republican party in the US becoming communist.

  50. No question about it

  51. My Jewish friend got an Islamic Republic of Iran passport so that she could see her grandma in Tehran before she died

    Sinn Fein can take their seats and perhaps to prevent a border reinforced in some way

    Maginot Line rigidity in politics is to be condemned. If fake principles lead to the most hated outcomes, then ” principles ” are bad, not good.

    We will soon see what SF is made of

  52. Yeah SF really should be talking about this and acting upon it .
    Darn my irish passport app has been rejected again ( 2nd time )
    Reason:
    Image too close to the camera. can’t use it for biometrics.
    Please ensure there is sufficient space under your chin and over the head
    WTF I have sat now in 2 separate passport photo booths and got the photos right
    you get a tick saying can use for passport .

  53. Sinn Fein will never take their seats in the House of Commons . They have never even hinted that they would. It isn’t even a debating point within the party as far as I can make out.

  54. I don’t so much care what people say, as I care what people do

    If SF’s actions lead to a border, IMO they should henceforth be seen as a partitionist party

  55. //They have never even hinted that they would. It isn’t even a debating point within the party as far as I can make out.//

    Perhaps, but they can change that in the bat of an eyelid and it wouldn’t make any difference. As Phantom says, there’s no reason apart from their rigid principle why they shouldn’t.
    As it is, the RoI government is acting with more responsibility for the Nationalist population in NI than Sinn Fein is.

    Negotiations like those between Leo ‘n Boris are always a bartering game with plenty of give and take. You can be sure that Leo secured the best possible deal for the North while, and maybe by, conceding to the Brits points of advantage for the RoI.

  56. If Sinn Fein delivers a new border, advantage Real IRA and the other bad guys.

    SF has a chance not to be stupid. Let’s hope that they take it.

  57. I’m on my phone here and will come back to this later when I get to a computer.

  58. Firstly,

    Paul, that’s a counterfactual and isn’t at all applicable in this case, which deals with a definite possibility.

    Noel, it’s an analogical conditional hypothesis, if A happens B will be the result and it’s absolutely appropriate in terms of your ‘What if he gets only 12?’ cmment.

    Now,

    SF won’t take their seats in Westminster regardless of what the reasons for doing so because to do so wouldn’t be asking SF to make a political compromise but to compromise on the very fundamental essence of what SF are.

    So SF is more concerned about possible loss of face for itself than about doing what’s best even for its own supporters? OK

    No it’s not but what it is concerned about is undermining it’s whole raison d’être. As a matter of fact you’ve inadvertantly dawn a more correct analogy yourself above:

    It would be more like the Republican party in the US becoming communist

    SF not recognising the legitimacy of Westminster in Ireland is the intrinsic ethos of what SF are and is a sacred cow that no price will sacrifice.

    Perhaps, but they can change that in the bat of an eyelid and it wouldn’t make any difference

    As explained above, they can’t.

    If SF’s actions lead to a border, IMO they should henceforth be seen as a partitionist party

    Let’s get one thing clear, if there is a hard border in Ireland the only thing that led to it will be Brexit and those who voted for it.

    SF won’t take their seats in Westminister for the reasons explained above and it doesn’t matter what I or anyone else thinks it just won’t happen regardless. I suspect it particularly won’t happen as a reaction to a British created problem imposing a hard border in Ireland.

    We’ll see soon enough what the outcome of the vote is and if it’s accepted or rejected as a result of seven SF abstentionist votes then SF will take that and all that comes with it on the chin.

  59. //SF not recognising the legitimacy of Westminster in Ireland is the intrinsic ethos of what SF are //

    I disagree, Paul. Abstention has always been (or at least originally was) a tactic, obviously not a goal. If a party has an essence, then SF’s is securing a republic in a united Ireland.

    //As explained above, they can’t. //

    Paul, you sound like those American constitutional fetishists we have here who think that these old principles were handed down to man on Mount Sinai and have since then been cast in stone.
    They aren’t. They were thought up by people to serve a participar purpose and they can be changed by people at any time. There’s absolutely nothing to stop SF changing its abstentionist policy immediately other than a kind of self-indulgent stubbornness.

    //SF will take that and all that comes with it on the chin.//

    Will they? SF is already sliding in the polls in Ireland. It has been inactive in the power-sharing govt of NI for years. If it now also jeopardises the opportunity of putting NI Nationalists in the best position they have ever been in and of moving one more step towards national unity just for the sake of an arcane principle that’s relevant only to themselves, they deserve to slide even more.

  60. Noel, I was a member of SF for more than 20 years and what you may think is an arcane political principal or tactic I know is the fundamental base of the party and as said, I particularly don’t think that fundamental will change as a reaction of a British created problem.

    Will they?

    Yes they will and they’ll return to fight another day and those who voted for them on an abstentionist ticket will vote for them again or they won’t.

    Like asking US Republicans to turn Communist above you are asking SF to negate their very being and it won’t happen regardless of what you, I or anyone else outside the Party thinks.

  61. It has been inactive in the power-sharing govt of NI for years

    ????

    That may be because the power-sharing govt of NI hasn’t existed for years?

  62. //Like asking US Republicans to turn Communist above you are asking SF to negate their very being //

    Paul, I know you’ve been dashing around today, but you misunderstood several things I said above. As for this one: I said – in response to Phantom’s comment – that SF contributing to a new border would be like US Republicans turning Communist, i.e. that its main raison d’etre is getting a united Ireland, and thus the exact opposite of what you understood.

  63. Their reason for being is or should be to move towards unity.

    If precedent and rigidity lead to supporting a partitionist outcome, what good are they?

    They should be willing to vote in the North Korean parliament if it would make unity happen sooner.

  64. I.e. that its main raison d’etre is getting a united Ireland

    It doesn’t include sitting in Westminster. It’s not going to happen.

    They should be willing to vote in the North Korean parliament if it would make unity happen sooner

    You’ve heard the argument that a hard brder in Ireland would hasten a border poll and potential unity?

  65. //I was a member of SF for more than 20 years //

    But twenty years was not long enough. Because if you had been a member during the 80s, after SF successes in the Hunger Strike elections, you’d have heard exactly this discussion then too. It was won by those who favoured abandoning abstentionism in relation to the Dail and any NI bodies and participating even in elections for the despised Westminster parliament.
    In fact, the very question of abstentionism as a principle vs a tactic was raised in those debates. I think they even used those terms.
    In any case, Gerry Adams and the pragmatists said that abstentionism was only a tactic and they won the debate and the future of the party.
    Those who said it was an integral part of what SF is – your argument here – lost out, walked out and went nowhere.

    The pragmatists who shrugged off past principles, on the other hand, went on to great successes. This is now a perfect opportunity for them to advance another step, a step towards the infinitely higher goal of a united Ireland.

    One thing you learn from Irish history is there’s a time for stubborn principle and a time for pragmatism. Parnell, Collins, DeValera, later even Adams, realised this. The Irish people will always give their support to whoever can get more independence from Britain without the use of violence.

  66. Flexibility is usually good.

    Rigidity is usually bad.

    Act accordingly.

  67. I was a member during the 80s. I joined the year after the Ard Fheis voted in favour of taking seats in Dail Éireann, an Irish Parliament on the island of Ireland, a totally diferent beast from the Brtish arliament – a bridge too far, particularly because of a disaster created by the British

    My former MP and good friend from last year:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/06/sinn-fein-mp-british-parliament-irish-republicans-brexit

    This is now a perfect opportunity for them to advance another step, a step towards the infinitely higher goal of a united Ireland.

    Noel, as I said to Phantom above, you’ve heard the argument that a hard brder in Ireland would hasten a border poll and potential unity?

    And no, that’s not condoning a hard border in Ireland, it’s merely a viable argument in the UI context.

  68. Flexibility is usually good.

    Rigidity is usually bad

    Is compromising the fundamental essence of what you are flexible or rigid?

  69. If their fundamental essence puts not sitting in some Parliament as more important than avoiding a reinstalled border, then what good are any of them?

  70. Then what good are any of them?

    Well, the reinstalled border wil be a result of the Parliament that you speak of and not the will of the Irish people as for what good:

    You’ve heard the argument that a hard brder in Ireland would hasten a border poll and potential unity?

    But you’d really need to ask those who elected them on an abstentionist ticket that question.

  71. Is compromising the fundamental essence of what you are flexible or rigid?

    So?

  72. //an Irish Parliament on the island of Ireland, a totally diferent beast from the Brtish parliament //

    But for most of its history, the principle of abstentionism was that partition must not be recognised. That was the essence of SF back then – they would not recognise the “partitionist parliaments” in Dublin or Belfast.

    But pragmatism won over principle, and they recognised both and now sit in both, and it has been a win for everyone (except Unionism). If it helps get you closer to your goals, do it.

    //You’ve heard the argument that a hard brder in Ireland would hasten a border poll and potential unity? //

    Paul, Sinn Fein – and that’s who we’re talking about – supports this deal. That argumnet is irrevant for this particular issue.

    Also, a “border poll” is in itself not much good. Winning it is the thing. And I – like Sinn Fein – no longer believe in lightening victories. They tend to go sour very quickly. A gradualist approach, where Unionists are weaned off the British tit and away from the stoneage conservativism in which they’ve hitherto pitched their tent, is not only the safest way in terms of peace, it’s also the most politically reliable way.

  73. In their almost 115 year history Noel SF MPs elected to Westminister have never taken their seats. It’s not going to happen now, it’s just not up for discussion.

    It’s irrelevant what you, I or anyone else outside the party thinks, that’s the reality.

    That argumnet is irrevant for this particular issue.

    I’m afraid if the argument is bringing about a UI it’s very much relevant.

    Winning it is the thing

    Absolutely agreed but first their needs to be one in order to win it.

  74. SF have always been for the border despite what they say because several important supporters benefit from smuggling. If there were no border there would be no smuggling and in addition to enriching several important supporters some of the loot is given to SF. The real reason they will not take their seats at WM is that they dare not do anything that might threaten border smuggling.

  75. ZZZZZZZZZ.