UK space comes to an 'understanding' with Australia as Brexit looms The UK and Australia have announced plans to become the best of buddies in the space field, including the UK’s current hot potato: satellite navigation. The memorandum of understanding, which was signed this week by Chief Executive of the UK Space Agency, Graham Turnock, and head of the fledgling Australian Space Agency (ASA …
>I have suspicions that a fair few people who voted remain have no idea what the EU even is or does. See the reporting during the protests after the vote where many youngsters didn't know what the EU was, does, or even what they were voting to remain in. One dopey cow even got on camera to claim we had to stay in the EU or the UK Gov wouldn't keep paying for us to go abroad to the EU *headslap*.
Is that any different to the Leave voters interviewed on TV News the day after who voted out to get rid of immigrants from Pakistan, or who didn't know what the EU did for them while stood in front of signs proclaiming that the EU had invested in the regeneration of their region.
One dopey cow even got on camera to claim we had to stay in the EU or the UK Gov wouldn't keep paying for us to go abroad to the EU
'One dopey cow' as you so evenly put it is hardly a clear representation - unless they caught her coming out of the polling station, and even then you couldn't be sure..
I'd assume the masses that couldn't be bothered to vote were the ones who didn't know nor care what the outcome was - and I know quite a few very intelligent (many more so than me IMO) who couldn't be bothered. Some had preference one way or the other, but still couldn't be bothered.
I'm actually getting quite tired of explaining to "Hard Brexiters" that the referendum was not a vote on "Stay in the EU or Crash Out". Just because Boris wants to screw the country and leave with No Deal does not mean the majority of the country want that. Nowhere on the ballot paper did it say "I vote for No Deal", and this is exactly what a second referendum should be about. You just have to look at what people were actually voting for to see that Hard Brexit should quite rightly be ignored, we need a deal and the likes of Farage and Boris with their rabid ramblings and self interest should be tried for treason for undermining the political process.
Why did people vote for Brexit?
1. £350M a week for the NHS. Except there never was £350M a week.
2. The Brexit Dividend. Except that you have to increase GDP to offset the cost of trade to the EU. So in effect there is no Brexit Dividend.
3. Uncontrolled immigration. Except we were always allowed to send EU migrants back to their home countries if they couldn't find work within 3 months. For some reason a lot of people confused EU immigration with non-EU immigration which we always had control over. And why were they coming here in the first place? To do jobs we didn't have the skills for or that British citizens won't do.
4. The unelected EU Parliament. You know the one, that we vote EU MPs for, like Farage, who then gets to vote on EU laws. Like the UK Parliament, with elected representatives. And we wonder why Scotland hates Westminster so much...
5. We can negotiate a new trade deal, like Norway has. This was made so much of during the referendum, it probably swung more votes than anything else, the idea that people could vote to Leave and have a Soft Brexit. It's also likely why the people who didn't vote didn't vote, stay or we get a Soft Brexit. If you don't care either way what's the point in voting?
The referendum should always have been more than just In or Out. There are so many shades of Out that rabidly stating "but I voted Leave and that means Leave" is meaningless. All it shows is that you're ignorant of everything the referendum was about and trying to hold onto your Little Britain mindset. "We were fine outside the EU". Really? I grew up in the 70's, I remember rolling blackouts, winter of discontent, cap in hand to the IMF, inflation, high interest rates. That's the whole reason we joined the EU in the first place.
"I grew up in the 70's, I remember rolling blackouts, winter of discontent, cap in hand to the IMF, inflation, high interest rates. That's the whole reason we joined the EU in the first place."
I remember them too - they occurred during the mid- to late 1970's.
After we joined the EEC.
So not 'why we joined the EU in the first place'. (Plus of course, we joined the EU when it formed in 1992, by which time the economic problems of the 1970's UK were long passed).
If there is a link between those economic problems and the EU (which I don't actual think there is) it would prove that joining EEC (/EC/EU) was detrimental to the UK economy. Which in some respects it was, and in other respects it was beneficial.
I have no objection to remain supporters pointing out the lies told by the Brexiteer, but if they do, they should make a modicum of effort to tell the truth themselves, less they be labelled hypocrites.
@EvilDrSmith the fact is Hard Brexiters see the UK pre-EU as being some golden age. When in fact the UK was seen as the sick man of Europe. To see the UK as some Great Britain of old, when we were an economic powerhouse capable of dictating to the world we'd first have to regain control over half the world's resources and reinstate the British Empire. The days of the Commonwealth are over, they'll never be reinstated and no amount of bluster from Boris will ever change that fact.
Today our economy is inextricably linked to the EU. Hard Brexit and trade on WTO terms means an end to free trade with the EU. That means everything we sell to the EU can have a tariff on it. That makes everything we sell to the EU more expensive to buy in the EU. That means businesses will lose trade or have to move. That is the reality of Hard Brexit. Lost jobs.
Mass emigration also has another unintended consequence. A country's economy is measured by GDP. A driver for GDP is population. If you suddenly remove people from the country, it has a negative effect on GDP. Or to put it in terms that the non-economist can understand, recession. These are effects that won't be felt in 30 years as some claim, but within the lifetime of this and the next Parliament. Whoever picks up this mess after the next election picks up a poisoned chalice. The only good news for me is that so long as I remain employed, the company I work for sells quite a lot to the EU, I should be able to buy a house quite cheaply as one key driver for housing costs has been the pressure from immigration.
@ Alien8n
"fact is Hard Brexiters see the UK pre-EU as being some golden age"
No I dont. And I am not convinced all the others hold such an opinion. I notice you use the loose definition of the EU as before the political entity but still, no. It is perfectly reasonable to believe that we would be better off outside the EU in future without it being backward. Unless of course it is backward to believe we should be in the EU modelled on the cold war era.
"Today our economy is inextricably linked to the EU"
Which can legitimately be seen as a huge threat as the EU is in multiple self inflicted crises and the leaders and supporters of it keep commenting on its impending breakup.
"That is the reality of Hard Brexit. Lost jobs."
The opportunity cost of being in the EU also applies as lost jobs.
"A driver for GDP is population."
The driver of GDP is productivity. Increased labour can increase productivity but it is only one factor and of course comes with the responsibilities and costs of immigration.
"If you suddenly remove people from the country"
Who is doing that? I hear remainers repeating pulling up the drawbridge and such but brexiters seem to be more outward looking to the world.
"as one key driver for housing costs has been the pressure from immigration."
Which has been pushed as a problem by a number of governments. In fact your claim that it is immigration causing upward pressure on housing costs has been one of the leave arguments. An alternative would be to build more but that would be cutting regulation which is a hard sell even if its the right thing to do.
I'm actually getting quite tired of explaining to "Hard Brexiters" that the referendum was not a vote on "Stay in the EU or Crash Out".
I can see why that would be hard, given that the text of the question was just that:
"Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?"
Nowhere on the ballot paper did it say "I vote for No Deal", and this is exactly what a second referendum should be about.
And what if that second referendum decides to reject "No Deal" by 51%? What then, a third referendum on "Canada or Norway"? Or on "Change our mind again or not?" And what if the vote were 51% to "not leave after all", do you think everyone would say "Oh goody, that's the right result, we can all stop worrying"? Of course not, there would just be calls for another referendum next year in case we changed our minds again.
We've had the referendum, we've had an election, both indicated a desire to leave, so we leave. It's the only democratic choice. Maybe in 20 years time the next generation might decide to rejoin, presuming there's an EU to join, which I personally doubt given the way Italy & other countries are going.
I grew up in the 70's, I remember rolling blackouts, winter of discontent, cap in hand to the IMF, inflation, high interest rates. That's the whole reason we joined the EU in the first place.
FFS NO, that's the reason we joined the Common Market, which was an economic partnership that mostly worked, and where things should have stayed. Turning it into the political entity of the EU happened with the Maastricht treaty, which John Major signed us up to without a referendum, because he know from the opinion polls would have been rejected by around 60% of people in the UK. The Danes rejected it, even the europhile French barely accepted it (51%, a smaller majority than voted Leave in Brexit, yet remainers don't deny the validity of that result).
The centralized political and monetary control of the EU is unnecessary, unwanted, and making Europe dangerously unstable by driving people into the arms of the extremists, but as usual short-sighted politicians are too busy empire-building to see the grassroots danger.
@Phil O'Sophical that's why a second referendum should not be just In/Out. It should be on the deal itself.
And it should be truly reflective, with a transferable vote so we don't have the ridiculous reality that a Minority of the population can hold the Majority of the vote. Select first and second preference, In/Out No deal/Out with deal. Effectively EU/EEA/WTO and you make it explicitly clear that it's a binding vote. Not an advisory one that somehow is treated as law without any further discussion of what it actually is everyone was voting for.
>We've had the referendum, we've had an election, both indicated a desire to leave, so we leave. It's the only democratic choice.
We had the referendum, in 1975, (after an election, when the referendum was promised), and we said Yes. (But a bunch of oligarchs decided they wanted out, and threw their barrels of ink at the problem.)
Well, unfortunately, the way things are now, if Britain leaves the European Union, it will also be thrown out of the Common Market. British voters were promised that this wouldn't happen when they voted in the referendum. How is it democratic to deceive voters and then tell them they're stuck?
@ John Savard
"How is it democratic to deceive voters and then tell them they're stuck?"
Happened for over 20yrs. Hell how many times were we offered a vote on the EU (Blair did a couple of times). We were told we would be at the back of the queue for a trade deal with the US. Told if we dare vote the way the government doesnt want we would be actively attacked with the punishment budget.
Cameron did promise he would stay to negotiate whatever the result. That art50 would be submitted the day of the result.
Screw it, both official campaigns lied their arses off and were an embarrassment to democracy continuing with the FUD now.
If it makes you feel any better we were to be some lone island that nobody will trade with because we didnt take on the Euro. Be grateful we didnt all fall for the lies that time either.
No, we weren't. No-one had the power to make such a promise.
Ah, I think it's beginning to dawn that referendum was a sham and a lie. People promised rainbows and unicorns before the referendum knowing they wouldn't have any accountability or responsibility afterwards, Leave won, then entirely different people do entirely different things based on the result.
I was responding to "Have you asked Ireland their opinion?". NI was asked and is leaving as part of the UK. ROI is part of the EU and they are not leaving the EU nor planning on asking are they? So what is your point and is there one?
NI was asked indeed, and taking their vote on its own they chose remain.
It really is so very good of you to take so much trouble to explain things to us; we are truly grateful and I am sorry that you are finding it fatiguing. When I told my doctor that it hurt to lift my arm over my head she told me to stop doing it. Perhaps there's a message there?
As for all the things we weren't asked when we voted to leave in 2016 - ie no longer be a member of the EU - can I assume with any confidence that when the next referendum comes round asking us to (re)join the EU, all the things that weren't mentioned in 1975 - "ever closer union", the euro, Schengen, EU passports, EU army, EU foreign service, EU government (qualified majority voting as opposed to member sovereignty/veto) and so on - will all be on the voting paper?
And just why exactly would a Common Market need an army?
Too late. The EU is in multiple self inflicted crises, the chaos is already there. Everything is going to be the end of the EU and Eurozone according to its presidents and leaders of member countries. They are finally talking of reforming the EU after all this time because it has finally penetrated their little bubble that the project is in a dire state. Cant blame the UK for wanting some distance from that wreck.
You suffer from the same problem as the UK's political class... just because you say it is so, it doesn't make it true.
@ Dan 55
"just because you say it is so, it doesn't make it true."
I am not sure which part you dont believe? Is it the EU in multiple self inflicted crises? Repeated claims that it will be the end of the project by those in the project (and support the project)? Or that they have finally come around to the idea of reform (I can understand your disbelief at this)?
Firstly the EU isn't about to collapse. It really isn't.
Hungary may get kicked out if their autocrat doesn't start unwinding his power grab (which the Tory MEPs, incidentally, voted not to censure). Italy or possibly some others may, at worst, be forced from the Eurozone if their populists won't abide by the rules. But no other country wants to leave the single market or customs union. Even if all the politics did fall apart, and the currency union broke up, they'd all still want to trade with each other without customs and with common standards. So they would. The single market and customs union will stay, as will freedom of movement and all the other aspects, because it's been hugely successful and beneficial. And even in the more right-leaning, anti immigration EU countries, they're not obsessing over EU immigration, only non-EU immigration. It's only the UK where the single market and customs union is an issue.
Brexitters seem to believe that leaving the EU won't stop us trading with them, or damage us economically (considering that's 50% of our trade, we'd be in trouble if it does).
But that it would magically insulate us from an economic collapse in the EU.
Sorry, I have some really bad news for you. If the UK does in some way manage to avoid economic oblivion by maintaining that huge level of trade with Europe, it's going to be absolutely screwed regardless if there is an economic collapse in the EU.
I am not sure which part you dont believe? Is it the EU in multiple self inflicted crises? Repeated claims that it will be the end of the project by those in the project (and support the project)? Or that they have finally come around to the idea of reform (I can understand your disbelief at this)?
Well, the part I quoted just some text from the end of your post so there, what I don't agree with is all of it. Just the deluge of Brexit good, EU bad.
The EU is not perfect, I don't think anyone claimed it was, but the current political class in the UK however is a thousand times worse. It has been unable to do anything about the UK's own problems during the past two and a half years. Any policy announcement is not based on logic or evidence. The government is divided, the opposition useless. The Brexit referendum itself was a vote on how happy people were and May took a knife-edge referendum result, set up some red lines, and made practically anything except no deal impossible.
What's the latest? The ERG saying their hard Brexit plan would add a trillion pounds to the economy then two weeks later saying a Super Canada proposal would be the perfect deal (it wouldn't) and today Mogg said that there must not be an Irish Sea border, which was an essential part of the Super Canada proposal. A few days ago there was the fucking Foreign Secretary of all people using "EUSSR" which he probably got from the Daily Mail and today complaining about Russia (how's that for irony).
It's b o l l o c k s. All of it. Brexit is impossible to deliver, has no upside that any rational economist can find (Minford doesn't count), has no basis in fact. It's just Cameron's gamble to so the Tory party doesn't lose electorate and politicians turned by May into a valve so the disaffected can release steam, pointed towards the EU instead of where it should be, the government.
And that is why I don't agree with the ridiculous laundry list of failure that you find the need to post every time there's a Brexit discussion. The EU is not perfect, but this bollocks is a whole lot worse.
@ Dan 55
"Just the deluge of Brexit good, EU bad."
Probably as nauseating as the EU good brexit bad garbage.
"The EU is not perfect, I don't think anyone claimed it was, but the current political class in the UK however is a thousand times worse."
This argument is extremely poor. Assuming we have a terrible government how does it make anything better to put an additional and terrible government above it?
"The government is divided, the opposition useless."
I dont argue against that at all. Our socialist opposition is somehow more terrifying than the spineless and antidemocratic government. However that is not improved by putting the unpopular and in multiple self inflicted crises EU above it.
"The Brexit referendum itself was a vote on how happy people were"
1 general election to get the vote, 1 referendum to get the result, 1 general election to confirm the result. We have been in the EU a couple of decades and voted to leave because we were not happy with it. Throughout the EU people are voting increasingly against the EU and countries (France for example) will not give the voters a choice because they will likely vote leave.
"Brexit is impossible to deliver"
Actually that is entirely incorrect as it can be unilaterally delivered with no requirement to get any agreement. We can brexit by our own choice to not participate in the project any longer. Getting a deal might be harder, getting some fantastic wet dream deal might be impossible but brexit is very possible.
"has no upside that any rational economist can find"
With i am sure a very restrictive idea of rational (i.e. must agree with you). Apart from that there are arguments for and against economically but also politically and as a matter of sovereignty and survival.
"It's just Cameron's gamble to so the Tory party doesn't lose electorate"
True. UKIP got stunning support as Cameron got the majority he didnt expect on the back of promising a referendum that people have been pushing for and increasingly supporting for a long time.
"pointed towards the EU instead of where it should be, the government."
I dont disagree with that particularly. Our gov (Blair) decided to sell out the country and gold plate whatever EU laws into the UK in the hopes of being the EU president. He was scum. He would have sold his own grandparents. Continuing with our stupidity of being so under the EU may be what pushed us over the edge. Maybe if the gov were loyal to the UK instead of the EU maybe people wouldnt have been so badly against the EU. Maybe.
"And that is why I don't agree with the ridiculous laundry list of failure that you find the need to post every time there's a Brexit discussion. The EU is not perfect, but this bollocks is a whole lot worse."
So you dont agree with my laundry list of EU problems because you dont like it? That doesnt change the laundry list of EU problems as they are real problems. Finding remainers who even accept those very public crises is hard enough, and if they cannot accept reality then how can we take them seriously?
The laundry list is repeated because it is reality. You might notice I dont particularly stick up for the gov nor the opposition in our gov. I am not biased to UK good EU bad, I am honest. I dont particularly like this gov but I give them credit where due and disagree with plenty of their stupidity. And I do the same with the EU. I dont ignore ones failings because the other is worse.
1 general election to get the vote, 1 referendum to get the result, 1 general election to confirm the result.
Wrong, it's a minority government propped up by the DUP for £1.5bn, which didn't represent NI's remain vote. The result was not confirmed, certainly not to the extent of leaving the SM and CU.
We have been in the EU a couple of decades and voted to leave because we were not happy with it.
See the Anywhere but Westminster series then come back to me.
Throughout the EU people are voting increasingly against the EU and countries (France for example) will not give the voters a choice because they will likely vote leave.
Not one right-wing populist party in an EU country in government or in coalition has any intention of leaving the EU or the eurozone. Greece doesn't either. Even they recognise it's not perfect but it's better in than out.
"Brexit is impossible to deliver"
Actually that is entirely incorrect as it can be unilaterally delivered with no requirement to get any agreement. We can brexit by our own choice to not participate in the project any longer.
Getting a deal might be harder, getting some fantastic wet dream deal might be impossible but brexit is very possible.
Brexit is possible but will fail. A deal in impossible. So reckons this expert (first link, second link), if you care to listen.
"which didn't represent NI's remain vote"
Northern Ireland didn't get a vote - The UK did. The opposite of how the UK didn't get a vote during the Scottish independence referendum - Only Scotland did. It's not difficult buddy, we've had 3 votes now and you lost all 3. Over 75% of voters at the last election voted for parties pursuing Brexit. Move on and grow up you anti-democrat.
Northern Ireland didn't get a vote - The UK did. The opposite of how the UK didn't get a vote during the Scottish independence referendum - Only Scotland did.
Of course Northern Ireland got a vote as did England, Wales, and Scotland. The results are available by region. Much like the referendum result itself (from those who bothered to vote) it was a tie, NI and Scotland voted in, England and Wales voted out. What gives England and Wales the right to a) dictate that there's a Brexit and b) it's a hard Brexit/no deal which is completely out of line with 52%-48% and 2 countries-2 countries?
Over 75% of voters at the last election voted for parties pursuing Brexit.
Nope. Labour is still resolutely sat on the fence, the government is a minority government propped up by the minority DUP in Northern Ireland.
It's not difficult buddy, we've had 3 votes now and you lost all 3. Move on and grow up you anti-democrat.
lol, you believed Aaron Banks, Cambridge Analytica, and the Internet Research Agency when they said it would be good to jump off a cliff and voted that we all jump of a cliff, why are you still angry, why aren't you happy you won?
Brexiteers are still angry Brexit isn't about facts, data, or information, Brexit is just a feeling. They know that they have no answers to complicated questions nor any inclination to find out because that might make them change their mind, and that's why they've got nothing but 'we won, you lost, get over it'.
The EU is in a less envious position as they really dont want a net contributor to leave the fragile project.
I think the UK has been pretty well written off by the EU at this point.
But neither can the Union, if it wants to retain it's current form, allow any special deal with an ex-member (we've gotten special deals before, but that was before the whole leave decision).
To do so, would set the worst sort of precedent, and definitely kick off the break-up of the Union. With all countries uncomfortable about one part or another wishing to back out of different bits.
@ Teiwaz
"I think the UK has been pretty well written off by the EU at this point."
Good I hope so. Not in any harsh or bad way but the fact that we voted leave and hopefully we will do so. It makes sense for the EU to prepare and that is a good thing.
"But neither can the Union, if it wants to retain it's current form, allow any special deal with an ex-member"
I have no problem with that. Hard brexit is the only certainty we have but we should be able to make a mutually beneficial trade deal which shouldnt even be difficult.
I must say I found nothing objectionable in your comment. The EU needs to look after the EU and the UK the UK. A mutual deal could easily be beneficial to both sides but the approach of both sides has been unimpressive.
The EU needs to look after the EU and the UK the UK
I don't believe a Hard Brexit is looking out for the UK.
England, maybe, but the UK, no.
Likelihood of it upsetting the Irish border is great, and it'll increase the chances of Scotland opting for Independence.
The Welsh weren't on same page with the vote mostly either
@ Teiwaz
"I don't believe a Hard Brexit is looking out for the UK."
Thats ok. Everyone has their own opinions and that is to be expected. And so we hold a vote to democratically determine the direction to go (2 actually in this case) and so with our varied opinions we voted to remain or leave, and the result was leave. That doesnt mean you have to suddenly believe it will be good for the UK but it does mean you hold the minority opinion and you are not considered better than everyone else (1 vote each).
"Likelihood of it upsetting the Irish border is great, and it'll increase the chances of Scotland opting for Independence."
Ok. So? The UK can unilaterally decide not to enforce a border or implement our side as we wish. The EU has the same freedom their side. Preferably to both sides of Ireland and the UK there would be no border or some low interference border, but the EU wont agree to that.
If Scotland want another vote for independence (not looking popular any more) then fine. Except last time they didnt want independence they wanted more devolution with the UK picking up the tab. Also it would be very unhelpful to have such a referendum on the basis of joining the EU as Scotland really does not qualify.
"The Welsh weren't on same page with the vote mostly either"
Again so what? The Welsh are also not counted as more than anyone else. That is why we have a 1 vote each system where we are equal.
"And so we hold a vote to democratically determine the direction to go (2 actually in this case)"
Please stop repeating this. There was one referendum that just asked 'leave the EU yes/no', with no detail on what yes means. So soft or hard Brexit cannot be divined from this decision. Then there was a snap general election in which the two largest parties both campaigned on a Leave platform. They received, for example, over 90% of the English vote between them. The idea that 90%+ of the English population support Leave is insane, so maybe the GE was about more than Brexit. So the GE cannot be used to prove that the UK population want Brexit, and especially not the hard-to-pass super-hard Brexit we seem to be heading for.
To claim that there is a settled will of the UK population on this issue is being either disingenuous or deluded.
"The UK can unilaterally decide not to enforce a border or implement our side as we wish".
Only if you are prepared to break that international agreement you have signed.
I would suggest you would enter "brexit lies" into your browser and remember how it all started.
Some suggestions:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBxWiRz6A9E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTt8XafbA60
.......
Enjoy.
>The UK can unilaterally decide not to enforce a border or implement our side as we wish. The EU has the same freedom their side.
I keep seeing this garbage from hardline headbangers. It's impossible. It's a madey-up answer to a question you can't answer. There is nowhere on the planet with such a one-sided border - because it can't work.
"But neither can the Union, if it wants to retain it's current form, allow any special deal with an ex-member (we've gotten special deals before, but that was before the whole leave decision).
To do so, would set the worst sort of precedent, and definitely kick off the break-up of the Union. With all countries uncomfortable about one part or another wishing to back out of different bits"
This is the thing i never get with you deluded remainers. Look at Canada's deal with the EU. It is better than anything the EU has offered to us or agreed with May, and funny enough Canada is not a member. They break their rules when it suits them. It's a protectionist racket
"This is the thing i never get with you deluded remainers. Look at Canada's deal with the EU. It is better than anything the EU has offered to us or agreed with May, and funny enough Canada is not a member. They break their rules when it suits them. It's a protectionist racket"
You've not read the Canada deal have you?
May set her red lines, one of which is the ECJ.
Those red lines dictate what you get offered. The EU did a handly single powerpoint slide on how it works, the more red lines the worse the deal on offer.
Its not so much remainers who are deluded, its more the quitlings like you who spout stuff you don't understand
And a Canada or South Korea-style FTA are only possible with an NI sea border, which is another red line. So that's impossible too.
When that slide was made that red line wasn't known, but now it's known that slide should be modified to cascade all the way down to no deal.
@ Dan 55
"And a Canada or South Korea-style FTA are only possible with an NI sea border, which is another red line. So that's impossible too."
Instead of the border being between the UK and Ireland it could be between Ireland and the EU. I hear the EU red lined that themselves so thats impossible to do.
Instead of the border being between the UK and Ireland it could be between Ireland and the EU. I hear the EU red lined that themselves so thats impossible to do.
Have you asked Ireland their opinion? Them also having sovereignty and that. Perhaps they don't want to leave the single market and customs union which works for them just to make life easier for the UK, when it was the UK which decided to leave.
The fact is an NI sea border would not make any practical difference, it's already there for food and livestock.
@ Dan 55
"Have you asked Ireland their opinion? Them also having sovereignty and that. Perhaps they don't want to leave the single market and customs union which works for them just to make life easier for the UK, when it was the UK which decided to leave."
Yes we asked their opinion, there was a referendum. The United Kingdom (including Northern Ireland) are leaving the EU.
>Yes we asked their opinion, there was a referendum. The United Kingdom (including Northern Ireland) are leaving the EU.
Ireland is not Northern Ireland, and hasn't been since the end of the Civil War in 1916. Nobody from Ireland was asked about whether they wanted to Leave the EU. You are correct in that people in NI were asked, and the majority of those didn't want to leave.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
