When Momentum exerted undue pressure on the Labour Party, the papers were full of criticism.
It is no different to the ERG in the Tory Party. Except, of course, Labour were not running the country at the time.
I watched a bit of Sky News this morning. Bernard Jenkin wants a land border. Kaye Burley, and Emily Thornberry both proved they havent a clue.
Bernard Jenkin is my MP. Naturally, this means I have never met him. He might be MP for Harwich & North Essex, but he avoids Harwich whenever possible. It is the "North Essex" bit that supports him.
Detest a lot of his policies. Presumably, so do the Conservative Party, as he has had no meaningful role during his 30+ years as an MP. Which of course means he is free to say whatever he likes, knowing it will have no impact on his future prospects. I have met his father, Patrick. Think I prefer the son.
Emily Thornberry. Looks the part. Sounds the part. But best not to listen to anything she says
Trivia of the day. Bernard Jenkin is friends with Richard Curtis. Consequently, in most of his films/books etc, there is a character called Bernard.
When Momentum exerted undue pressure on the Labour Party, the papers were full of criticism.
It is no different to the ERG in the Tory Party. Except, of course, Labour were not running the country at the time.
I watched a bit of Sky News this morning. Bernard Jenkin wants a land border. Kaye Burley, and Emily Thornberry both proved they havent a clue.
Bernard Jenkin is my MP. Naturally, this means I have never met him. He might be MP for Harwich & North Essex, but he avoids Harwich whenever possible. It is the "North Essex" bit that supports him.
Detest a lot of his policies. Presumably, so do the Conservative Party, as he has had no meaningful role during his 30+ years as an MP. Which of course means he is free to say whatever he likes, knowing it will have no impact on his future prospects. I have met his father, Patrick. Think I prefer the son.
Emily Thornberry. Looks the part. Sounds the part. But best not to listen to anything she says
Trivia of the day. Bernard Jenkin is friends with Richard Curtis. Consequently, in most of his films/books etc, there is a character called Bernard.
Is he a member of the ERG? Emily Thornberry thinks that there is a land border in Ireland.
When Momentum exerted undue pressure on the Labour Party, the papers were full of criticism.
It is no different to the ERG in the Tory Party. Except, of course, Labour were not running the country at the time.
I watched a bit of Sky News this morning. Bernard Jenkin wants a land border. Kaye Burley, and Emily Thornberry both proved they havent a clue.
Bernard Jenkin is my MP. Naturally, this means I have never met him. He might be MP for Harwich & North Essex, but he avoids Harwich whenever possible. It is the "North Essex" bit that supports him.
Detest a lot of his policies. Presumably, so do the Conservative Party, as he has had no meaningful role during his 30+ years as an MP. Which of course means he is free to say whatever he likes, knowing it will have no impact on his future prospects. I have met his father, Patrick. Think I prefer the son.
Emily Thornberry. Looks the part. Sounds the part. But best not to listen to anything she says
Trivia of the day. Bernard Jenkin is friends with Richard Curtis. Consequently, in most of his films/books etc, there is a character called Bernard.
Is he a member of the ERG? Emily Thornberry thinks that there is a land border in Ireland.
Yes. Always been a Member. Also prominent in Leave Means Leave.
Was also 1 of the original Maastricht rebels under Major that inspired the creation of the ERG.
When Momentum exerted undue pressure on the Labour Party, the papers were full of criticism.
It is no different to the ERG in the Tory Party. Except, of course, Labour were not running the country at the time.
I watched a bit of Sky News this morning. Bernard Jenkin wants a land border. Kaye Burley, and Emily Thornberry both proved they havent a clue.
Bernard Jenkin is my MP. Naturally, this means I have never met him. He might be MP for Harwich & North Essex, but he avoids Harwich whenever possible. It is the "North Essex" bit that supports him.
Detest a lot of his policies. Presumably, so do the Conservative Party, as he has had no meaningful role during his 30+ years as an MP. Which of course means he is free to say whatever he likes, knowing it will have no impact on his future prospects. I have met his father, Patrick. Think I prefer the son.
Emily Thornberry. Looks the part. Sounds the part. But best not to listen to anything she says
Trivia of the day. Bernard Jenkin is friends with Richard Curtis. Consequently, in most of his films/books etc, there is a character called Bernard.
Is he a member of the ERG? Emily Thornberry thinks that there is a land border in Ireland.
Yes. Always been a Member. Also prominent in Leave Means Leave.
Was also 1 of the original Maastricht rebels under Major that inspired the creation of the ERG.
When Momentum exerted undue pressure on the Labour Party, the papers were full of criticism.
It is no different to the ERG in the Tory Party. Except, of course, Labour were not running the country at the time.
I watched a bit of Sky News this morning. Bernard Jenkin wants a land border. Kaye Burley, and Emily Thornberry both proved they havent a clue.
Bernard Jenkin is my MP. Naturally, this means I have never met him. He might be MP for Harwich & North Essex, but he avoids Harwich whenever possible. It is the "North Essex" bit that supports him.
Detest a lot of his policies. Presumably, so do the Conservative Party, as he has had no meaningful role during his 30+ years as an MP. Which of course means he is free to say whatever he likes, knowing it will have no impact on his future prospects. I have met his father, Patrick. Think I prefer the son.
Emily Thornberry. Looks the part. Sounds the part. But best not to listen to anything she says
Trivia of the day. Bernard Jenkin is friends with Richard Curtis. Consequently, in most of his films/books etc, there is a character called Bernard.
He came across very badly in the Brexit drama on the telly.
Boris Johnson’s foul-mouthed comment over backing Brexit deal to please White House
Boris Johnson reportedly hit out at suggestions that supporting Rishi Sunak’s Brexit deal would help the UK’s relations with the White House, saying: “F*** the Americans!”
It amuses me that the papers are forever banging on about "secret" plans to "unravel" Brexit. In exactly the sorts of ways you mention.
I suppose the first thing to say is that they are really not that secret. If they were, then the Papers wouldn't be reporting on them so often. And updating/improving is not unravelling. Foodstuffs aren't labelled "new and unravelled"
The strange thing is, that this time there really does seem to be an element of secrecy. It does sound faintly ridiculous that we are apparently close to a new deal with the EU in relation to NI that no-one seems to know what it is. No details on the mechanics, the advantages and the disadvantages. The only reason is Tory Party self-interest. A genuine discussion and vote in Parliament would get through-but with 50% of Tories and 90% Labour support. Which would not be a good look for Rishi Wishy Washy.
One thing I don't understand is why the DUP must give consent. Surely the key question is whether the new deal is better than the old one. After all, the DUP don't consent to the current deal-so why should a new deal be vetoed simply because the DUP have the same view as they have on the current deal? It's not like they will ever be happy with anything, or ever come up with practical solutions, as opposed to red lines. And if they ever did, Sinn Fein would immediately start moaning in their place.
It amuses me that the papers are forever banging on about "secret" plans to "unravel" Brexit. In exactly the sorts of ways you mention.
I suppose the first thing to say is that they are really not that secret. If they were, then the Papers wouldn't be reporting on them so often. And updating/improving is not unravelling. Foodstuffs aren't labelled "new and unravelled"
The strange thing is, that this time there really does seem to be an element of secrecy. It does sound faintly ridiculous that we are apparently close to a new deal with the EU in relation to NI that no-one seems to know what it is. No details on the mechanics, the advantages and the disadvantages. The only reason is Tory Party self-interest. A genuine discussion and vote in Parliament would get through-but with 50% of Tories and 90% Labour support. Which would not be a good look for Rishi Wishy Washy.
One thing I don't understand is why the DUP must give consent. Surely the key question is whether the new deal is better than the old one. After all, the DUP don't consent to the current deal-so why should a new deal be vetoed simply because the DUP have the same view as they have on the current deal? It's not like they will ever be happy with anything, or ever come up with practical solutions, as opposed to red lines. And if they ever did, Sinn Fein would immediately start moaning in their place.
I dont see the point of the secrecy. He will allegedly announce the new deal as early as tomorrow. I dont think that any deal will satisfy the DUP 7 tests. The ERG have said that they will stand with the DUP. So more fun and games. The loveable Mark Francois is appearing on Sophie Ridge in a minute, so I am sure everything will become clear shortly. He is such a pr1ck.
In particular they wont remove the border, or get rid of the ECJ.
It amuses me that the papers are forever banging on about "secret" plans to "unravel" Brexit. In exactly the sorts of ways you mention.
I suppose the first thing to say is that they are really not that secret. If they were, then the Papers wouldn't be reporting on them so often. And updating/improving is not unravelling. Foodstuffs aren't labelled "new and unravelled"
The strange thing is, that this time there really does seem to be an element of secrecy. It does sound faintly ridiculous that we are apparently close to a new deal with the EU in relation to NI that no-one seems to know what it is. No details on the mechanics, the advantages and the disadvantages. The only reason is Tory Party self-interest. A genuine discussion and vote in Parliament would get through-but with 50% of Tories and 90% Labour support. Which would not be a good look for Rishi Wishy Washy.
One thing I don't understand is why the DUP must give consent. Surely the key question is whether the new deal is better than the old one. After all, the DUP don't consent to the current deal-so why should a new deal be vetoed simply because the DUP have the same view as they have on the current deal? It's not like they will ever be happy with anything, or ever come up with practical solutions, as opposed to red lines. And if they ever did, Sinn Fein would immediately start moaning in their place.
I dont see the point of the secrecy. He will allegedly announce the new deal as early as tomorrow. I dont think that any deal will satisfy the DUP 7 tests. The ERG have said that they will stand with the DUP. So more fun and games. The loveable Mark Francois is appearing on Sophie Ridge in a minute, so I am sure everything will become clear shortly. He is such a pr1ck.
In particular they wont remove the border, or get rid of the ECJ.
Thoroughly disagreeable little man.
In every sense.
Full of distaste for the ideas of others. While possessing none of his own.
It amuses me that the papers are forever banging on about "secret" plans to "unravel" Brexit. In exactly the sorts of ways you mention.
I suppose the first thing to say is that they are really not that secret. If they were, then the Papers wouldn't be reporting on them so often. And updating/improving is not unravelling. Foodstuffs aren't labelled "new and unravelled"
The strange thing is, that this time there really does seem to be an element of secrecy. It does sound faintly ridiculous that we are apparently close to a new deal with the EU in relation to NI that no-one seems to know what it is. No details on the mechanics, the advantages and the disadvantages. The only reason is Tory Party self-interest. A genuine discussion and vote in Parliament would get through-but with 50% of Tories and 90% Labour support. Which would not be a good look for Rishi Wishy Washy.
One thing I don't understand is why the DUP must give consent. Surely the key question is whether the new deal is better than the old one. After all, the DUP don't consent to the current deal-so why should a new deal be vetoed simply because the DUP have the same view as they have on the current deal? It's not like they will ever be happy with anything, or ever come up with practical solutions, as opposed to red lines. And if they ever did, Sinn Fein would immediately start moaning in their place.
I dont see the point of the secrecy. He will allegedly announce the new deal as early as tomorrow. I dont think that any deal will satisfy the DUP 7 tests. The ERG have said that they will stand with the DUP. So more fun and games. The loveable Mark Francois is appearing on Sophie Ridge in a minute, so I am sure everything will become clear shortly. He is such a pr1ck.
In particular they wont remove the border, or get rid of the ECJ.
Thoroughly disagreeable little man.
In every sense.
Full of distaste for the ideas of others. While possessing none of his own.
After watching his interview, I wont be holding my breath, waiting for Stormont to get up and running again. Also there look to be troubles ahead for our PM.
Can Rishi FINALLY settle Brexit? Sunak braces for Tory and DUP backlash as he prepares to unveil new 'Windsor Deal' for Northern Ireland TODAY alongside EU's Ursula von der Leyen - claiming he has secured major concessions
RIshi Sunak unveiling 'Windsor Deal' for Northern Ireland Brexit rules Rishi Sunak will meet EU commission chief Ursula von der Leyen in Windsor at lunchtime to finalise the pact, the result of months of painstaking negotiations. Downing Street insists that Mr Sunak has achieved 'significant and far reaching' concessions. One Cabinet minister even swiped at Boris Johnson by claiming the terms are better than 'any of [Sunak's] predecessors got'. However, the DUP is not expected to give its verdict immediately and has set red lines that are unlikely to be met - including completely removing the role of the European Court of Justice. Unless the unionists agree to rejoin powersharing at Stormont the political crisis will continue. Mr Sunak could face a rough ride from Tories when he makes a statement to the Commons this evening after staging a press conference with Ms von der Leyen. Some MPs are already warning that the agreement will not be satisfactory - although other previous hard-liners insist they are open-minded.
Let's leave to 1 side that various "Brexiteers" feel able to criticise this new deal before they even know what it is. Let's also leave to 1 side that it should be possible for both sides to come up with an idea that is better than what we currently have.
The main problem I have is 1 of Democracy. We have an unelected leader, who has not been elected by the Country-just his own Party Members/MPs. The only tenuous link with Democracy is that the Public voted for the Conservative Party then run by Boris Johnson. That would be 2 PMs ago.
I get that people (in theory) vote for a Party and their policies, rather than the PM. But if an unelected PM is entering into a major deal that is completely different to that which (rightly or wrongly) the Public voted for, without so much as consulting Parliament, where does that leave our Democracy?
What I find particularly annoying is that he is doing this behind Parliament's back not because he could not win a vote (he would win) but for purely selfish reasons. He does not want to give those MPs who still believe in what the Public actually voted for in the last election to be allowed to be heard, the MPs within his own Party.
I profoundly disagree with the ERG and the people who plot for a return for Johnson. But not as much as I disagree with them not being allowed to be heard.
Let's leave to 1 side that various "Brexiteers" feel able to criticise this new deal before they even know what it is. Let's also leave to 1 side that it should be possible for both sides to come up with an idea that is better than what we currently have.
The main problem I have is 1 of Democracy. We have an unelected leader, who has not been elected by the Country-just his own Party Members/MPs. The only tenuous link with Democracy is that the Public voted for the Conservative Party then run by Boris Johnson. That would be 2 PMs ago.
I get that people (in theory) vote for a Party and their policies, rather than the PM. But if an unelected PM is entering into a major deal that is completely different to that which (rightly or wrongly) the Public voted for, without so much as consulting Parliament, where does that leave our Democracy?
What I find particularly annoying is that he is doing this behind Parliament's back not because he could not win a vote (he would win) but for purely selfish reasons. He does not want to give those MPs who still believe in what the Public actually voted for in the last election to be allowed to be heard, the MPs within his own Party.
I profoundly disagree with the ERG and the people who plot for a return for Johnson. But not as much as I disagree with them not being allowed to be heard.
I dont get it. The public clearly voted for Brexit, but not the terms and conditions under which we left. Nor have they had a say on the terms and conditions of any deal since the referendum. Despite the fact that these terms and conditions have changed under the various PMs.
It is hard to contemplate that the new deal could be worse than the old one. The leaked details show improvements in some areas. Some of the improvements have been gained by the fact the we are now prepared to provide the EU with data relating to the goods crossing the border. Something that we have refused to do until now.
However the ERG have said that they will support the DUPs opinion of the deal. The two conditions that are included in the DUP 7 tests which will not be met, are the removal of the border, and getting rid of the ECJ. Therefore the deal will not be supported by either of them. The DUP seem to have forgotten about the checks that took place between GB/NI throughout the time we were members, as they are now insisting on no border, no checks, and no ECJ.
I have said before that this is a Brexit rather than a protocol problem. Which is something you disagreed with. Successive PMs have claimed to be getting Brexit done. This is b0ll0cks as Brexit will go on forever. As we diverge from EU rules more checks will be required. As we import more goods that dont comply with SM rules, the number of checks will increase.
I cant get past the obvious fact that leaving the EU meant there would have to be a border between us and the EU. There are only two possibilities. A land border in Ireland, or the Irish Sea. As the land border is prohibited under the GFA. Leaving the EU clearly meant an Irish Sea border. Everyone knew that leaving was bound to increase trade friction. Therefore more border checks than when we were members. I therefore cant see why anyone would be surprised by the results. Leaving the EU meant more trade friction than when we were members.? Yet one of the huge benefits of membership is frictionless trade. Where else could the border go?
The DUPs goals seem unrealistic. NI remains in the SM, and CU. Any alternative to this means a land border in Ireland. Many businesses in NI are benefitting from access to the SM. How could the people of NI be unhappy with this. So we want the benefits of frictionless trade with the EU, but without any involvement by the ECJ.
The outcome will be that the DUP will not be happy, and as a result, neither will the ERG.
Pulling NI out of the SM/CU would mean a land border in Ireland. Staying in means a border in the Irish Sea, and ECJ involvement.
More elections in NI will not help to get Stormont back up and running. The people of NI lose out as a result. Maybe they will consider voting for an alternative unionist party as a solution, at some point. The Government are currently ignoring the legislation relating to NI elections, you would think that this must change at some point. Although having election after election will not help.
Brexit guaranteed a border, and the end of frictionless trade. Unless of course the whole of the UK remained in the SM/CU.
It is probably a British characteristic. We seem to take every opportunity to knock the EU. Yet they have allowed NI to remain in the SM/CU free of charge. If they hadnt been prepared to do this, where would we be?
Let's leave to 1 side that various "Brexiteers" feel able to criticise this new deal before they even know what it is. Let's also leave to 1 side that it should be possible for both sides to come up with an idea that is better than what we currently have.
The main problem I have is 1 of Democracy. We have an unelected leader, who has not been elected by the Country-just his own Party Members/MPs. The only tenuous link with Democracy is that the Public voted for the Conservative Party then run by Boris Johnson. That would be 2 PMs ago.
I get that people (in theory) vote for a Party and their policies, rather than the PM. But if an unelected PM is entering into a major deal that is completely different to that which (rightly or wrongly) the Public voted for, without so much as consulting Parliament, where does that leave our Democracy?
What I find particularly annoying is that he is doing this behind Parliament's back not because he could not win a vote (he would win) but for purely selfish reasons. He does not want to give those MPs who still believe in what the Public actually voted for in the last election to be allowed to be heard, the MPs within his own Party.
I profoundly disagree with the ERG and the people who plot for a return for Johnson. But not as much as I disagree with them not being allowed to be heard.
So there are different types of Brexit formulated by different people.
Comments
Detest a lot of his policies. Presumably, so do the Conservative Party, as he has had no meaningful role during his 30+ years as an MP. Which of course means he is free to say whatever he likes, knowing it will have no impact on his future prospects. I have met his father, Patrick. Think I prefer the son.
Emily Thornberry. Looks the part. Sounds the part. But best not to listen to anything she says
Trivia of the day. Bernard Jenkin is friends with Richard Curtis. Consequently, in most of his films/books etc, there is a character called Bernard.
Emily Thornberry thinks that there is a land border in Ireland.
Was also 1 of the original Maastricht rebels under Major that inspired the creation of the ERG.
Non Elected leader wishes to hand back UK control to Non Elected EU leader. Mm!
Rumble in the Westminster Jungle or Handbags at Dawn.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/the-brexit-deal-has-shown-how-truly-awful-rishi-sunak-is-at-politics/ar-AA17NW7k?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=7a1062540a8a4be1a2d959469ebdd1e0
Boris Johnson reportedly hit out at suggestions that supporting Rishi Sunak’s Brexit deal would help the UK’s relations with the White House, saying: “F*** the Americans!”
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/boris-johnson-foul-mouthed-over-210820691.html
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/top-brexiteers-split-over-rishi-sunak-s-eu-deal/ar-AA17VxgG?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=ef166cdbf76e4e69926fb4b8bd83e6c7&ei=21
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/brits-are-suffering-but-for-us-it-s-boom-time-how-brexit-boosted-french-and-irish-ports/ar-AA17Vlxv?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=1d9c6012b4fc42b0a26226a337417a6b&ei=71
I suppose the first thing to say is that they are really not that secret. If they were, then the Papers wouldn't be reporting on them so often. And updating/improving is not unravelling. Foodstuffs aren't labelled "new and unravelled"
The strange thing is, that this time there really does seem to be an element of secrecy. It does sound faintly ridiculous that we are apparently close to a new deal with the EU in relation to NI that no-one seems to know what it is. No details on the mechanics, the advantages and the disadvantages. The only reason is Tory Party self-interest. A genuine discussion and vote in Parliament would get through-but with 50% of Tories and 90% Labour support. Which would not be a good look for Rishi Wishy Washy.
One thing I don't understand is why the DUP must give consent. Surely the key question is whether the new deal is better than the old one. After all, the DUP don't consent to the current deal-so why should a new deal be vetoed simply because the DUP have the same view as they have on the current deal? It's not like they will ever be happy with anything, or ever come up with practical solutions, as opposed to red lines. And if they ever did, Sinn Fein would immediately start moaning in their place.
He will allegedly announce the new deal as early as tomorrow.
I dont think that any deal will satisfy the DUP 7 tests.
The ERG have said that they will stand with the DUP.
So more fun and games.
The loveable Mark Francois is appearing on Sophie Ridge in a minute, so I am sure everything will become clear shortly.
He is such a pr1ck.
In particular they wont remove the border, or get rid of the ECJ.
In every sense.
Full of distaste for the ideas of others. While possessing none of his own.
Also there look to be troubles ahead for our PM.
RIshi Sunak unveiling 'Windsor Deal' for Northern Ireland Brexit rules
Rishi Sunak will meet EU commission chief Ursula von der Leyen in Windsor at lunchtime to finalise the pact, the result of months of painstaking negotiations. Downing Street insists that Mr Sunak has achieved 'significant and far reaching' concessions. One Cabinet minister even swiped at Boris Johnson by claiming the terms are better than 'any of [Sunak's] predecessors got'. However, the DUP is not expected to give its verdict immediately and has set red lines that are unlikely to be met - including completely removing the role of the European Court of Justice. Unless the unionists agree to rejoin powersharing at Stormont the political crisis will continue. Mr Sunak could face a rough ride from Tories when he makes a statement to the Commons this evening after staging a press conference with Ms von der Leyen. Some MPs are already warning that the agreement will not be satisfactory - although other previous hard-liners insist they are open-minded.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11797463/RIshi-Sunak-unveiling-Windsor-Deal-Northern-Ireland-Brexit-rules.html
The main problem I have is 1 of Democracy. We have an unelected leader, who has not been elected by the Country-just his own Party Members/MPs. The only tenuous link with Democracy is that the Public voted for the Conservative Party then run by Boris Johnson. That would be 2 PMs ago.
I get that people (in theory) vote for a Party and their policies, rather than the PM. But if an unelected PM is entering into a major deal that is completely different to that which (rightly or wrongly) the Public voted for, without so much as consulting Parliament, where does that leave our Democracy?
What I find particularly annoying is that he is doing this behind Parliament's back not because he could not win a vote (he would win) but for purely selfish reasons. He does not want to give those MPs who still believe in what the Public actually voted for in the last election to be allowed to be heard, the MPs within his own Party.
I profoundly disagree with the ERG and the people who plot for a return for Johnson. But not as much as I disagree with them not being allowed to be heard.
The public clearly voted for Brexit, but not the terms and conditions under which we left.
Nor have they had a say on the terms and conditions of any deal since the referendum.
Despite the fact that these terms and conditions have changed under the various PMs.
It is hard to contemplate that the new deal could be worse than the old one.
The leaked details show improvements in some areas.
Some of the improvements have been gained by the fact the we are now prepared to provide the EU with data relating to the goods crossing the border.
Something that we have refused to do until now.
However the ERG have said that they will support the DUPs opinion of the deal.
The two conditions that are included in the DUP 7 tests which will not be met, are the removal of the border, and getting rid of the ECJ.
Therefore the deal will not be supported by either of them.
The DUP seem to have forgotten about the checks that took place between GB/NI throughout the time we were members, as they are now insisting on no border, no checks, and no ECJ.
I have said before that this is a Brexit rather than a protocol problem.
Which is something you disagreed with.
Successive PMs have claimed to be getting Brexit done.
This is b0ll0cks as Brexit will go on forever.
As we diverge from EU rules more checks will be required.
As we import more goods that dont comply with SM rules, the number of checks will increase.
I cant get past the obvious fact that leaving the EU meant there would have to be a border between us and the EU.
There are only two possibilities.
A land border in Ireland, or the Irish Sea.
As the land border is prohibited under the GFA.
Leaving the EU clearly meant an Irish Sea border.
Everyone knew that leaving was bound to increase trade friction.
Therefore more border checks than when we were members.
I therefore cant see why anyone would be surprised by the results.
Leaving the EU meant more trade friction than when we were members.?
Yet one of the huge benefits of membership is frictionless trade.
Where else could the border go?
The DUPs goals seem unrealistic.
NI remains in the SM, and CU.
Any alternative to this means a land border in Ireland.
Many businesses in NI are benefitting from access to the SM.
How could the people of NI be unhappy with this.
So we want the benefits of frictionless trade with the EU, but without any involvement by the ECJ.
The outcome will be that the DUP will not be happy, and as a result, neither will the ERG.
Pulling NI out of the SM/CU would mean a land border in Ireland.
Staying in means a border in the Irish Sea, and ECJ involvement.
More elections in NI will not help to get Stormont back up and running.
The people of NI lose out as a result.
Maybe they will consider voting for an alternative unionist party as a solution, at some point.
The Government are currently ignoring the legislation relating to NI elections, you would think that this must change at some point.
Although having election after election will not help.
Brexit guaranteed a border, and the end of frictionless trade.
Unless of course the whole of the UK remained in the SM/CU.
It is probably a British characteristic.
We seem to take every opportunity to knock the EU.
Yet they have allowed NI to remain in the SM/CU free of charge.
If they hadnt been prepared to do this, where would we be?
So there are different types of Brexit formulated by different people.
Didn't see that on the side of the bus.
Who has been had by who?