The Brexit Thread

[Vox Populi Vox Dei]

Olly (or as Brexiteers like to call him, Oily) Robbins, May's Chief Brexit Advisor (and a Remoaner of the Dominic Grievance type) has "accidentally" let the cat out of the bag. May has delayed voting on her WA (again) until March

Olly Robbins has ended up in a significant amount of hot water after a sensational scoopfrom ITV’s Angus Walker in Brussels, who overheard Theresa May’s chief negotiator talking loudly to two colleagues in a Brussels hotel bar on Monday night. His remarks more or less confirmed all of Brexiteers’ worst fears that the wool is being pulled very firmly over their eyes…

Robbins’ revealed his plan to force the deal through by letting it go down to the wire and using the threat of a “long” extension to bully MPs into voting for the deal, saying “… Got to make them believe that the week beginning end of March… Extension is possible but if they don’t vote for the deal then the extension is a long one…” The Government’s long-held position has been firmly against any extension of Article 50. Now Robbins wants to weaponise that possibility to blackmail MPs. Forget the EU, it is clearer than ever that the UK’s own chief negotiator is not negotiating in good faith…

Robbins also boasted about the true nature of the backstop, revealing that it was not intended to be a “safety net” as it has been sold publicly but actually a “bridge” to the future relationship – exactly as his opposite number Sabine Weyand told EU ambassadors the day after the deal was agreed. Robbins told his companions: “The big clash all along is the ‘safety net’… We agreed a bridge but it came out as a ‘safety net’.” This blows another massive hole in May’s key commitments – this time on leaving the customs union. Robbins is answerable directly to the Prime Minister. How can she continue to stand up at the Despatch Box telling MPs one thing while allowing her chief negotiator to run round Brussels saying the complete opposite?

https://order-order.com/2019/02/13/robbins-reveals-dishonesty-of-governments-stance/

 

[Dave]

If you want to get technical, Ireland is the name of the island fyi, the entire island. The island of Ireland consists of two countries: Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, one of which of course is part of the UK.

If you want to get technical and actually be correct.

CONSTITUTION OF IRELAND
October 2015
Enacted by the People 1st July, 1937

ARTICLE 4
The name of the State is Éire, or, in the English language, Ireland.
ARTICLE 5
Ireland is a sovereign, independent, democratic state.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/cons/en/html#part2

 

[ToxicBunny]

OOOooooo... small bit of owned there.

(even for me actually since I just assumed it was the Republic of Ireland officially)

 

[Cray]

If you want to get technical and actually be correct.




View attachment 619214

Yup, even the UN says Ireland.

http://www.un.org/en/member-states/#gotoI

 

[Dave]

OOOooooo... small bit of owned there.

(even for me actually since I just assumed it was the Republic of Ireland officially)

Republic of Ireland can be used as the term “Republic of Ireland” is an official description of the state of Ireland (Republic of Ireland Act 1948), but constitutionally the official name of the state is just Ireland in English or Eire in Gaelic.

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

If you want to get technical and actually be correct

sure sure
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1948/act/22/enacted/en/print

2.—It is hereby declared that the description of the State shall be the Republic of Ireland.

 

[Cray]

sure sure
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1948/act/22/enacted/en/print

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_the_Irish_state#Republic_of_Ireland_v_Ireland

Since 1949 the Republic of Ireland Act has provided that the Republic of Ireland (or Poblacht na hÉireann in Irish) is the legal description for the state.[10] However, Ireland remains the constitutional name of the state.

The constitutional name Ireland is normally used. However, the legal description Republic of Ireland is sometimes used when disambiguation is desired between the state and the island of Ireland. In colloquial use this is often shortened to 'the Republic'.

 

[Dave]

sure sure
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1948/act/22/enacted/en/print

Yes, as said, that’s a description of the state of Ireland, it would require a constitutional amendment to change the name from Ireland.

You were the one who wanted to be technical...

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

You were the one who wanted to be technical...

Correction: I specifically stated "if you want to be technical", nowhere have I indicated my desire to be so.

In reality the description was officially enacted to help avoid this exact kind of confusion, leaving aside that the republic claiming the name of the island as theirs alone has also been disputed by Britain of course.

So we're both right, which is a bit boring, honestly I'm surprised none of the grammar Nazis picked up a much more glaring error earlier. (now corrected)

 

[Dave]

Correction: I specifically stated "if you want to be technical", nowhere have I indicated my desire to be so.

In reality the description was officially enacted to help avoid this exact kind of confusion, leaving aside that the republic claiming the name of the island as theirs alone has also been disputed by Britain of course.

So we're both right, which is a bit boring, honestly I'm surprised none of the grammar Nazis picked up a much more glaring error earlier. (now corrected)

Nope, the legally accepted constitutional name of the country is Eire or Ireland, it’s legal description is the Republic of Ireland which is not the same thing. It would take a constitutional amendment to change the name of the country.

Notably, the Act did not change the official name of the state. It merely provided the description for the State.

The Constitution of Ireland provides that Éire (or Ireland in English) is the official name of the State and, if the Act had purported to change the name, it would have been unconstitutional as it was not a constitutional amendment.

The distinction between a description and a name has sometimes caused confusion. The Taoiseach, John A. Costello, who introduced the Republic of Ireland Bill in the Oireachtas, explained the difference in the following way:[10]

If I say that my name is Costello and that my description is that of senior counsel, I think that will be clear to anybody who wants to know. If the Senator [Helena Concannon] will look at Article 4 of the Constitution she will find that the name of the State is Éire. Section 2 of this Bill declares that "this State shall be described as the Republic of Ireland."

Its name in Irish is Éire and in the English language Ireland. Its description in the English language is "the Republic of Ireland.".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Ireland_Act_1948

PS
You’re digging a deep hole trying to pretend you weren’t the one who started off “if you want to be technical”. You tried to look clever in the exchange with @ToxicBunny and it failed, accept the failure and move on.

 

[ToxicBunny]

Nope, the legally accepted constitutional name of the country is Eire or Ireland, it’s legal description is the Republic of Ireland which is not the same thing. It would take a constitutional amendment to change the name of the country.



https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Ireland_Act_1948

PS
You’re digging a deep hole trying to pretend you weren’t the one who started off “if you want to be technical”. You tried to look clever in the exchange with @ToxicBunny and it failed, accept the failure and move on.

Don't think he can..

Its by and large why I just patted him on the head and moved on.

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

Nope, the legally accepted constitutional name of the country is Eire or Ireland, it’s legal description is the Republic of Ireland which is not the same thing

In practise it is the same thing and enacting the description is a practical measure to avoid confusion without going through the motions of amending the constitution. There would be no point in enacting the description otherwise.

PS
You’re digging a deep hole

PS I could not care less, but thank you for the laugh, for your next trick go scream at me loudly out the nearest window, it will have the same gutting effect on me

 

[Dave]

In practise it is the same thing and enacting the description is a practical measure to avoid confusion without going through the motions of amending the constitution. There would be no point in enacting the description otherwise.


PS I could not care less, but thank you for the laugh, for your next trick go scream at me loudly out the nearest window, it will have the same gutting effect on me

*pats on head*

/reads

It doesn't matter, only one entity officially carries the proper noun Ireland as a single word, that is the island.

I did point out this is "if you want to get technical" did I not?

/laughs

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

Now that the usuals have given up arguing properly and reset to their default defence algorithm of monosyllables and entirely failed attempts at patronising, we can get back on topic:
https://www.news.com.au/finance/wor...s/news-story/11a865ffa87c6f15a092e302ea3376e4

“6 weeks left on #Brexit clock and all the PM has to offer is another meaningless vote in 2 weeks,” Ms Lucas tweeted.

“This isn’t a strategy – it’s definition of insanity: doing the same thing over & over again and expecting a different result.

So May wants to have another vote on essentially the same BS "deal" with only 4 weeks to go before brexit day ... but at the same time people should not think that's a sinister tactic, no no no:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47218687

Theresa May has played down reports that she could force MPs to choose between backing her deal or accepting a delay to EU withdrawal.

Sure ... completely convincing.

 

[Unhappy1]

Yes, as said, that’s a description of the state of Ireland, it would require a constitutional amendment to change the name from Ireland.

You were the one who wanted to be technical...

Literally technical.

 

[ToxicBunny]

Its so much fun tieing him up in his own knots...

 

[f2wohf]

 

[f2wohf]

Nothing to worry about obviously...

Bank of America says no going back on its $400m plans for Brexit move

The world’s biggest banks are warning that there will be no going back from the actions they are taking to cope with potential Brexit disruption, which is expected to cost them as much as $400m each.

Anne Finucane, Bank of America’s vice-chair, said her company would spend about $400m — the upper bound of a $300m-$400m range previously given by BofA — on everything from offices to moving people and technology as it tries to ensure clients can trade seamlessly with the EU after the UK’s exit.

“Multiply that by the number of financial institutions that are doing the same thing and it adds up,” Ms Finucane told the Financial Times’ fourth European Financial Forum in Dublin.

BofA’s plans include moving $50bn of banking assets to Dublin and creating a 500-strong trading business in Ireland, which will also have a sizeable but as-yet unspecified asset base. The bank is also moving traders to a new Paris hub.

“Dublin is our headquarters for our European bank now — full stop,” she said. “There isn’t a return. That bridge has been pulled up . . . From a trading perspective, likewise, Paris would be the European trading arm.”

https://www.ft.com/content/b9d43bba-2f7a-11e9-8744-e7016697f225

 

[f2wohf]

Views on whether the UK will have to hold MEP elections or not:

Some senior people in Paris and a few in BXL say it would be easy to do a quick protocol excusing A50 countries of need to elect MEPs, quickly ratifiable. The majority view in BXL is that is would not be so easy- ratification could take years.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1095726428476395521

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

Its so much fun tieing him up in his own knots...

You must be one of those tantric types that enjoy delayed gratification if you find such joy in something that has yet to happen.

Also, it's tying fyi, tieing is not in use around the world.