- Location
- Northern Ireland
For what it's worth, I didn't vote, because I didn't feel sufficiently well enough informed to answer the question. I couldn't know how, but i knew it was bound to be massively complicated, and a job for MPs to thrash out in the proper place for this sort of thing - parliament.
What struck me soon after the referendum was that the EU was never going to let us leave with a good deal.
A big part of this deal is of course the border. And while it doesn't affect me directly, I do respect that it would affect others, and would be very bad for the union indeed if it was to be hardened significantly.
We are at a dead end with this current agreement. The prime minister has probably got the best deal that she, or anyone else possibly could out of the EU. That's not to say it's good - considering they aren't going to give us a good deal without a lot of leverage being applied. And we didn't really have much to use. It's probably the least bad, is a better way of putting it.
Going forward, a part of me does wonder if we should go ahead and scrap it and call their bluff. There have been two and a half years of considerable rhetoric built up regarding the border and the peace process. 29th of May comes and we leave, with nothing other than an obligation to impose no controls on the border. The EU will be under massive, and i mean massive pressure not to do anything that creates a hard border. That might actually open the door to a much more equitable process of negotiation. Could we have got it from the beginning? No. We first had to go through long periods of stalemate and get the deal we've got at this late stage. Republic of Ireland would be in very big diffs with a no deal, as would we, so I could see an emergency extension of trading arrangements while trade negotiations got under way.
What struck me soon after the referendum was that the EU was never going to let us leave with a good deal.
A big part of this deal is of course the border. And while it doesn't affect me directly, I do respect that it would affect others, and would be very bad for the union indeed if it was to be hardened significantly.
We are at a dead end with this current agreement. The prime minister has probably got the best deal that she, or anyone else possibly could out of the EU. That's not to say it's good - considering they aren't going to give us a good deal without a lot of leverage being applied. And we didn't really have much to use. It's probably the least bad, is a better way of putting it.
Going forward, a part of me does wonder if we should go ahead and scrap it and call their bluff. There have been two and a half years of considerable rhetoric built up regarding the border and the peace process. 29th of May comes and we leave, with nothing other than an obligation to impose no controls on the border. The EU will be under massive, and i mean massive pressure not to do anything that creates a hard border. That might actually open the door to a much more equitable process of negotiation. Could we have got it from the beginning? No. We first had to go through long periods of stalemate and get the deal we've got at this late stage. Republic of Ireland would be in very big diffs with a no deal, as would we, so I could see an emergency extension of trading arrangements while trade negotiations got under way.
Last edited: