Former Brexit staffer: Why many Brexiteers forgot about the British-Irish border issue.

*MOD Note: Keep All Brexit related discussions in here. Important news will posted in OP*

Irish Times

Written by a former Brexit Staffer, Oliver Norgrove

The Brexit looming before the UK today looks nothing like the Brexit promised in 2016. The goalposts have shifted, negotiations have been arduous and the biting realities of trade have crept up on Britain’s lawmakers. In truth, there is now as strong an argument for revoking article 50 as there is for continuing down the path laid out by Theresa May’s withdrawal agreement.

As a former Brexit campaigner, I find much to reflect on. I take the view that central to the unravelling of Brexit has been the Irish Border, whose frictionless state is informally tied to the ambitions and objectives of the 1998 Belfast Agreement. Those of us who made the case for leaving the European Union did not sufficiently take into account the interests of Northern Ireland, nor indeed did we estimate the significance of the role played by the Border within the Brexit negotiations.

As historical errors go, this is pretty large. And an error it most definitely was. An argument is often presented by Remainers that the Leaver exclusion of Northern Ireland from Brexit discussion before and during the referendum was a deliberate, strategic decision. I do not buy this. I think the omission of Northern Ireland from Leaver thinking was far less conscious and, in some ways, symptomatic of a much wider political issue.

International trade

One reason remains that until two years ago, British people, activists and politicians simply did not need to think or know very much about the workings of international trade. European Union membership had for years meant that trade policy was outsourced to Brussels, with little thinking behind moulding it in Westminster. The intellectual atrophy born out of this will have had a major impact on pre-referendum thinking, and certainly any need for extensive consideration of customs and third-country controls.

Another reason might well have been down to the fact that in Britain, political discourse routinely ignores Northern Irish interests. Being that it is geographically, historically and constitutionally separate from England, Scotland and Wales, there is a tendency to treat Northern Ireland as a sort of unwanted child, with rare mentions of Northern Irish public policy usually raised as a sort of marker for comparison with Britain rather than as part of wider discussions of reform.

Ignorance

Inside Vote Leave, too, a very similar observation could be made. The Border not only played no part in campaign messaging, being that it was largely technical and thus not very politically sellable, it was also seldom mentioned in the office. This I point out not as an attack upon anybody (indeed, my own ignorance is partly to blame), but in order to capture the extent to which the Border just did not feature in Leaver thinking and discourse.

One night, I want to say sometime around the end of May 2016, BBC Newsnight – to be hosted by James O’Brien that evening – rang us at Westminster Tower to ask for a representative to go on that night to debate the effects of Brexit on the Border. Nobody in the office was keen to take up the request, with even our more polished and experienced media performers rejecting the opportunity on the grounds that they simply lacked real knowledge of the issue.

I remember quite vividly the feeling of unease and discomfort about the prospect of us talking about something we just didn’t feel needed addressing. Of course, I would not have been much use myself, given that the most thought I had afforded the topic was simply to dismiss any suggestion that the North-South peace process would be halted as yet more Project Fear. I now realise this was naivety on my part. I should have considered things more carefully.

And so we are where we are. The big Brexit dream was brought to its knees thanks to one of the UK’s most persisting political ailments: its tendency to ignore the interests of Northern Ireland. Historical accounts of the future will do well to emphasis this somewhat uncomfortable fact.

Sarcasm mode: Well, way to go! *facepalm*

**Mod Edit update**

Theresa May has promised Tory MPs she will stand down if they back her EU withdrawal deal.

6 million signatures against Brexit now.

Anyone ever thought Brexiteers had a plan? That was news to me.

Yeah, same here.

I hope they hold a second referendum. The UK's actions on Brexit make Trump look like a well prepared and competent individual. And that's nearly impossible to do.

Yep, and next time the government does not like the outcome of a general election, they can hold another one until they get the result they are after.

Brexit will happen unless the MP´s want a massive backlash that will hunt them for the rest of their political careers.

Brexit was never thoroughly thought through in any measure.

Brexit Illustrated

I think Brexit will be the massive backlash that haunts them for the rest of their political careers

Nope, in 10 years you will look back at Brexit and think "why didn´t the UK leave much sooner" Also remember up until 70´s UK and much of Europe were doing fine outside.

How long should there be between two referendums on same topic? If people aren't allowed to change their minds, then some countries that held referendums to join the EU could never held another one to ask shoud we leave.

It was almost 3 years ago. USA votes for new president every 4 years.

People didn't know or understand what they were voting for, which is always a problem of democracy. People were also lied to and misled. Now people may have a better understanding of the issue so I'm for another referendum. First one was so close that it's impossible to predict what will happen. And the brexit side also said that if they'd lost by slim margin, they would ask for new referendum too.

Uh... what? So, Europe was fine during WWII?

@nintendoboy16:

Create a soft border like Canada and US.

The Republic of Ireland and British occupied Northern Ireland ALREADY have a soft border. Said 'soft border' is already under threat due to Brexit.

Have they come to some agreement about the border?

Not that I know of. Lord knows what's going to happen and we already have nationalist of a left-wing variety (though good luck telling that to Dennis Prager, who thinks the left HATE nationalism) trying to pull both Northern Ireland and Scotland away from the UK.

Not yet which is what is considered the biggest hurdle as to a yes on the deal.

Within the EU, both Ireland and Northern Ireland has freedom of movement not just US-Canada's soft border.

Which is... a soft border. Again, it's under threat with Brexit unless something is done. Be it Sinn Fein being successful in campaigning for NI to reunite with the Republic or some special deal only for NI applies where the EU treats NI unlike the rest of the UK.

EU's (Federalist) "Freedom of Movement" is not US-Canada's soft border definition.

I assure you, Brexit was carefuly formulated over many years by the most qualified subject matter experts in the UK.

Actually, it´s not a soft border since there is no actual physical border like at the US-Canadian border.

It´s like if you go from California to Oregon,

@ronvalencia: @Jacanuk: Major difference. California and Oregon are under the ONE GOVERNMENT. South Ireland and Northern Ireland are each under DIFFERENT governments.

And even if we go under the US- Canada version of a soft border, that still gives the Irish the shaft.

Leaving this here: http://www.siue.edu/GEOGRAPHY/ONLINE/Vogeler/TypesBorders.htm

@nintendoboy16: Sorry for hijacking your topic ever so slightly. Given the amount of topics (by all means valid topics, I'm not talking about spam) made during both government shutdown and Mueller finishing the investigation, I'm hoping we can keep it in one pinned topic instead. I will be updating OP with headlines and links to any major news about Brexit. You don't have to if you don't want to. Up to you.

For the rest of you guys. Tag me in a post if there is any news you want to be added to OP.

I might as well start with something.

Theresa May has promised Tory MPs she will stand down if they back her EU withdrawal deal.

She told backbench Tories: "I am prepared to leave this job earlier than I intended in order to do what is right for our country and our party."

The PM said she knew that Tory MPs did not want her to lead the next phase of Brexit negotiations "and I won't stand in the way of that".

She did not name a departure date at a packed meeting of the 1922 committee.

But the BBC's Laura Kuenssberg said a Tory leadership contest could be expected in May.

Downing Street said it would be a "different ball game" if the deal was not passed by Parliament.

It comes as MPs seize control of the Commons agenda to hold votes on alternatives to the deal.

Mrs May told the 300 or so Tory MPs at the meeting "we need to get the deal through and deliver Brexit".

"I ask everyone in this room to back the deal so we can complete our historic duty - to deliver on the decision of the British people and leave the European Union with a smooth and orderly exit."

The BBC's Iain Watson said Boris Johnson - a likely contender in any leadership contest - was smiling broadly as he left the meeting.

Our correspondent said a very senior Conservative had said the PM was "as clear as she has ever been" that she will not be around for the next stage of Brexit but if the deal does not pass then "that's a different matter".

Tory MP Simon Hart said the mood in the 1922 meeting was "respectful" as the prime minister set out her plan.

He said: "She was passionate about getting the deal through, passionate about keeping the party together and passionate about keeping the government as the government, passionate about keeping Jeremy Corbyn out of Number 10."

Despite the nature of the meeting, Mr Hart joked that "neither the Chief Whip nor the PM were crying".

The PM has said she wants to bring the deal back to the Commons this week, after it was previously rejected twice, by large margins.

Speaker calls for changes

Commons Speaker John Bercow ruled last week that the government could not return for a third attempt, unless there had been "substantial" changes to the proposals.

And he warned ministers earlier that they should "not seek to circumvent my ruling" by introducing procedures that could reverse his judgement.

But a Downing Street spokesman said there had been a "significant development" at the summit in Brussels last week, after Mrs May agreed "extra reassurances" over the Irish backstop with the EU, and the date of exit had changed.

Many Tory Brexiteers are looking to the Democratic Unionist Party, who have led opposition to the PM's deal, before deciding whether to get behind it.

Rees-Mogg 'sadness'

Leading Tory Brexiteer Jacob Rees-Mogg said there was an "element of sadness" about the prime minister's announcement "even though it's something I've wanted".

And speaking to journalists after the 1922 committee he said he would vote for the government's Brexit deal if the DUP abstained.

Asked what would happen if the government's deal failed to get through, he said: "Then she would have every right to carry on."

He refused to speculate on who would now stand as Conservative leader - but asked what he thought of Boris Johnson he said: "I think Mr Johnson is a formidably able man and I backed him in 2016."

Earlier, Mrs May moved to prevent possible ministerial resignations by allowing Conservative MPs a free vote when MPs pass judgment later on different Brexit plans, in the so-called indicative votes.

But the prime minister herself, along with her Cabinet ministers, will abstain in the votes, Conservative whips have indicated

Actually, California and Oregon are under different governments,

Which is actually not that much different than the Irish Republic and the United Kingdom, they are both different but under one "federal" government.

And again the border between Ireland and the UK is not a soft border, that is exactly what part of the problem is, The problem is that even a soft-border may ignite the whole catholic - protestant conflict again and no one wants that or even a hint of a border, which is impossible since once the UK is out, the outer border is the Irish-north Irish and have to be enforced.

So stupid. LEAVE already! It was democratically chosen by the voters so do so.

The more they stall or attempt another vote, the more democracy comes into question which is a bigger issue than leaving the dying EU.

Stupid to leave without any deal. UK don't have the personnel ready to deal with increased work in importing goods of all kinds when they don't have a trade deal with the country/union importing it from.

@Jacanuk: California and Oregon are still led by figures in Washington DC. Why else do you have presidents still making decisions for them? EX: Obama was blasted for recognizing Bears Ears in Utah via Executive Order, while Trump is getting praise for cutting Bears Ears with his overreach. Hell, Obama was also blasted for overreach when all 50 states had to recognize gay marriage.

So whatever differences there are between states in the US is minimal at best, compared to UK and ROI, as the EU is multinational, the US isn't.

You're not going to look at the link, are you? Open borders are a type of soft borders. You don't need walls or armed guards to prove there is a border.

Sorry but that is nowhere near the truth, State rights are actually a major point in how any state is run, why do you think Marijuana is still illegal on the Federal level while even the state of Washington have legalized it, why do you think ICE a federal agency is limited by state legislators in states like California. Federal has the bigger more universal policies and the foreign policies but if you remember your civics classes, you know how big impact state governments have as to their own population.

There is no more than a hair´s difference between where EU is headed to where the US is, sure "EU states have an independent government, but as seen with GDPR, Copyright directive (article 13 now 17) and many many many other EU policies that they have to do.

And I don´t need to look at the link to know how the "border" is in the EU, I have friends and family and travel quite frequently to Europe and the only visible sign you crossed a border is the sudden change in language on the road signs and the change of maps on your GPS. Which is nothing like the US Candian border

Also if you followed the Brexit debate you would know that one of the problems May has is that even a soft-border which is on the table is a no-go for some of the hardliners who keep voting no.

What an absolute farce the UK government are perpetrating.

Summary

1. MPs who voted on a series of eight alternative Brexit options have rejected them all
2. Proposal for a permanent customs union with the EU came closest, and was beaten by 272 to 264 votes
3. Theresa May promises Tory MPs she will stand down if they back her EU withdrawal deal
4. The PM gives no specific date for her departure
5. But if deal gets through, a Tory leadership contest could be some time around May
6. The PM indicates she could still hold a third vote on her withdrawal deal this week
7. Speaker reiterates ruling another vote cannot be brought if it is "substantially the same"

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-politics-parliaments-47696409

8 proposals and all rejected, even the idea of a 2nd referendum that would destroy every single shred of democracy the UK has left.

Those overpriced politicians really need to get their act together and face the music and stand by the vote they themselves placed in front of the people.

And so is May's....your point?

What Parliament needs to do is collapse and go to a general election.

There has already been a general election

They can´t run out and do a second so soon after the last one.

People had their chance to vote May out but voted her in again.

Yes they can, in fact, general elections can actually happen very close to each other if they cannot form a government.

Tonight shows that the UK is in crisis because MPs want to go against the nature of the system.

EU has a half-ass'ed/proto federal government. EU is more than a simple free trade agreement. EU member countries are under European Commission and European Parliament.

UK government doesn't have controls over it's fishing rights which is worst than Australian state governments's fishing rights management.

Well, the problem is not that they can´t form a government, there is a working government, the problem is that the courts decided that a deal should go to a vote and the MP´s have the maturity and sensibility of a 4-year-old kid.

And a General election will not change that, Labour won´t win enough seats to make it so they can go ahead with a 2nd referendum or whatever crazy idiotic plans Corbyn has. So all it will do is delay the exit even more.

Tonight showed some MP´s are completely out of touch with reality and the last option is simply EU says enough is enough and no more delays.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bears_Ears_National_Monument#Designation_under_President_Obama

On December 28, 2016, President Obama proclaimed the 1,351,849 acres (547,074 ha)^[12] Bears Ears National Monument, including the eponymous buttes and the surrounding landscapes, using his authority under the Antiquities Act to create national monuments by proclamation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antiquities_Act

The Antiquities Act of 1906, (Pub.L.59–209, 34 Stat.225, 54 U.S.C.§§ 320301–320303), is an act passed by the United States Congress and signed into law by Theodore Roosevelt on June 8, 1906. This law gives the President of the United States the authority to, by presidential proclamation, create national monumentsfrom federal landsto protect significant natural, cultural, or scientific features. The Act has been used more than a hundred times since its passage.

---------------

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_in_the_United_States

The Supreme Court's ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges ended all inter-state legal complications surrounding same-sex marriage, as it orders states to both perform the marriages of same-sex couples and to recognize the marriages of same-sex couples performed in other states.^[68]

--

• Obergefell v. Hodges (2013-2015) U.S. Supreme Court case finding state bans on same-sex marriage to be unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment. (Overturned Baker v. Nelson)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obergefell_v._Hodges

Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. ___ (2015) (/ˈoʊbərɡəfɛl/OH-bər-gə-fel), is a landmarkcivil rights case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the fundamental right to marry is guaranteed to same-sex couples by both the Due Process Clause and theEqual Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The 5–4 ruling requires all fifty states, the District of Columbia, and the Insular Areas to perform and recognize the marriages of same-sex couples on the same terms and conditions as the marriages of opposite-sex couples, with all the accompanying rights and responsibilities

For EU, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Court_of_Justice

• The President of the Constitutional Court of Belgium, Marc Bossuyt, said that both the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights were taking on more and more powers by extending their competences, creating a serious threat of a "government by judges". He stated that "they fabricate rulings in important cases with severe financial consequences for governments without understanding the national rules because they are composed out of foreign judges".^[40]

Both US and EU has issues with "government by judges".

So a govt with a very small majority supplied only by a fringe party (who is still against the PM's deal by the way) is a working govt?

Labour would WIN a general election right now, and Remain would actually win in a referendum. This is why May keeps pushing her moronic joke of a deal. And face facts here, softer Brexit options are getting more support than hard ones.

There is a reason why Labour and SNP want a general election right now, they would win.

Those who were in favour of Brexit doesn't have the guts to see it through. They got a Remainer making deals for them. Boris Johnson never wanted to be in charge and later resigned. David Davis resigned and the person behind their slogans (Cummings I think) has very little to do with Brexit these days.

Yes, it´s a working government since the only question where the DUP does not support May is in this area. Also, the problem is not that MP´s want to stay, the problem is that May´s side is split between the people wanting a hard Brexit and the people who want a soft exit and this deal lands closer to a soft exit than a hard one. Which makes it almost pointless to talk about a Brexit, UK would have to abide by rules they have no control over.

Claiming Labour would win an election is a very bold statement, considering Corbyn is more disliked than May and they couldn´t even get a majority in the last one that was held less than 18 months ago. And SNP you mean the Scottish party that was dismantled in the last election and lost almost half their seats.

I think you misjudge the political situation and the opposition there is both the insane notion that Scotland should be independent and that Brexit should not happen.

So no the SNP and Labour would not win

Not as simple as that.

Even May is and was for remain, but the problem she is faced with is that the deal for the hardliners is too soft and for the soft-liners to problematic with the whole "soft border" at the North-Irish - Ireland border.

Labour actually made big gains in the last election and was able to forced May out of a hard majority, once again requiring the DUP for supply. The SNP is still big enough to supply Labour as well. Next, I also think Corbyn may not lead Labour in the next election.

Next, polls show that REMAIN would win in a 2nd referendum as well as support being strong for a second referendum. Next, Scotland becoming independent is a post-Brexit reality, and would be unwise to discount this.

You must be one of those half full glass kind of guys because Labour did not make big gains, they did not get destroyed as much as was predicted but they also didn´t get a hold of power and their support party SNP got absolutely dismantled mainly by the Tories, and which is why May pushed the General election button

And of course, the Remain stands to win, considering how big a mess the politicians have made the whole deal, instead of accepting the deal and leave and get past all the "what if´s" among businesses and market.

No, Labour made big gains and actually that election revitalized the party. Second, it doesn't matter if SNP took losses, they still can supply Labour. As well, Lib Dems could supply Labour as well. And the parties against the Tories together actually won slightly more votes than May's coalition.

Other famous or rich people in favour of Brexit has also left the country. Some got foreign passports for their kids because they could.

Still, you're not disagreeing. Those in favour of it should have been much more in charge of negotiations imo.

so has this shit imploded yet?

Nope. Delayed until April 12th I think.

@Jacanuk: I wouldn't say the SNP got absolutely dismantled by the Tories, they still have more seats than all the other Scottish parties combined. SNP have 35 while Scottish Conservatives only have 13, most of which will likely get wiped out at the next general election due to this Brexit mess.

6 million signatures against Brexit now.

The petition asking the British government to revoke article 50 and reconsider its plan to exit the European Union passed 6m signatures a day and a half after Britain was meant to have left the European Union.

The number of signatories passed the 5m mark the previous Sunday, making it the most popular petition to have been submitted to the parliament website. The previous highest total of 4,150,260 was for a 2016 petition calling for a second referendum should the initial poll not provide a definitive enough result.

The woman behind the petition, Margaret Georgiadou, said she had received death threats. She also said she had deleted her Facebook account after receiving a “torrent of abuse”.

Parliament will debate the petition on Monday. The government responded on 26 March that it would not revoke article 50, saying: “We will honour the result of the 2016 referendum and work with parliament to deliver a deal that ensures we leave the European Union.”

Since then, Theresa May’s Brexit deal has been rejected by MPs for the third time, this time by 58 votes; the DUP’s deputy leader, Nigel Dodds, said he would rather the UK stayed in the EU than back her withdrawal agreement.

May is set to return to Brussels for an emergency European council summiton 10 April. The EU27 expect her to ask for a longer delay or accept a no-deal Brexit two days later, on 12 April.

There have been conspiracy theories about the petition on both sides of the debate. Some said crashes on the site since the petition launched were a plot to prevent further signatures.

Others claimed that a small proportion of signatures from overseas IP addresses – including one from North Korea – meant the petition had been hijacked by bots. In fact, 96% of the signatures were from the UK.

Well, losing over half your seats is not exactly proof that the Scottish people are behind you.

But you are correct they do still hold 35 out of the 59 seats, so they have a slim majority.

@Jacanuk: Winning 35 seats alone puts them as the strongest party in Scotland by a wide margin, the others don't even come close.

They'll go above 35 again next time. Also minor correction, they didn't lose over half. They went from 56/59 to 35/59.