IRELAND STILL THE STICKING POINT.

With Brexit negotiations increasingly rancorous and divisive, it seems clear that the one and only real issue is that of the border between Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic, an issue which is being used by the Republic's government as a lever to try to force reunification of their divided island.

As a proportion of the EU's trade, what crosses the border in Ireland is minute, likewise for the UK's trade. Neither the UK nor the EU wants to introduce a massive border infrastructure and the UK has proposed various measures to ensure that border checks are minimal. However, neither the government in Dublin nor the bureaucrats of Brussels have shown any willingness to discuss such proposals, persisting in their demands that the "Irish Backstop" is the only way forward, something they know would severely weaken the connection between Northern Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom and which they know is unacceptable to the government of the UK.

Ireland has been a problem for centuries, ever since King Henry VIII effectively annexed it. Religious differences have exacerbated the historic mistreatment of many of its citizens and the eventual separation of the predominantly Catholic south from the predominantly Protestant north did little but bring a temporary halt to the troubles of the early 20th century. The resurgence of violence in the 1960s was nothing but a resurfacing of centuries old hatreds and, again, the solution of the "Good Friday Agreement" did nothing but bring about a temporary cessation of hostilities. The Republic and the still extant and active IRA continue to aim for reunification while the Protestants of the North still hate such a prospect. The two sides are irreconcilable.

There seems to be little chance of the Republic's government agreeing to anything that would weaken their position and no UK government could agree to anything that effectively breaks up its country. Unless the Irish and the EU are prepared to agree to a compromise which safeguards the total integrity of the United Kingdom, surely no Brexit deal is currently possible and the options for a future resolution are limited.

A further delay to the date of Brexit, beyond 31st October, will serve little purpose given the attitudes of the Irish Republic and the EU and a second Brexit referendum would be a betrayal of the democratic process in the UK. The remaining options are "No Deal", to which the current UK parliament appears implacably opposed, a general election, which the Labour Party refuses to countenance, or the formulation of a laughably entitled "government of national unity", created solely for the purpose of preventing Brexit altogether.

Or can Prime Minister Johnson come up with something else ?

HYPOCRISY AND FANATICISM - THE REALMS OF REMAINERS.

Today's news contains some stories that truly belong to the 'silly season'.

Firstly, news from Eire indicates that the Irish government is not at all happy about the prospect of Northern Ireland politicians having the final say in matters to do with the border question, post-Brexit. Hang on, when the final say rests with the EU and Eire, courtesy of the "Backstop" it's OK but they won't allow the reverse situation. Hypocritical or what !?

Then there's news from Scotland that a judge is to be asked to consider an entirely hypothetical issue regarding the potential imprisonment of the Prime Minister. It seems that fanatical Remainers now want a judgement regarding whether the PM could be forced to delay Brexit if a deal cannot be agreed and want to know what would happen if he did not. 

It stands to reason that a further delay to Brexit could be enforced if Parliament so determines by the enactment of appropriate legislation; otherwise it cannot. Can a court really say anything else ? As for the matter of consequences in the event of an exit from the EU without a deal, that is a hypothetical question incapable of answer until after such an event and, even then, only with full knowledge of all the prevailing circumstances. 

What sort of world is it when courts are asked to pass judgement on hypotheticals ? Why has this nonsense even been allowed to occupy court time ? It seems it's still desperation time for fanatical Remainers.

EU STILL PLAYING THE BULLY-BOYS.

So, while Theresa May tries to find a way to bridge the gap to the European Union, Donald Tusk, one of the several Presidents of something or other in that Union, and Leo Varadkar, the Irish Prime Minister, have made it clear that they have no interest in listening to anything that Mrs May may have to say, unless, that is, it's that she's happy to leave the 'Irish Backstop' untouched.

The latest nonsense from the EU is to try to link the 'Backstop' to the maintenance of peace in Ireland, surely utterly ridiculous. The UK has made it clear that it will not create a 'hard border' between the north and south in Ireland, as has the Irish government; this is regardless of whether or not there is a deal over Brexit. The only participant in the discussions who does want a hard border is the European Union, desperately scared of the possibility of losing a few Euros through a bit of smuggling if there isn't one. What the existence of a border, hard or soft, has to do with the maintenance of peace escapes me altogether; peace will continue unless those of a violent tendency decide otherwise and go back to their former aggressive ways. With the IRA based in the South and it being the South which wants to annexe the North, it is Varadkar who holds the key to peace, not Theresa May, not the EU and certainly not a divisive 'Backstop'.

Thus far, the EU has shown no interest in exploring ways of managing a border through the use of technology or advance clearance. It has, and still is, using this fabricated Irish border issue as a mechanism to beat the British, and especially Brexiteers, around the ears. Today, Tusk has even gone so far as to invoke visions of a future in Hell for them, surely not language which should ever be used in diplomatic negotiations. It is clear that Tusk and his pals intend pushing things to the wire in the hope that the UK parliament will ride to the rescue of the EU by somehow stopping 'No Deal' or even Brexit itself.

All that we can hope is that Theresa May can convince her parliamentary colleagues to play this ludicrous game every bit as hard as is the EU. No one wants 'No Deal', and this is now all about which side takes fright first. Given that the balance of trade between the UK and EU is massively in favour of the latter, all that the UK has to do is hold its nerve.

Will it ?

EU SAYS "NON !" YET AGAIN.

Yesterday evening, Theresa May achieved what had seemed impossible just a couple of weeks ago - she won a vote in the House of Commons on the vexed subject of Brexit.

When the so-called 'Withdrawal Agreement' was put before Parliament on 15th January, it was rejected emphatically; Brexiteers and Remainers were united in dislike of it and threw it out unceremoniously. Mrs May was sent away to think again, talk to colleagues, other Parliamentarians and interested parties and representatives of the European Union, and to come back with something more acceptable. This she did and, yesterday, Parliament voted on a series of amendments to the Agreement; the government supported one of these, a proposal to accept the Agreement subject to there being an alternative mechanism to the 'Irish Backstop', and Mrs May is now about to set off on a new round of discussions with all and sundry in pursuit of this.

In a world populated by decent people, rather than by self-serving, egotistical, entrenched politicians, there would now be a genuine effort on all sides to come up with a revised plan. Sadly, we do not live in such a world. 

Shortly after the votes, Jeremy Corbyn magnanimously changed his position and agreed that he would, after all, converse with the Prime Minister; however,, it seemed clear to me that his real aim is to be able to walk out of such talks loudly proclaiming what a waste of time they'd been and thus trying to bolster his own political position.

The pronouncements from Europe have been even more problematic. Rather than welcoming what they'd asked for, a clear statement from the British Parliament as to their wishes, all and sundry have simply fallen back on the tired old European approach of saying "NON !", loudly and repeatedly. These bullies of the European Union have no interest in negotiating, all they want is for things to be done their way. From their viewpoint, they still have time to take advantage of the divisions in the UK Parliament and to try to force either a revocation of Brexit or, at least, another referendum which might produce the desired result of 'Remain'.

While the Eurocrats stand firm, our own Parliament wavers. Rather than meeting fire with fire, many of its members seek to undermine the Prime Minister and Brexit, regardless of the outcome of the 2016 referendum. These 'representatives' of the people continue to do what they can to keep the UK within, or very closely tied to, the EU and one of their principle tacks has been to try to "take no-deal off the table". This course of action effectively removes the UK's strongest bargaining chip and allows the EU to continue to be obstructive to any further discussion. While they are scared witless by the possibility of a 'no-deal' Brexit, they are convinced that the UK Parliament will force the Prime Minister to compromise, on their terms, before such a thing becomes a reality.

With the 'Irish Backstop' as it is currently framed, the Withdrawal Agreement has no chance of being ratified by the UK Parliament. The EU is, so far, emphatic in stating that the Agreement is not open for renegotiation and must stay as it is. The UK Parliament has made it clear that it wants this part of the Agreement renegotiated. Where is there room for manoeuvre ? 

The simple answer is that neither side wants 'no-deal' and, the closer we get to 29th March, the more likely the EU is to realise that its position is untenable. No Deal will do them great harm and will have huge repercussions for some of their own political leaders when they are next standing for re-election. If our own parliamentarians could actually grow some backbone and learn to play the game every bit as determinedly as their European counterparts, there'd be a deal, and a reasonable one, in plenty of time.

The trouble is that too many of our own 'representatives' remain of the view that Brexit is a mistake, the we, the ignorant people, simply didn't understand the issues and 'complexities'; we voted for the wrong reasons blah, blah. Our 'representatives' are determined to lead us back to the path of righteousness, kicking and screaming if necessary, and the EU knows this. It will happily wait, doing nothing but saying "NON !" until the UK does as it's told and effectively cancels Brexit.

We must not let this happen.

WILL BREXIT EVER HAPPEN ?

While far too many of our political masters continue to either try to frustrate Brexit or to use it for their own purposes, Theresa May is supposedly working on a new plan to take to the House of Commons tomorrow. What she will propose is anyone's guess but, with the European Union continuing to be obstructive, it's unlikely to be something that will gain favour with those who simply want Brexit to happen.

While Brexiteers have a number of issues with Mrs May's original plan, the most critical 'sticking point' must surely be the so-called "Irish Backstop". My question is, "Why is it there at all ?"

Clearly the British government doesn't want this blatantly political arrangement to be included in the agreement and, reportedly, neither does the European Union. It's said that the EU has an assortment of concerns about it and sees it as being unwelcome and potentially damaging to its own best interests; and yet it was the EU which insisted on including it at the insistence, of course, of the Republic of Ireland.

The Republic is a tiny country in population as well as in economic terms and yet it is wagging the dog's tail to the benefit of no one but itself, and even that is debatable. If the UK leaves the EU without a deal, the Republic will almost suffer more than anyone else due to its close economic ties to the UK. Sadly, this seems to be of no relevance to the Irish leader, Leo Varadkar, who appears hell bent on using the border issue as a lever in the century old battle to reunite the 2 parts of the island of Ireland.

Potential solutions to the border issue have been put forward but none has found favour with the EU - why ? If the EU really doesn't want to ever have to implement the 'backstop', why are they not being far more willing to remove this impediment from the withdrawal agreement ? The only realistic answer is that they're using it as a means of frustrating the whole Brexit process.

Conservative Brexiteers will not agree to any deal which includes the 'backstop' and Conservative Remainers will not agree to any deal which sees the UK move more than the tiniest distance from the EU. Jeremy Corbyn and Nicola Sturgeon are also using Brexit for their own political purposes and gaining Parliamentary approval for any arrangement seems impossible.  

What on earth will happen next ?