alexander1911.bsky.social
319 posts
21 followers
116 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
Whereas the EU cherry-picking youth mobility is just fine. Seriously? Even the EU negotiators have said it's time to retire this tired phrase.
comment in response to
post
Thanks for clarifying, I think inevitably that this is how the relationship will progress and I agree it’s going to close the door on A49 but I think that’s always been the direction of travel. I’m sore a lot of people will disagree and be upset but I don’t see why it can’t be a productive thing.
comment in response to
post
If the UK did end up with a Swiss style membership why would you perceive this as a negative if it’s a stable working relationship? From your post you seem to feel that the end goal must be membership but I don’t understand why you necessarily see this as a bad thing? Unless I’ve misunderstood?
comment in response to
post
God you are the most insufferable knob!
comment in response to
post
Which I further clarified when I replied to Brain Burning: bsky.app/profile/alex...
comment in response to
post
Not to mention the whole premise of your post was on the hypothetical of an A49 application. “ So, if the UK asks to join 🇪🇺” to which I replied with a) the reasons it won’t happen yet and b) the alternative. So I fail to see what part of that is “failing to listen” or where I said don’t do anything.
comment in response to
post
Literally said nothing of the sort and you’re being completely disingenuous to say so. So rather than snark you should at least try and engage in good faith.
bsky.app/profile/alex...
comment in response to
post
Thanks for clarifying, totally with you 💯 % there’s a lot of positive action that can happen between now and then for certain.
comment in response to
post
I agree on the direction, but don’t see that requires an A49 application to get the conversion going. There are other ways that are far less divisive imo.
comment in response to
post
With respect, this language risks framing Scotland as a colonised entity, which it is not. Scotland is a sovereign part of the United Kingdom by the democratic consent of its people and this framing is simply divisive.
comment in response to
post
The constitutional integrity of the UK is not in question here. It is possible to advocate for closer EU relations without framing it in a way that subtly divides the peoples of the UK.
comment in response to
post
It risks introducing unnecessary national sensitivities into what is, at heart, a shared British and European question. I don’t know if they are deliberate but it certainly reads with a certain undertone of division.
comment in response to
post
May I also politely say that invoking Robert the Bruce despite your first three examples being solely related to EU ascension (as well as your reference to Scotland yesterday, as a British territory) is really unnecessary.
comment in response to
post
Step by step rebuilding of trust, cooperation and institutional alignment is the only credible path forward for now. This isn’t caution it’s political reality.
comment in response to
post
By all means, let’s have a wider national conversation: perhaps a commission to review the impacts of Brexit, compare the current framework with deeper cooperation models (EEA, CU/SM, third pillar options etc). But even in the most optimistic scenario, no A49 is going to be viable yet.
comment in response to
post
A thoughtful discussion, but I believe Mark’s argument is ultimately more pragmatic. No government, is going to burn immense political capital, having secured office on a platform excluding CU or SM, to suddenly reverse course with a full accession application. The politics simply aren’t there.
comment in response to
post
Not sore if that’s for me or Niall? But yes I agree
comment in response to
post
I agree this is a positive outcome for all involved and may open doors for future UK-EU dialogue. Just to note: Gibraltar, the Channel Islands and Falklands are territories with distinct legal statuses. Scotland is a devolved part of the UK and, as a constituent nation is not a British territory.
comment in response to
post
Fair, I get where you’re coming from, and you’re right that it’s probably exaggerated in the UK. But I still think there’s something unsettling about compulsory/biometric ID. It would depend a lot on the actual legislation, of course, and until then we’re both guessing. Happy to agree to disagree.
comment in response to
post
I think that’s why people naturally rail against them: there’s a sense of reduced agency. It’s not necessarily logical, but it’s understandable.
That said I’m sure opinions may change with time but not sure this government has the political capital to move the dial.
comment in response to
post
Yes, absolutely and that’s kind of the point I was making. Surveillance that’s ambient or invisible (like CCTV or phones) often gets a free pass, whereas something like being asked for ID feels more intrusive, even if it’s less constant. It’s about perception and agency as much as reality.
comment in response to
post
Totally fair to point out how surveilled we already are. I suppose my point is that there’s a perceived difference between passive surveillance (like cameras) and active, mandatory systems (like biometric ID). Different thresholds of public resistance. Always value different perspectives though.
comment in response to
post
Agreed, again leaves us in the situation of waiting for political opinions to change. Hopefully, with PR a more pro EU discussion and political makeup would allow for a party to put their head above the parapet so those resources and good will can be utilised.
comment in response to
post
As you say that discussion may not end in join but the country would be in a more realistic place to have those sorts of conversations.
comment in response to
post
I agree I would think that making joining the goal in a couple of election cycles post this one maybe manageable especially if strategic effort was made to highlight the failures of Brexit and the benefits of A49. It would also allow trust to be built in the mean time and allow more positive debate.
comment in response to
post
I’m open to hearing a different path forward. But if incrementalism doesn’t exist and applying to rejoin isn’t realistic, what exactly is the strategy? I’m not seeing what’s expected of pro EU brits from your perspective other than talking about the net positives of the EU and advocating for EU?
comment in response to
post
reasonable, not like they've got nothing else on their plates. However, this attitude does speak to the lack of strategic culture in Bxl. They have the power of politicians but think like civil servants - for good reason without a mandate. But where should our strategic culture then emerge from?
comment in response to
post
Yes advocate for EU and acquis in the mean time but demanding A49 or bust today is just not being serious.
comment in response to
post
Demanding they do until 2029 is just counter productive. The only option in this parliament is to build trust, enact the agreed terms of current agreements and look for further areas of expansion and hopefully UK reform like PR.
comment in response to
post
This very fact would denote that it’s takes time. No government is going to apply for A49 on the idea you may as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb having campaigned that they wouldn’t even consider single market or customs union.
comment in response to
post
I agree making the case for Europe is the obvious thing to do, but the idea the UK is in any position for A49 now I’m afraid is just not realistic. The fact is governments are rarely elected on single issues and voters in the UK are simply not on board with the acquis.
comment in response to
post
I’ve never argued of anything like that in fact I’ve argued the opposite. The idea that an A49 application would be conducive to a polite political discussion in the UK and that the EU would welcome it and the utter chaos that would follow I think is unrealistic. Undoubtedly, it would be declined.
comment in response to
post
I agree PR would be a better system. But talking in more hypotheticals isn’t changing the political reality.
comment in response to
post
There *will* come a time - but more work to do first. EU + members have enough on their plate. They would not yet welcome a UK application to join, when joining not yet deliverable for UK or desirable for EU. And a sudden accession application now would create turmoil in UK + a gift to Farage.