Would an UK EU exit really effect Ireland ?

ewan whose army

Considering the UK and Ireland have agreements (like right to settle in either and vote in parliaments) long before the EU was formed ? While I am worried about a lot of the British flippancy on the issue I just wonder what effects this would have outside of the UK.

micosoft

ewan whose army wrote: »

Considering the UK and Ireland have agreements (like right to settle in either and vote in parliaments) long before the EU was formed ? While I am worried about a lot of the British flippancy on the issue I just wonder what effects this would have outside of the UK.

It would have an enormous effect depending on how it proceeded and the effects will be both positive and negative.

For example - does the UK leave to become part of EFTA like Norway or Switzerland or exit exit?

In the later case we have the challenge of one of our largest trading partners leaving a free trade zone...

The flip side is that a substantial number of global (and indeed UK companies) may relocate here to take advantage of the EU market. Many have indicated they would...http://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/dec/04/goldman-sachs-warns-london-exit-britain-eu

So many factors and variables that is hard to say, but honestly, overall it will be worse for everyone. Mostly the UK, but everyone.

MarkR

Didn't see Ireland mentioned there, just Paris & Frankfurt?

micosoft

MarkR wrote: »

Didn't see Ireland mentioned there, just Paris & Frankfurt?

Sorry - I didn't mean to imply that Goldman would move over. Dublin usually does back office so unlikely to attract an operation like GS who likely would move to the next biggest Financial Hub and Exchange. I suspect it would be Frankfurt.

That said, we would gain a lot of US multinationals, backoffice Finance, some UK firms head offices who all would want to remain in the EU. Mid way down this article you have John Bruton (who heads the IFSC)
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/fb88ee48-859e-11e2-bed4-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2qVRHbygv
And here - IDA are bullish:
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/british-exit-seen-as-opportunity-by-business-sector-220509.html

As I said though - other things will be an almighty pain and Irish firms who export to England Wales would suffer.

Jimminism

In a good way, yes.

FreudianSlippers

Jimminism wrote: »

In a good way, yes.

Excellent contribution. I'm not so sure that there are many advantages to the UK leaving, but is can't see how it benefits Ireland to be aligned with the EU without the UK. Given the enormous legal similarities between Ireland and the UK, I would think we should probably consider political and economic cooperation with the UK if they leave. Of course there are massive problems with that idea too. So, I don't think there is a clear answer.

Jimminism

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Excellent contribution. I'm not so sure that there are many advantages to the UK leaving, but is can't see how it benefits Ireland to be aligned with the EU without the UK. Given the enormous legal similarities between Ireland and the UK, I would think we should probably consider political and economic cooperation with the UK if they leave. Of course there are massive problems with that idea too. So, I don't think there is a clear answer.

How could leaving the EU with the UK possibly benefit Ireland? America, Ireland's main trading partner, wants Ireland to remain in the EU. Ireland does more trade with the Rest of the EU than the UK.

FreudianSlippers

Jimminism wrote: »

How could leaving the EU with the UK possibly benefit Ireland? America, Ireland's main trading partner, wants Ireland to remain in the EU. Ireland does more trade with the Rest of the EU than the UK.

It really depends on what a structured exit would look like. Since it's moot, there is no clear answer. I think the future of our trade with the US in particular is uncertain in the wake of the patent cliff issues. Not sure about the rest of America (I presume you're referring only to North America) but I don't think there is a significant view on the subject as I haven't heard anyone actually discussing an Irish exit.

Scofflaw

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Excellent contribution. I'm not so sure that there are many advantages to the UK leaving, but is can't see how it benefits Ireland to be aligned with the EU without the UK. Given the enormous legal similarities between Ireland and the UK, I would think we should probably consider political and economic cooperation with the UK if they leave. Of course there are massive problems with that idea too. So, I don't think there is a clear answer.

I think the legal similarities are somewhat overplayed. We're not on the same voting side as the UK very often in the EU, although I'll grant you there may be some cooperative value in legislative drafting.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Cool Mo D

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Excellent contribution. I'm not so sure that there are many advantages to the UK leaving, but is can't see how it benefits Ireland to be aligned with the EU without the UK. Given the enormous legal similarities between Ireland and the UK, I would think we should probably consider political and economic cooperation with the UK if they leave. Of course there are massive problems with that idea too. So, I don't think there is a clear answer.

Why would we possibly want to align with the UK over the EU? The EU is a far more attractive trading partner, and the UK economy would be in big trouble if it cut itself off from the EU. Just because we have similar legal systems?

The UK leaving the EU would likely be bad for Ireland, and throw up a whole load of practical problems with the border and residency. But there could be a windfall of multinationals leaving London to set up in Ireland for access to EU markets.

ewan whose army

Cool Mo D wrote: »

Why would we possibly want to align with the UK over the EU? The EU is a far more attractive trading partner, and the UK economy would be in big trouble if it cut itself off from the EU. Just because we have similar legal systems?

The UK leaving the EU would likely be bad for Ireland, and throw up a whole load of practical problems with the border and residency. But there could be a windfall of multinationals leaving London to set up in Ireland for access to EU markets.

Actually since the UK imports more from the EU that it exports (note EU exports include anything routed through another EU country if it isn't sold there such as goods to Asia via Holland) the EU wouldn't do a tariff law since the EU would stand to loose out a lot if it tried that.

the perfect ten

Would there not have to be formal border controls between ourselves and the UK, including Northern Ireland?

ewan whose army

the perfect ten wrote: »

Would there not have to be formal border controls between ourselves and the UK, including Northern Ireland?

No, the UK Irish border is controlled under the Common Travel Area, an agreement that predates the EU considerably. Its related to the idea that Irish people can go and live in the UK visa free and actually vote there, and vice versa (as a UK citizen I can vote for the Dail)

Banjoxed

Well since the Irish State was already effected in (say) 1922, not much.

How the UK leaving the EU would affect the Republic of Ireland, now there's an interesting thread.

the perfect ten

ewan whose army wrote: »

No, the UK Irish border is controlled under the Common Travel Area, an agreement that predates the EU considerably. Its related to the idea that Irish people can go and live in the UK visa free and actually vote there, and vice versa (as a UK citizen I can vote for the Dail)

But that only applies to Irish and British citizens.

Surely EU law would require that all other nationalities would require a passport (or possibly a national identity card as exists in several EU countries) for all other people to enter the EU from outside?

whatstherush

ewan whose army wrote: »

Actually since the UK imports more from the EU that it exports (note EU exports include anything routed through another EU country if it isn't sold there such as goods to Asia via Holland) the EU wouldn't do a tariff law since the EU would stand to loose out a lot if it tried that.

This doesn't make sense. Let say there was a trade war and for arguments sake all trade between the EU and UK ceased. The UK would be losing access to a market for roughly 50% of its export goods where as the EU would be losing a market for 22% of its export goods. In this hypothetical both losses would be devastating, but 22% is a lot less then 50%.

View

ewan whose army wrote: »

Actually since the UK imports more from the EU that it exports (note EU exports include anything routed through another EU country if it isn't sold there such as goods to Asia via Holland) the EU wouldn't do a tariff law since the EU would stand to loose out a lot if it tried that.

If the UK leaves the EU then the standard level of tariffs that apply to all non-members of the EU would apply to the UK (save those who have - after years of negotiation - secured a free trade agreement with the EU).

Richard

the perfect ten wrote: »

Would there not have to be formal border controls between ourselves and the UK, including Northern Ireland?

No, only if Ireland joins Schengen.

realitykeeper

View wrote: »

If the UK leaves the EU then the standard level of tariffs that apply to all non-members of the EU would apply to the UK (save those who have - after years of negotiation - secured a free trade agreement with the EU).

If there was such a thing as competent Irish politicians, such an agreement would have been negotiated and put in place as a contingency years ago. Unfortunately, nationally elected politicians in this country spend their time on local issues in order to get re-elected. This is the same as bribery, even if nothing is given or promised in return.

Banjoxed

realitykeeper wrote: »

If there was such a thing as competent Irish politicians, such an agreement would have been negotiated and put in place as a contingency years ago. Unfortunately, nationally elected politicians in this country spend their time on local issues in order to get re-elected. This is the same as bribery, even if nothing is given or promised in return.

You'll have to dissolve the people and appoint a new one then. It's crap but the only way the system will change is by persuading all the local minded electorate that ultimately localism isn't in their long term interest.

View

realitykeeper wrote: »

If there was such a thing as competent Irish politicians, such an agreement would have been negotiated and put in place as a contingency years ago.

It takes considerable time and tax-payers' money to negotiate any trade agreement. There is no pressing reason why the governments of the member states would do so.

It isn't up to the governments of the other member states to figure out what the UK wants. Neither is there any reason for them to interfere in the UK's domestic politics which is what they would be doing by putting in place contingency agreements for a potential UK's EU exit.

View

Richard wrote: »

No, only if Ireland joins Schengen.

Under current EU law every EU member state is obliged to join Schengen except:
a) the UK which has absolute discretion on joining or not joining, and,
b) Ireland which has a conditional exception on the continuing existence of the UK-RoI CTA,

Should the UK depart the EU, UK related conditions such as a) above no longer apply in EU law, hence Ireland's conditional exception b) ceases to apply and we are then under EU law an "ordinary" EU member state obliged to join Schengen (and to avoid confusion, EU law trumps bilateral agreements with non-EU member states if those agreements do not comply fully with EU law).

ewan whose army

From what I understand an EU secession would take 5 years under Lisbon, I am assuming that is what the time is meant to be used for

keeponhurling

View wrote: »

Under current EU law every EU member state is obliged to join Schengen except:
a) the UK which has absolute discretion on joining or not joining, and,
b) Ireland which has a conditional exception on the continuing existence of the UK-RoI CTA,

Should the UK depart the EU, UK related conditions such as a) above no longer apply in EU law, hence Ireland's conditional exception b) ceases to apply and we are then under EU law an "ordinary" EU member state obliged to join Schengen (and to avoid confusion, EU law trumps bilateral agreements with non-EU member states if those agreements do not comply fully with EU law).

If Britain did leave EU and border controls were coming in anyways, it would make sense for us to join Schengen.

View

keeponhurling wrote: »

If Britain did leave EU and border controls were coming in anyways, it would make sense for us to join Schengen.

Well, I suspect that it makes sense for us to start examining the possibility now as we can attempt to quantify how to do it, the cost of doing it and what, if any, EU assistance we might receive were we to do so.

I'd imagine a last minute request for help from the rest of the EU would just look desperate whereas one planned well in advance can be calmed considered and we'd have a better chance of securing financial support (it being easier to commit to support when it is just a possibility it'll be called upon).

keeponhurling

Well yes, but also I'm sure there are costs it to.
I wouldn't invest too much in a contingency plan for something that might never happen, and is unlikely to happen at some undetermind date later than 2017.

UK exit from EU from presumably have a transition period as well.
What we would need to do would be small compared to what UK would have to do adminstratively

View

keeponhurling wrote: »

Well yes, but also I'm sure there are costs it to.
I wouldn't invest too much in a contingency plan for something that might never happen, and is unlikely to happen at some undetermind date later than 2017.

I would suggest we plan on joining Schengen at some stage irrespective of what the UK does, not just as a last minute panic driven contingency measure because of a UK EU exit.

Schengen is THE common travel area for Europe and we disadvantage ourselves by being outside it (as there are costs to being outside it just as there are other costs of being in it). We should intend to rectify that not leave it to the whim of the UK as to whether we join it.

Richard

View wrote: »

Under current EU law every EU member state is obliged to join Schengen except:
a) the UK which has absolute discretion on joining or not joining, and,
b) Ireland which has a conditional exception on the continuing existence of the UK-RoI CTA,

Should the UK depart the EU, UK related conditions such as a) above no longer apply in EU law, hence Ireland's conditional exception b) ceases to apply and we are then under EU law an "ordinary" EU member state obliged to join Schengen (and to avoid confusion, EU law trumps bilateral agreements with non-EU member states if those agreements do not comply fully with EU law).

That's not true. According to what you have said, Ireland's opt out from Schengen is conditional on the CTA existing, not the UK beImg an EU state. If the UK left the EU then its opt-out would no longer be required but the Irish one would still be in force.

In any case, even if what you said about Ireland having to join Schengen is true then they'd change the rules to either mean Ireland wouldn't have to join or that it could but with special arrangements to allow a similar situation as present to continue.

Remember that Russians have special arrangement for passing through EU territory between Kalliningrad and Russia proper.

View

Richard wrote: »

That's not true. According to what you have said, Ireland's opt out from Schengen is conditional on the CTA existing, not the UK beImg an EU state. If the UK left the EU then its opt-out would no longer be required but the Irish one would still be in force.

To clarify, the exemptions - from the Schengen commitment - exist under EU law. Should the UK leave the EU any and all exemptions it has under EU law obviously disappear as they are null and void. That means the exemption for Ireland therefore depends on a condition that no longer applies under EU law. Hence we are bound by the Schengen commitment like every other EU member state.

Richard wrote: »

In any case, even if what you said about Ireland having to join Schengen is true then they'd change the rules to either mean Ireland wouldn't have to join or that it could but with special arrangements to allow a similar situation as present to continue.

That is wildly improbable. Why should the other member states rewrite (and undertake the hassle and expense of ratifying) a treaty provision (Art 3.2 of the TEU) that we have already agreed to?

Remember the Schengen commitment exists as the default under EU law because we agreed to it just like we agreed to the conditional exemption.

Why should - on principle - any member state agree to us putting an arrangement with a non-EU member state ahead of our arrangements with the EU member states?

ewan whose army

Its pretty unlikely the UK will pull out anyway

(Reuters) - More Britons would vote to stay in the European Union than leave it, a poll showed on Tuesday, the first time the "in" camp has been ahead since Prime Minister David Cameron pledged a referendum on Britain's membership last year.

Cameron has promised to offer Britons a vote on whether to leave the 28-nation EU if he wins a national election next year.

Under pressure from eurosceptics in his Conservative party and the anti-EU UK Independence Party (UKIP) ahead of European elections in May and the 2015 general election, Cameron has promised to first try to reshape Britain's ties with the EU.

YouGov said its poll of 3,195 adults, carried out on March 9 and 10, found 41 percent would vote for Britain to remain a member of the EU, while 39 percent would choose to leave.

Furthermore most young Brits like myself would vote to remain in

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/03/11/uk-britain-politics-europe-idUKBREA2A0TQ20140311

R.E The CTA, I heard Rabies was one of the reasons why the UK and Ireland opted out? That the UK may join when they are more convinced about border controls and disease control

Richard

View wrote: »

To clarify, the exemptions - from the Schengen commitment - exist under EU law.

You said that before. I know that.

Should the UK leave the EU any and all exemptions it has under EU law obviously disappear as they are null and void.

Well, yes the UK will no longer require exemptions.

That means the exemption for Ireland therefore depends on a condition that no longer applies under EU law.

No, the Irish exemption does not depend on the UK being a member state. It depends on the existence of the CTA, which is a bilateral agreement between two states, not governed by UK law.

Hence we are bound by the Schengen commitment like every other EU member state.

No

That is wildly improbable. Why should the other member states rewrite (and undertake the hassle and expense of ratifying) a treaty provision (Art 3.2 of the TEU) that we have already agreed to?

Not really. Given that there is an opt-out already in place, even if what you say is true, another one could be agreed. There are special arrangements for places like Gibraltar and the Canaries (part of the EU) and Kaliningrad (not part if the EU).

There are opt-outs from the Euro currency officially (UK/Denmark) and unofficially (Sweden and anyone else who choses not to meet the joining criteria such as being in EMU II).

If it came to it and Ireland supposedly had to join and didn't, what would happen? - absolutely nothing! The fact that border controls would have to established with Northern Ireland would make the Irish government doing anything to avoid it.

Why should - on principle - any member state agree to us putting an arrangement with a non-EU member state ahead of our arrangements with the EU member states?

Because they do it already?

Richard

ewan whose army wrote: »

Its pretty unlikely the UK will pull out anyway




Furthermore most young Brits like myself would vote to remain in

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/03/11/uk-britain-politics-europe-idUKBREA2A0TQ20140311

I agree. The talk of a UK withdrawal is just talk.

R.E The CTA, I heard Rabies was one of the reasons why the UK and Ireland opted out? That the UK may join when they are more convinced about border controls and disease control

I think rabies may be part if it, but no British government made up of any if the main parties would join Schengen given all the talk of immigration. Thus won't change for a long time.

realitykeeper

View wrote: »

It takes considerable time and tax-payers' money to negotiate any trade agreement. There is no pressing reason why the governments of the member states would do so.

It isn't up to the governments of the other member states to figure out what the UK wants. Neither is there any reason for them to interfere in the UK's domestic politics which is what they would be doing by putting in place contingency agreements for a potential UK's EU exit.

Irish MEPs have plenty of time and plenty of money so that`s that problem solved. To get them to do their job instead of returning to their constituency to bribe to locals is a different matter. Local constituency work by MEPs and TDs should be a criminal offence because it is bribery.

Regarding your second point, I was referring specifically to Ireland because we trade a lot with the UK, so it would be more an Irish/UK matter than an EU/UK matter.

View

Richard wrote: »

You said that before. I know that.

But you continue to believe that EU law is an optional extra nevertheless...

Richard wrote: »

Well, yes the UK will no longer require exemptions.

And, hence any exemptions that Ireland has that depends on the UK having an exemption under EU law is null and void.

Richard wrote: »

No, the Irish exemption does not depend on the UK being a member state.

Yes, it does. If there are no UK exemptions under EU law as it no longer is a member state then the legal basis the Irish exemption rests upon disappears.

Richard wrote: »

It depends on the existence of the CTA, which is a bilateral agreement between two states, not governed by UK law.

There is no bilateral agreement - a formal one that is - on the CTA. It is an informal practise dating back to the Irish Free State being a Dominion of the then British Empire. The first formal mention of it is in the EU Treaties, hence the ECJ might be called upon to pass judgement on it someday.

Richard wrote: »

Not really. Given that there is an opt-out already in place, even if what you say is true, another one could be agreed.

Lots of things could be agreed but are improbable. We could agree to allow France to discriminate against our exports so we no longer have having Free Trade access to their market but we would be very stupid to do so. Likewise, the French would be stupid to allow us to discriminate against their citizens - our fellow EU citizens - while favouring citizens of a non-EU country.

Do you really think the Assemble Nationale has nothing better to do with its time then discurss opt-outs for us? How many opt-outs on using the Euro did they agree to in the recent Eurozone crisis?

Richard wrote: »

There are special arrangements for places like Gibraltar and the Canaries (part of the EU) and Kaliningrad (not part if the EU).

There are opt-outs from the Euro currency officially (UK/Denmark) and unofficially (Sweden and anyone else who choses not to meet the joining criteria such as being in EMU II).

Most of those were in situ within the member state concerened prior to accession and were left in situ as part of the accession treaty of the member state as they were mainly internal domestic matters.

That is completely different from a member state seeking to overturn a basic goal of the EU as set out in Article 3.2 of the TEU, particularly when the proposal amounts to favouring a non-EU country over the EU member states.

Richard wrote: »

If it came to it and Ireland supposedly had to join and didn't, what would happen? - absolutely nothing! The fact that border controls would have to established with Northern Ireland would make the Irish government doing anything to avoid it.

Ever hear of the ECJ?

They are there to pass judgement on member states that breech the EU Treaties. Are you going to pay the fines for all the tax-payers here should they rule against us?

If not, then the choice we face comes down to 3 options - a) persuade the other member states to allow us to discriminate against them in favour of a non-EU state (contrary to current EU principles), b) comply with EU law and join/implement Schengen or c) refuse and when fined face following the UK out of the EU.

You may be happy with option c, most people I suspect might run option a by the other member states and then go with option b when they get a negative response.

View

realitykeeper wrote: »

Irish MEPs have plenty of time and plenty of money so that`s that problem solved.

The Commission acting on behalf of the member states is the main negotiator of EU trade agreements. The EP has collectively to also be on board but Irish MEPs aren't in any position to do "solo runs" on behalf of Ireland much less the combined EU, all the member states and the EP.

Richard wrote: »

Regarding your second point, I was referring specifically to Ireland because we trade a lot with the UK, so it would be more an Irish/UK matter than an EU/UK matter.

As I tried to explain previously, any agreements that Ireland enters into has to comply with EU law. Ireland can't cut "sweet heart" deals which bypass EU law. Hence the reason the Commission negotiates for ALL the member states and we have trade deals such as EU-Korea one.

Richard

View wrote: »

But you continue to believe that EU law is an optional extra nevertheless...

Never said that, nor do I believe that.

And, hence any exemptions that Ireland has that depends on the UK having an exemption under EU law is null and void.

No, let's look at the actual wording of the opt-out, from http://www.eurotreaties.com/amsterdamprotocols.pdf

The United Kingdom and Ireland may continue to make arrangements between themselves relating to the movement of persons between their territories (“the Common Travel Area”), while fully respecting the rights of persons referred to in Article 1, first paragraph, point a of this Protocol. Accordingly, as long as they maintain such arrangements, the provisions of Article 1 of this Protocol shall apply to Ireland under the same terms and conditions as for the United Kingdom. Nothing in Article 7a of the Treaty establishing the European Community, in any other provision of that Treaty or of the Treaty on European Union or in any measure adopted under them, shall affect any such arrangements.

As I have explained, the Irish opt-out is depndent in the existence of the CTA, not UK membership of the EU. There are other countries mentioned in the document I referred to which aren't EU members.

If what you had said is true then the document above would say something like "Acordingly, as long as they maintain such arrangements, and the United Kingdom remains a member state".

Yes, it does. If there are no UK exemptions under EU law as it no longer is a member state then the legal basis the Irish exemption rests upon disappears.

No, the Irish excemptions are based on the CTA existence.

There is no bilateral agreement - a formal one that is - on the CTA. It is an informal practise dating back to the Irish Free State being a Dominion of the then British Empire.

"Bilateral" means between two countries. I know how it came about, informally, but there is bilatal agreement for it to continue.

The first formal mention of it is in the EU Treaties, hence the ECJ might be called upon to pass judgement on it someday.

That's because it didn't have a name and needed once to be distinct from Schengen.

The UK and Ireland are participants in some aspects of Schengen, not just the one that is obvious to most people. i.e. the movement of people within the Schengen area.

Do you really think the Assemble Nationale has nothing better to do with its time then discurss opt-outs for us? How many opt-outs on using the Euro did they agree to in the recent Eurozone crisis?

If the UK left the European Union there would obviously have to be discussions about the impact of that on the remaining EU states, both individually and EU institutions as a whole. It is, after all, the third largest EU country, both by population and GDP (2012 figures). The Assemblée Nationale and, I imagine, every other member state parliament would discuss this, but a lot of the minutiae would be dealt with by civil servants.

Even if what you say about Ireland somehow being forced to join Schegen (contradicting the protocol I quoted above) is true, the situation would be covered in the UK exit negotiations. It wouldn't be dealt with separately, by the French National Assembly, or by anyone else for that matter.

Most of those were in situ within the member state concerened prior to accession and were left in situ as part of the accession treaty of the member state as they were mainly internal domestic matters.

That is completely different from a member state seeking to overturn a basic goal of the EU as set out in Article 3.2 of the TEU, particularly when the proposal amounts to favouring a non-EU country over the EU member states.

It is interning what you say about accession of states because if Ireland was a non-EU state wishing to join then under current rules it would have to join Schengen. The British government's position would be that an independent Scotland would have to do the same, although Salmond disputes this.

Ever hear of the ECJ?

They are there to pass judgement on member states that breech the EU Treaties. Are you going to pay the fines for all the tax-payers here should they rule against us?

Yes, it's the European Court of Justice. I am not currently a resident in the Republic of Ireland so won't be paying any fines on this matter, but then, neither will you.

If not, then the choice we face comes down to 3 options - a) persuade the other member states to allow us to discriminate against them in favour of a non-EU state (contrary to current EU principles), b) comply with EU law and join/implement Schengen or c) refuse and when fined face following the UK out of the EU.

You may be happy with option c, most people I suspect might run option a by the other member states and then go with option b when they get a negative response.

There's a huge amount of speculation here.

In any case, it is highly unlikely your theories (or what I have said, for that matter) will be put to the test because the UK isn't leaving the EU any time soon.

Richard

View wrote: »

As I tried to explain previously, any agreements that Ireland enters into has to comply with EU law. Ireland can't cut "sweet heart" deals which bypass EU law. Hence the reason the Commission negotiates for ALL the member states and we have trade deals such as EU-Korea one.

The quote you refer to was by realitykeeper, not me.

Scofflaw

Richard wrote:

No, let's look at the actual wording of the opt-out, from http://www.eurotreaties.com/amsterdamprotocols.pdf

The United Kingdom and Ireland may continue to make arrangements between themselves relating to the movement of persons between their territories (“the Common Travel Area”), while fully respecting the rights of persons referred to in Article 1, first paragraph, point a of this Protocol. Accordingly, as long as they maintain such arrangements, the provisions of Article 1 of this Protocol shall apply to Ireland under the same terms and conditions as for the United Kingdom. Nothing in Article 7a of the Treaty establishing the European Community, in any other provision of that Treaty or of the Treaty on European Union or in any measure adopted under them, shall affect any such arrangements.
As I have explained, the Irish opt-out is depndent in the existence of the CTA, not UK membership of the EU. There are other countries mentioned in the document I referred to which aren't EU members.

If what you had said is true then the document above would say something like "Acordingly, as long as they maintain such arrangements, and the United Kingdom remains a member state".

I'd have to agree - in particular, the wording "arrangements between themselves", and the recital at the beginning:

HAVING REGARD to the existence for many years of special travel arrangements between the United Kingdom and Ireland,

This is a legal arrangement recognising a historical situation. The historical situation of the CTA will continue to be in force even should the UK leave the EU, and the recognition of it therefore should not automatically lapse.

cordially,
Scofflaw

realitykeeper

The Scots will naturally vote for independence. The remainder of the UK will probably vote to leave the EU but the mood in England/Wales could change toward Europe if the global economy crashes or if the situation in Russia/Ukraine deteriorates. If Irish foreign trade suffered because of a UK exit and Russian counter sanctions with Europe, then Ireland would have to seek other markets for beef/dairy etc. Other EU countries and the middle East and North Africa would be needed to make up the difference. Sometimes adversity has long term benefits.

England will have big problems if the Scots cut off their oil and if the Russians cut off their gas.

View

Richard wrote: »

No, let's look at the actual wording of the opt-out, from http://www.eurotreaties.com/amsterdamprotocols.pdf

Okay, let's do so and to focus on the nub of the article you quote:

the provisions of Article 1 of this Protocol shall apply to Ireland under the same terms and conditions as for the United Kingdom

Pretty clear, isn't it?

Article 1 is the article that allows the UK to maintain border controls with the other EU member states - their "opt out" in other words - and Article 2, which you quoted, allows Ireland to apply the provisions of Article 1, right?

Only what happens should the UK leave the EU?

Clearly, as a non-member, the UK would not have to follow the EU Treaties' provisions. It would have no legal obligation to do so.

Nor, though, could it avail of the rights it has under the EU Treaties (e.g. to trade with the other member states as though it were a member state of the EU). Any, and all, such rights would be null and void.

So, also, would any, and all, exemptions or opt-outs that the UK has. Hence, a non-EU UK has no rights whatsover under the provisions of Article 1 above.

Hence, in the event of a UK exit from the EU, the quote from Article 2 boils down to:

the provisions of Article 1 - which is null and void under EU law - of this Protocol shall apply to Ireland under the same terms and conditions as for the United Kingdom - which as a non-member state has no enttitlement whatsoever under EU law to apply or avail of any provision of EU law

Or, in other words, Ireland has no right under EU law to avail of a null and void UK-related opt-out should the UK leave the EU.

Hence, under EU law, the provisons within the EU Treaties relating to the Schengen area MUST be applied by Ireland (as soon as is reasonably possible).

And, just to be clear, once the provisons of Article 1 are null and void, any attempt to re-cast the CTA in a new legal format must either: a) be compatible with our obligations under EU law (i.e. be based on Schengen which presumably the UK would not accept), or, b) receive the approval of each and every other EU member state to change the EU Treaties to allow for it (and presumably the other member states would have little sympathy for a request by us to discriminate against our fellow EU citizens (i.e. the citizens of the other member states) so we could favour the citizens of a non-EU country).

Richard

You've not really looked what I've posted, have you?

The important issues are:

The Irish opt-out is based on the CTA existence not the UK being a member state.
The UK can still be referred to in the document as other non-member states are.

It's black and white, really.

We can go round and round in circles here, but Ireland will not be forced to join Schengen, no border checks at the Irish border.

The obligation to join Schengen applies to new states, which Ireland isn't.

Scofflaw makes some good points above, too...

View wrote: »

Okay, let's do so and to focus on the nub of the article you quote:



Pretty clear, isn't it?

Article 1 is the article that allows the UK to maintain border controls with the other EU member states - their "opt out" in other words - and Article 2, which you quoted, allows Ireland to apply the provisions of Article 1, right?

Only what happens should the UK leave the EU?

Clearly, as a non-member, the UK would not have to follow the EU Treaties' provisions. It would have no legal obligation to do so.

Nor, though, could it avail of the rights it has under the EU Treaties (e.g. to trade with the other member states as though it were a member state of the EU). Any, and all, such rights would be null and void.

So, also, would any, and all, exemptions or opt-outs that the UK has. Hence, a non-EU UK has no rights whatsover under the provisions of Article 1 above.

Hence, in the event of a UK exit from the EU, the quote from Article 2 boils down to:



Or, in other words, Ireland has no right under EU law to avail of a null and void UK-related opt-out should the UK leave the EU.

Hence, under EU law, the provisons within the EU Treaties relating to the Schengen area MUST be applied by Ireland (as soon as is reasonably possible).

And, just to be clear, once the provisons of Article 1 are null and void, any attempt to re-cast the CTA in a new legal format must either: a) be compatible with our obligations under EU law (i.e. be based on Schengen which presumably the UK would not accept), or, b) receive the approval of each and every other EU member state to change the EU Treaties to allow for it (and presumably the other member states would have little sympathy for a request by us to discriminate against our fellow EU citizens (i.e. the citizens of the other member states) so we could favour the citizens of a non-EU country).

Richard

realitykeeper wrote: »

The Scots will naturally vote for independence.

The polls suggest otherwise. If they do, it will be by a small margin. Why the word "naturally"?

England will have big problems if the Scots cut off their oil and if the Russians cut off their gas.

Scotland isn't Russia, and Russia aren't big players in the UK gas market.

turnikett1

Can someone tell me what the apparent advantages are for the UK upon leaving the EU? In the eyes of those who wish to leave that is. I'm not informed on this to be honest but it seems to me that national pride and arrogant traditional Euroscepticism are what fuels this campaign, I could be completely wrong though! While I don't like the EU (as I don't most modern political institutions!), it seems to me to make more sense to just stay in the EU and enjoy all the perks they have to offer, which in Ireland's case, is quite a lot! I don't see how the EU is harming the UK. Again, I'm not read up so someone please enligthen me.

The Corinthian

turnikett1 wrote: »

Can someone tell me what the apparent advantages are for the UK upon leaving the EU? In the eyes of those who wish to leave that is.

Essentially, the only advantage would be that the UK would be able to retain final say on many laws and regulations that presently the EU regulates. Of these, labour laws have been cited in particular, with many in the UK arguing that those being legislated for by the EU are anti-competitive.

Ironically though, if you trade with the EU, you tend to have to adopt most EU regulations anyway. Quality standards are essentially non-negotiable; you have to be in sync with the EU otherwise no trade - same goes for any other trading partner, EU goods and services have to comply with US standards too to trade with them. Others, such as labour laws, are not pushed as hard, but nonetheless some still are implemented in non-EU states if they want to trade with the EU.

Beyond that, British eurosceptism (and from what I've seen, eurosceptism) is driven almost exclusively by a mixture of xenophobia and nationalism. There's the occasional claim that it's a reaction to the EU pushing a 'leftist' (read social democrat) agenda, but this doesn't really wash, as eurosceptism was already making the same noises years ago, back when the EU was more dominated by Christian democrats.

househero

The UK leaving should benefit Ireland as trading with Europe requires business to have a EU base (UK business moving here to avail of our tax rate and English speaking Euro ties)

The UK really enjoys exploiting its citizens, they are paid very badly compared to us and they only want to pay people less, give them less rights and a larger tax bill. They would be more competitive, but the cost of doing business with Europe for UK based companies would increase.

I think they see themselves as a potential tax haven if they leave, they have a long history of operating offshore territories as us tax havens and avoiding EU wide vat (CDs & Music in the 00s) and assisting the avoidance of corporation tax in the Caribbean.

The UK's economy relys heavily on financial trading, were not in to that much here so it wouldn't affect us. But Germany, France and the US would NOT be happy if the UK repositioned its self to increase its share of the market using tax leverage the US or Europe would prefer not to compete with.


If Scotland becomes independent and the UK leaves, Northern Ireland will be surrounded by European countries and a potential tax haven similar to how Hong Kong and Singapore were operated with a definitive time limit to handover back to its rightful owners. Border control with a non EU country (The north) may have to be more regulated.

tbradman

One possible item that hasn’t been mentioned...

If Britain does leave the EU and it’s still a big “if”. What happens to English as an official European Union working language? There are about 63 million UK citizens and 4.5 Irish citizens using English as a working language. If the UK leaves, that means Ireland with a population of approx 4.5 million now has two official EU working languages. Would the EU force Ireland into making a choice of only one? That could be a bit embarrassing...

FreudianSlippers

tbradman wrote: »

One possible item that hasn’t been mentioned...

If Britain does leave the EU and it’s still a big “if”. What happens to English as an official European Union working language? There are about 63 million UK citizens and 4.5 Irish citizens using English as a working language. If the UK leaves, that means Ireland with a population of approx 4.5 million now has two official EU working languages. Would the EU force Ireland into making a choice of only one? That could be a bit embarrassing...

No, both languages are 'official' as per our Constitution.

tbradman

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

No, both languages are 'official' as per our Constitution.

Sorry I think you misunderstood my question. I realise that both languages are 'official' in Ireland as per the Irish Constitution and cannot be changed by Europe. What I meant was that Ireland would be in a pretty unique position of having its two languages used as official 'working' languages in the European Parliament, Commission, etc. From the EU's point of view is this not wasteful and would the EU want Ireland to choose just one working language within the Euro Parliament?

Scofflaw

tbradman wrote: »

Sorry I think you misunderstood my question. I realise that both languages are 'official' in Ireland as per the Irish Constitution and cannot be changed by Europe. What I meant was that Ireland would be in a pretty unique position of having its two languages used as official 'working' languages in the European Parliament, Commission, etc. From the EU's point of view is this not wasteful and would the EU want Ireland to choose just one working language within the Euro Parliament?

I doubt it, since they would want an excuse to keep English - it's one of the two major lingua franca of the EU. If someone suggested knocking Ireland down to one official language, and we said "OK, we choose Irish", there would be an instant scramble to backtrack.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Empire o de Sun

View wrote: »

Under current EU law every EU member state is obliged to join Schengen except:
a) the UK which has absolute discretion on joining or not joining, and,
b) Ireland which has a conditional exception on the continuing existence of the UK-RoI CTA,

Should the UK depart the EU, UK related conditions such as a) above no longer apply in EU law, hence Ireland's conditional exception b) ceases to apply and we are then under EU law an "ordinary" EU member state obliged to join Schengen (and to avoid confusion, EU law trumps bilateral agreements with non-EU member states if those agreements do not comply fully with EU law).

If the UK leaves I don't think this will affect the CTA but customs posts will reappear on the border crossings, and flights into Ireland from the UK will be channeled through the Green/Red customs channel.
Customs will in effect kill off the CTA

petronius

Hard to see the UK leaving the EU although public opinion while a large number are EU critical in the cold light of day would vote to stay methinks.
I can not see it affecting Ireland greatly the northern unionists are eu-sceptic so they would be happy but how businesses in the North who trade in the republic may have additional bureaucracy
border patrols, or passport control back in connolly or belfast central or on the enterprise i can not see. I cant see them searching the contents of your packed lunch and sambos if your going to a GAA match
-
even if they left the UK would become members of the EEA and would have to adhere to many standards set by the EU to trade with it and not enter bilateral agreements with 25+ states.
-
I just wonder do the Republics government have a plan in the case of the UK leaving, surely they must?