Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Brexit Referendum Superthread
Options
Comments
-
This. They don't want to be in the EU. They don't want to be in the Single Market. They don't want to be in the Customs Union. They don't want to be in the EEA. They don't want a Swiss arrangement. They don't want a Turkish arrangement.. . . How is that the UK not wanting a hard Brexit?
About the only think they do want is a trade deal with the EU, which puts them in the same category as other countries currently seeking to negotiate a trade deal with the EU - the Mercosur countries (Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay, Venezuela), Indonesia, Thailand, the Phillipines, Morocco, Tunisia, one or two others.
May has definitely taken up a position very much towards the 'hard' end of the hard/soft spectrum. I don't think this comes as any great surprise; she has been signalling something like this for months. But, no question, May is not settling reluctantly for a hard Brexit because she can get no better; she is targetting a hard Brexit because that's what she wants.0 -
Peregrinus wrote: »They don't want to be in the EU. They don't want to be in the Single Market. They don't want to be in the Customs Union. They don't want to be in the EEA. They don't want a Swiss arrangement. They don't want a Turkish arrangement.
...
she is targetting a hard Brexit because that's what she wants.
Yes, and that is her opening stance in negotiations, so she will clearly settle for less to get her main goals - immigration control and out from under foreign courts.0 -
She won't have to settle for less to get those goals. If she's not looking for single market participation, she'll come under no pressure to accept ECJ jurisdiction or free movement. I suspect, in fact, that she has targetted a hard Brexit precisely because she can be confident of getting it without too much difficulty, so she will be seen to have achieved what she sought to achieve.Zubeneschamali wrote: »Yes, and that is her opening stance in negotiations, so she will clearly settle for less to get her main goals - immigration control and out from under foreign courts.
What she does want is (a) a good trade deal, with minimal/no tarrifs on as wide a range as possible of goods and services, and (b) security for UK citizens living/working in the UK. To get the latter she may have to trade reciprocal security for EU citizens living/working in the UK, but I think she's happy to do that. She may also have to put up with anti-dumping provisions that allow the EU to impose tariffs if the UK is seen to be undercutting EU producers by lowering employment or environmental standards, or providing state subsidies or state aids.
To get the former she may have to accept carve-outs in some areas, notably financial services.
She also says she wants to maintain the British/Irish Common Travel Area and, actually, that's going to be tricky, since she also wants control of immigration. Unless she's using "Common Travel Area" with some non-standard meaning, a British/Irish CTA coupled with Ireland's obligation to admit EU nationals provides an obvious back door into the UK for all EU nationals, and how does that fit with control of immigration?0 -
Ah sure , we all speak German and French loike
The U.K. Does not want a hard exit. That's clear from Mays speech m but it's negoiating position is that it will take that path if it had too. May can hardly say anything else.
Hence the best all round is a deal that minimises disruption and has as little effect as possible in Ireland. That's what we have to look for.
Being vindictive is self defeating.
May has clearly set her stall in favour of a "hardest of hard" Brexit options. She has also in her speech basically given the other member states an ultimatum to either give her what she wants or else. That of course is her personal choice, since her government is under no obligation to adopt that approach (or indeed to do anything at all).
That leaves us with the question as to how WE will respond to her ultimatum. If push absolutely comes to shove and we must make an either/or choice what will it be?
If our starting position is that we will yield because we just can't face the alternative then we may as well drop any pretence of being independent from the UK and follow the UK out of the EU.
Alternatively, if we make it absolutely clear to the UK that we will stick with the EU come what may then we put the ball right back in the Brexiters' court and THEY, not us, have to solve the issue. More importantly they also have to deal with the British public who will not be impressed when they see the Brexiters were wrong on a fundamental issue as that will raise questions about how many other issues they are wrong on.
It is only when the wind is taken out of the sails of the Brexiters that negotiated compromises become possible. Why, after all, should the UK waste its time negotiating about the border with either us or the EU if they know in advance that they can basically dictate terms to us as we will never countenance the possibility of rejecting their terms?0 -
May has simply realised that the UK has no negotiating position to get anything else but that.0
-
Advertisement
-
Zubeneschamali wrote: »Peregrinus wrote: »They don't want to be in the EU. They don't want to be in the Single Market. They don't want to be in the Customs Union. They don't want to be in the EEA. They don't want a Swiss arrangement. They don't want a Turkish arrangement.
...
she is targetting a hard Brexit because that's what she wants.
Yes, and that is her opening stance in negotiations, so she will clearly settle for less to get her main goals - immigration control and out from under foreign courts.
She doesn't have to settle for less. If the UK leaves the EU and CoE/ECHR the foreign courts issue is resolved. Likewise once outside the EU and EEA it is free to settle immigration control any way it wants as it is then an entirely domestic UK issue much as, let's say, immigration from Chile or Korea is. She and the Brexiters have the wind behind their sails and are basically going for a "burn your bridges" approach thus ensuring that any future government is presented with a fait accompli.0 -
embraer170 wrote: »May has simply realised that the UK has no negotiating position to get anything else but that.
She is a remarkably poor leader. Her speeches are flat with the delivery of a schoolboy being asked to read out his essay. I suppose that is understandable as she probably doesn't believe much of what she is saying - less than twelve months ago she was arguing for remain. Her biggest problem is that she is a charisma free zone and that matters when you are trying to lead a divided nation through its biggest crisis since WW2.0 -
I think you miss my point.
if the UK had a change of heart after article 50 , I suspect the EU 27 would agree to terminate the exit anyway.
the point is that the forces for Brexit in the UK are getting stronger, not weaker. Therefore I see no political process in the UK, that would set parliament on a collision course with the Gov. All this would do is force an election , that would return the Tories in even greater numbers, possibly with even more Brexit hardliners, ( certainly a hard line Brexit PM ) and the process would complete.
There is no evidence that the UK public are seriously regretting their decision. When they do , it will be far too late as it will be several years from now
This is my point, its all wishful thinking
Most Leavers are not prepared to be poorer for immigration control.
Only 10% would insist on immigration control if they were £100 per month poorer. How poor will they feel in two years.
This survey shows that 61% of people don't want a hard Brexit.
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/01/16/public-split-what-kind-brexit-they-think-governmen/
Yesterday, Inflation got ratched up again to 1.6%, it is agreed by almost all economists that even with the low Sterling/still in single market bonanza that the slump will begin this near.
The pro-remain Liberal Democratic party are blazing through bye/council elections to date.
May has given clarity at least. But once A50 is invoked control passes completely to the EU...and there will be a running commentary.
Her threat of a Singapore off the coast of Europe is hollow if 'no deal'.
We will see. If youre considering jumping off a cliff it's best to have a parachute. If the talks are going badly the parliament might insist on a DEAL or IN chocie. Its up to them after all NOT the government.0 -
Guys , will ceasing immigration apply to us as well who go to and from the UK to work? And will the British national insurance number no longer be available?0
-
I was beginning to lose all faith in the BBC’s reporting on all matters Brexit, but then I came across a rather illuminating piece, contrasting what Theresa May had to say on the matter pre-Referendum and what she said yesterday. Some of the more interesting snippets from last April:...the big question is whether, in the event of Brexit, we would be able to negotiate a new free trade agreement with the EU and on what terms.
…
It is not clear why other EU member states would give Britain a better deal than they themselves enjoy.
…
It is tempting to look at developing countries' economies, with their high growth rates, and see them as an alternative to trade with Europe. But just look at the reality of our trading relationship with China - with its dumping policies, protective tariffs and industrial-scale industrial espionage. And look at the figures. We export more to Ireland than we do to China, almost twice as much to Belgium as we do to India, and nearly three times as much to Sweden as we do to Brazil. It is not realistic to think we could just replace European trade with these new markets.
…
And while we could certainly negotiate our own trade agreements, there would be no guarantee that they would be on terms as good as those we enjoy now.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-386536810 -
Advertisement
-
Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,812 CMod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 36671
Guys , will ceasing immigration apply to us as well who go to and from the UK to work? And will the British national insurance number no longer be available?
I'd say wait and see. It's unlikely the UK government will want to change it's special relationship with Ireland. Even with the North aside, it's too minor an issue to have any real political impetus.The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.
Leviticus 19:34
0 -
Not really. First of all, we’re not nearly as heavily dependent on the UK for trade as people seem to think we are and secondly, it’s very likely that a significant amount of UK business will relocate to Ireland post-Brexit.Seriously it's Ireland that's fu€ked by Brexit not the uk...
Even though Ireland is part of an economic bloc that is far larger than the UK? That doesn’t make any sense?The U.K. Is of sufficant size ecomonically to at least make a fair stab at it and the U.K. Is at its best when it feels it's the underdog.
We on the other hand have far more to loose economically and culturally
Some of us do, but fortunately, a lot of people in Europe speak English - language has never been much of a barrier within the EU.Ah sure , we all speak German and French loike
What speech were you listening to?The U.K. Does not want a hard exit. That's clear from Mays speech......while I am sure a positive agreement can be reached - I am equally clear that no deal for Britain is better than a bad deal for Britain.0 -
But they've been told they're all going to be substantially better off outside the EU in the all-new, all-singing, all-dancing, Frosties-sponsored GRRRRRREAT Britain.Most Leavers are not prepared to be poorer for immigration control.
They're not prepared to be poorer because anyone who suggested anyone was going to be worse off as a result of Brexit was dismissed as a fear-mongerer, so the idea that restricting immigration could somehow have negative consequences is unlikely to have occurred to a lot of people.
Remember, Johnny Foreigner, because he's from Czechoslovania, or wherever, is really poor, lives on air and water and lives in a flat with 27 of his mates and can therefore afford to steal jobs from good, honest, British workers by undercutting them. So how could getting rid of Johnny make us poorer?0 -
Guys , will ceasing immigration apply to us as well who go to and from the UK to work? And will the British national insurance number no longer be available?
No one has a clue.
It is hard to see how it would be politically defensible to restrict the negligible number of Austrians or Slovenians that immigrate to the UK every year while allowing the much larger number of Irish immigrants - overall the second highest number of EU immigrants - to have unrestricted access to the UK.
Also, remember for us in Ireland, under the EU (and EEA) Treaties we must continue to give our fellow EU (and EEA) citizens priority over non-EU citizens. Hence, if the UK insists on going out of both the EU and the EEA, then we must subject UK citizens to immigration control/work visas just as we do for any other non-EU country. Therefore, it is difficult to see a situation in future where we would have open access to their country while we restrict their access to ours.0 -
Are British citizens aliens in Irish law? I thought they were not, as we are not aliens in the UK.No one has a clue.
It is hard to see how it would be politically defensible to restrict the negligible number of Austrians or Slovenians that immigrate to the UK every year while allowing the much larger number of Irish immigrants - overall the second highest number of EU immigrants - to have unrestricted access to the UK.
Also, remember for us in Ireland, under the EU (and EEA) Treaties we must continue to give our fellow EU (and EEA) citizens priority over non-EU citizens. Hence, if the UK insists on going out of both the EU and the EEA, then we must subject UK citizens to immigration control/work visas just as we do for any other non-EU country. Therefore, it is difficult to see a situation in future where we would have open access to their country while we restrict their access to ours.0 -
In what way do you believe that the Lib Dems are blazing a trail? They took Zac Goldsmiths seat but the Conservatives retained the other two by elections they fought. The council elections were held last May before the referendum. I suppose that there may have been some borough and town council elections since but nothing major.
The pro-remain Liberal Democratic party are blazing through bye/council elections to date.
.0 -
-
I find it hard to understand why May engaged in any threats to the EU at all. She has a very weak hand. 44% of UK exports go to the EU. 53% of its imports come from the EU. As little as 8% of EU exports go to the UK. As May herself pointed out less than a year ago, for all the talk about a global trading nation the UK does more business with Ireland and Belgium than it does with China and India respectively. If the UK tries to throw down ultimatums and is forced to back them up in a trade war, the EU will catch a sniffle. The UK will die from pneumonia. Even voicing the idea of a conflict will just encourage people to invest and create jobs in the EU market with 450 million consumers over the UK with its 60 or so.
And as for the threat to cut the EU off from the City of London...eh, the only hope for keeping the City of London afloat is ensuring it is open to EU business. The City is just a marketplace - if it tries to cut off the borrowers from the lenders, they'll just find a new market place, likely in Paris or Frankfurt.
In that environment, when the UK is so much counting on the kindness of the EU threats are just incredibly counter-productive. Almost as if designed to irritate the EU. I understand May is having to represent a position she does not agree with, but she is doing a very poor job of it with an almost entirely parochial, insular perspective. Her speech was designed to appease the inane UK media, mission accomplished, but it drew a much cooler response from the EU media and leadership whose goodwill the UK is so dependent on now.0 -
'No deal is better than a bad deal' she says.0
-
J Mysterio wrote: »'No deal is better than a bad deal' she says.
Talk is cheap. Quite literally. "No deal" wont sound so great between her own ears coming into the next election if the economy and/or electorate's employment prospects have taken a thumping. Assuming of course that she survives in office that long.
Theresa May Maggie's final horcrux has been described by a couple of different high-ranking civil servants (diplomats and the like) as being lacking in any sort of imagination. Parochial if you will, and unable to look beyond her own shoes, never mind try to place herself in the other guy's shoes to gauge what they must be thinking of her position. She's not up to the job and is woefully out of her depth, backed in to a corner and brow-beaten by a small circle of fanatics. It also shows she has absolutely no political spine and will bend whatever way is most convenient for her at any given moment in time.0 -
Advertisement
-
If any quote from this debacle will live with me for the rest of my days, it was the utterly reckless and contemptible outburst from Michael Gove that "the people of this country are sick of experts". Everytime I hear that awful quote, my heart sinks at the thought that the long course of human development and progress has culminated in an academically distinguished graduate of Oxford telling the working men and women of Britain that intellectuals and experts were effectively the enemy -- purely by virtue of the fact that these experts fail to predict absolutely everything and fail to legislate against every possible negative churn of the waves of fate and fortune. It was, in my view, one of the most nauseatingly insincere, ambition-driven statements I have ever heard from a mainstream politician.
It is a sad indictment on the wisdom of the (older) British public that, months AFTER it voted to leave the EU, no solid plan is yet even close to being formulated never mind solidified. And yet they voted to instigate an almost impossibly complex divorce from the EU with absolutely no concept of the plan. They now turn to the experts who they were convinced to hate, and the 'elites' that apparently were the source of all evil, to oversee the process of Brexit. The desired goal of the Brexit-supporting voter? A 'return' to some sort of nostalgic postcard vision of a utopian Britain which never existed; a Canute-like stance against the irrepressible tide of change.
May's ultimate plan remains a mystery to us. She is intelligent and capable -- and will be as acutely aware of the irrationality which forms the basis of the Brexit vote as anyone here is. The question remains as to whether she will do what she knows to be the smart thing -- that is, drag out the negotiations and sap the political will of the British public to see Brexit through to the end, winning some poxy token concessions on issues like immigration to convince the average Brexit-voter that something had been won. The other route is that she genuinely means that 'Brexit means Brexit', and she blindly and recklessly oversees the fracturing of the EU based on a misplaced sense of duty to a decision made by a people who were shamefully conned.0 -
May has said that she wants to keep the common travel area which means no movement control at all between the UK and Ireland. At this stage it's hard to see how she can reconcile that with her other objective of exercising control over migration into Britain in a way not permitted to member states of the EU, but let that pass. The point is that it strongly suggests that she has no desire to control or limit migration from Ireland, at any rate, whatever about migration from other member states.Guys , will ceasing immigration apply to us as well who go to and from the UK to work?
It's a huge issue - not internationally, but domestically. There are millions of Irish citizens who live in the UK and vote in UK elections, and no British government will want to piss them off. But all the political incentives are to retain the special status of Ireland and Irish citizens, not to change it.ancapailldorcha wrote: »I'd say wait and see. It's unlikely the UK government will want to change it's special relationship with Ireland. Even with the North aside, it's too minor an issue to have any real political impetus.
I don't think the UK government would have any difficulty at all about defending that. I don't detect any sentiment in the UK that wants to restrict or limit the rights/status of Irish people in the UK. And the whole point of leaving the EU is to avoid the EU obligation not to discrminate between EU citizens, so in treating Irish citizens differntly from, say, Austrian or Slovenian citizens the UK would be doing exactly what everyone expects it to do. I can't see the EU getting all huffy about that; why would they?It is hard to see how it would be politically defensible to restrict the negligible number of Austrians or Slovenians that immigrate to the UK every year while allowing the much larger number of Irish immigrants - overall the second highest number of EU immigrants - to have unrestricted access to the UK.
No. we don't have to prioritise EU/EEA citizens over others. We have to treat EU/EEA citizens in the say way we treat our own citizens, but we are free also to accord that status to third-country citizens as well, if we choose.Also, remember for us in Ireland, under the EU (and EEA) Treaties we must continue to give our fellow EU (and EEA) citizens priority over non-EU citizens. Hence, if the UK insists on going out of both the EU and the EEA, then we must subject UK citizens to immigration control/work visas just as we do for any other non-EU country. Therefore, it is difficult to see a situation in future where we would have open access to their country while we restrict their access to ours.
It's no longer relevant, now that Norway and Iceland are in the EEA and Sweden and Finland are in the EU, but in the past when Denmark was in the EU and also in the Nordic Council, citizens of the Nordic States had the same
rights of entry, etc, into Denmark as EU citizens had. It wasn't a problem.
This would change if Ireland joined the Schengen zone; we would then have to have common migration policies with other Schengen countries, and we'd have to treat UK citizens accordingly. But we'll want to stay outside the Schengen zone if, by doing so, we can maintain the common travel area with the UK, and I think the EU will be onside with that.0 -
There is some confusion of thinking here.
U.K. Residents in Ireland have a status virtually identical to native Irish. For example they cannot be deported. Yet EU citizens can. Paradoxically Irish in the uk can be deported but the uk has not exercised that party of the law
I fully expect that existing residents in the uk and EU will be " grandfathered in" but I suspect that Ireland will not be treated any differently after uk exit to any other EU nationals and we will be subject to the same immigration rules. ( ie to new immigrants )
The " boat to England " will in all likihood become a thing of the past.
The fact remains , if a hard exit , which now looks increasing likely occurs. It's Ireland that will suffer out of all proportion0 -
Peregrinus wrote: »This. They don't want to be in the EU. They don't want to be in the Single Market. They don't want to be in the Customs Union. They don't want to be in the EEA. They don't want a Swiss arrangement. They don't want a Turkish arrangement.
About the only think they do want is a trade deal with the EU, which puts them in the same category as other countries currently seeking to negotiate a trade deal with the EU - the Mercosur countries (Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay, Venezuela), Indonesia, Thailand, the Phillipines, Morocco, Tunisia, one or two others.
May has definitely taken up a position very much towards the 'hard' end of the hard/soft spectrum. I don't think this comes as any great surprise; she has been signalling something like this for months. But, no question, May is not settling reluctantly for a hard Brexit because she can get no better; she is targetting a hard Brexit because that's what she wants.
While I wouldn't have agreed with you some months ago. I now fully agree with what you say, may is pushing a hard exit
The only interesting aspect is whether the SNP has the cohones to push for another independence within the two year time frame. My personal guess is not.0 -
Peregrinus wrote: »This. They don't want to be in the EU. They don't want to be in the Single Market. They don't want to be in the Customs Union. They don't want to be in the EEA. They don't want a Swiss arrangement. They don't want a Turkish arrangement.
About the only think they do want is a trade deal with the EU, which puts them in the same category as other countries currently seeking to negotiate a trade deal with the EU - the Mercosur countries (Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay, Venezuela), Indonesia, Thailand, the Phillipines, Morocco, Tunisia, one or two others.
May has definitely taken up a position very much towards the 'hard' end of the hard/soft spectrum. I don't think this comes as any great surprise; she has been signalling something like this for months. But, no question, May is not settling reluctantly for a hard Brexit because she can get no better; she is targetting a hard Brexit because that's what she wants.Peregrinus wrote: »She won't have to settle for less to get those goals. If she's not looking for single market participation, she'll come under no pressure to accept ECJ jurisdiction or free movement. I suspect, in fact, that she has targetted a hard Brexit precisely because she can be confident of getting it without too much difficulty, so she will be seen to have achieved what she sought to achieve.
What she does want is (a) a good trade deal, with minimal/no tarrifs on as wide a range as possible of goods and services, and (b) security for UK citizens living/working in the UK. To get the latter she may have to trade reciprocal security for EU citizens living/working in the UK, but I think she's happy to do that. She may also have to put up with anti-dumping provisions that allow the EU to impose tariffs if the UK is seen to be undercutting EU producers by lowering employment or environmental standards, or providing state subsidies or state aids.
To get the former she may have to accept carve-outs in some areas, notably financial services.
She also says she wants to maintain the British/Irish Common Travel Area and, actually, that's going to be tricky, since she also wants control of immigration. Unless she's using "Common Travel Area" with some non-standard meaning, a British/Irish CTA coupled with Ireland's obligation to admit EU nationals provides an obvious back door into the UK for all EU nationals, and how does that fit with control of immigration?
The maintenance ( or the offer of maintenance ) of the CTA from the uk perspective is an easy offer to make , as the problems all lie with the Irish side. In the end it's ultimately Ireland that will be forced to end the CTA not the British.0 -
That's not what May is saying. She has said, in as many words, that she wants to maintain the Common Travel Area with the Republic of Ireland.There is some confusion of thinking here.
U.K. Residents in Ireland have a status virtually identical to native Irish. For example they cannot be deported. Yet EU citizens can. Paradoxically Irish in the uk can be deported but the uk has not exercised that party of the law
I fully expect that existing residents in the uk and EU will be " grandfathered in" but I suspect that Ireland will not be treated any differently after uk exit to any other EU nationals and we will be subject to the same immigration rules. ( ie to new immigrants )
The " boat to England " will in all likihood become a thing of the past.
The fact remains , if a hard exit , which now looks increasing likely occurs. It's Ireland that will suffer out of all proportion
The special status of Irish citizens in the UK predates UK membership of the EU - it's set out in the Ireland Act 1949. Obviously, in the post-Brexit reconfiguration of the UK's relationships with the rest of the world everything is up for review, including this. But none of the rhetoric from either Brexiters or remainers during the campaign suggested any change in the Ireland Act, I don't observe any political support for change from even the most xenophobic of Brexiters and beyond-Brexiters, and the UK government will not want to do anything to disturb the NI settlement that Brexit does not absolutely require to be done. Plus, of course, there are several million votes in Great Britain exercised by people who enjoy the protection of the Ireland Act; no UK government will want to alienate them.
So I confidently predict that when the dust has settled Irish citizens in the UK will continue to enjoy the status provided by the Ireland Act 1949. Nobody wants to change this, and it's in nobody's interests to change it.0 -
ArthurDayne wrote: »If any quote from this debacle will live with me for the rest of my days, it was the utterly reckless and contemptible outburst from Michael Gove that "the people of this country are sick of experts". Everytime I hear that awful quote, my heart sinks at the thought that the long course of human development and progress has culminated in an academically distinguished graduate of Oxford telling the working men and women of Britain that intellectuals and experts were effectively the enemy -- purely by virtue of the fact that these experts fail to predict absolutely everything and fail to legislate against every possible negative churn of the waves of fate and fortune. It was, in my view, one of the most nauseatingly insincere, ambition-driven statements I have ever heard from a mainstream politician.
It is a sad indictment on the wisdom of the (older) British public that, months AFTER it voted to leave the EU, no solid plan is yet even close to being formulated never mind solidified. And yet they voted to instigate an almost impossibly complex divorce from the EU with absolutely no concept of the plan. They now turn to the experts who they were convinced to hate, and the 'elites' that apparently were the source of all evil, to oversee the process of Brexit. The desired goal of the Brexit-supporting voter? A 'return' to some sort of nostalgic postcard vision of a utopian Britain which never existed; a Canute-like stance against the irrepressible tide of change.
May's ultimate plan remains a mystery to us. She is intelligent and capable -- and will be as acutely aware of the irrationality which forms the basis of the Brexit vote as anyone here is. The question remains as to whether she will do what she knows to be the smart thing -- that is, drag out the negotiations and sap the political will of the British public to see Brexit through to the end, winning some poxy token concessions on issues like immigration to convince the average Brexit-voter that something had been won. The other route is that she genuinely means that 'Brexit means Brexit', and she blindly and recklessly oversees the fracturing of the EU based on a misplaced sense of duty to a decision made by a people who were shamefully conned.
I'm afraid you are entirely wrong here. Mays plan is abundantly clear , she doesn't actually really want or need anything from the EU. The U.K. Is going it alone.
Negotiations will be short , the U.K. Is in reality asking for nothing, other then no additional tariffs. Once the single market idea has been rejected the UK has in effect removed itself from the discussions with the EU.
The other thing is " the Eu isn't fracturing " , just one country is leaving.
The sad fact is , all the pain , and it will be horrendous , will fall on Ireland , it's actually we who will be pleading with the EU for special treatment to mitigate the effects. What then our tax rates eh ? It's a perfect storm for Ireland , a hard border on the island , hugely increased bureaucracy higher costs , difficult market in the uk to access etc etc ,0 -
Peregrinus wrote: »That's not what May is saying. She has said, in as many words, that she wants to maintain the Common Travel Area with the Republic of Ireland.
The special status of Irish citizens in the UK predates UK membership of the EU - it's set out in the Ireland Act 1949. Obviously, in the post-Brexit reconfiguration of the UK's relationships with the rest of the world everything is up for review, including this. But none of the rhetoric from either Brexiters or remainers during the campaign suggested any change in the Ireland Act, I don't observe any political support for change from even the most xenophobic of Brexiters and beyond-Brexiters, and the UK government will not want to do anything to disturb the NI settlement that Brexit does not absolutely require to be done. Plus, of course, there are several million votes in Great Britain exercised by people who enjoy the protection of the Ireland Act; no UK government will want to alienate them.
So I confidently predict that when the dust has settled Irish citizens in the UK will continue to enjoy the status provided by the Ireland Act 1949. Nobody wants to change this, and it's in nobody's interests to change it.
you fail to read what I wrote. I fully beleive reciprcial rights for existing residents will be maintained. They will be grandfathered in ( that's the term ) as will uk residents in the eu.
It's new Irish migration that will be subject to EU nationals uk immigration policy. That will bring " the boat to England " to an end. I do not see the automatic right for Irish citizens to enter and settle in the uk without being subject to immigration control , surviving Brexit0 -
ined the Schengen zone; we would then have to have common migration policies with other Schengen countries, and we'd have to treat UK citizens accordingly. But we'll want to stay outside the Schengen zone if, by doing so, we can maintain the common travel area with the UK, and I think the EU will be onside with that.
The issue for the uk will be , given that Ireland has a land border with the U.K. , and Ireland will be unable to limit EU nationals access to Ireland , how does the uk prevent Ireland from being used as a back door. For eu migration
Therefore , unlike today , the U.K. will have to implement an immigration check on all travellers entring the UK ( and from the ROI to NI ) to seperate Irish citizens from EU citizens. ( paradoxically , since Mary harneys signing into law of the immigration control bill , we do exactly that to uk citizens arriving here )
At that point the CTA is dead from the point of view of any objective analysis. It's doubly dead where the uk enforced it's EU national migration policy on ALL eu citizens equally.0 -
Advertisement
-
I understand that's what you're saying. I just don't see why you're saying it. For the reasons I have already given, I don't see things unfolding this way. You do, but I don't know why (because you don't say why).you fail to read what I wrote. I fully beleive reciprcial rights for existing residents will be maintained. They will be grandfathered in ( that's the term ) as will uk residents in the eu.
It's new Irish migration that will be subject to EU nationals uk immigration policy. That will bring " the boat to England " to an end. I do not see the automatic right for Irish citizens to enter and settle in the uk without being subject to immigration control , surviving Brexit0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement