Crossing the Border in the event of Brexit: Whats gonna happen?

Charles Babbage

First Up wrote: »

That has already been discussed. Whatever about closer control of travel between the Republic and Britain, border controls between NI and Britain would be about as hot a political potato as you could think of. Would any British government give a higher priority to internal travel within Ireland than internal travel within the UK?

If you mean checking people then there is no point checking them at the border, as they would not be on the main roads, but every point checking them at GB ports and airports.

It isn't rocket science, impose controls at Stranraer then people would whine, impose checks at the border and people would shoot at you. Sticks and stones and all that.

First Up

First Up wrote: »

That has already been discussed. Whatever about closer control of travel between the Republic and Britain, border controls between NI and Britain would be about as hot a political potato as you could think of. Would any British government give a higher priority to internal travel within Ireland than internal travel within the UK?

It's not about the British government giving higher priority to 'internal travel within Ireland', its about the practality & logistics associated with screening travel between the 2 islands.

Consonata

Fred Swanson wrote:

Finland and Poland operate a border zone arrangement with Russia. Russian citizens are allowed to cross the border but cannot go more than 50km from the border.

That's basically making Donegal part of the UK haha

Charles Babbage

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

An equivalent concept would be for any person with a valid Irish visa to be allowed an incidental visit to NI, but not to go to GB.

They can't really be stopped and NI is not a major target for someone legally entitled to be in the 26 counties, so why not just allow it?

First Up

Deleted User wrote:

It's not about the British government giving higher priority to 'internal travel within Ireland', its about the practality & logistics associated with screening travel between the 2 islands.

But that is how it would be interpreted and portrayed politically.

Dravokivich

CelticRambler wrote: »

Last time I checked (I can almost see it from where I am at the moment) Calais was in France, and there are many thousands of non-EU citizens waiting there in the hope of getting to the UK. What incentive will there be for the French to keep them in the EU if they want to get to a country that's no longer part of it?

Well to be honest, it's been presented on TV that the French had a habit of passing the buck onto any other country a migrant displayed intent on getting to. It gets mentioned quite a lot on those Border shows on Sky Living, so much so that the UK have presence in French ports such as Calais and can refuse entry at the port before someone even got onto a boat.

Deleted User wrote: »

It's not about the British government giving higher priority to 'internal travel within Ireland', its about the practality & logistics associated with screening travel between the 2 islands.

That already happens, although on a minimal level. Fly into Stanstead and you've to show your passport. Get the boat to Holy Head and you've to pass through Customs. They filter out people passed on their Passports / Identifications.

First Up

First Up wrote: »

But that is how it would be interpreted and portrayed politically.

From the unionist perspective maybe. But what about the nationalist viewpoint? We dogmatically follow the script and return the border to the state it was in the bad old days of the troubles and the pre single European market era with customs, police checkpoints etc. Pure manna from heaven politically for the dissidents I feel. Plus what about the expense of doing all this? I as a taxpayer would object to the increased costs it would bring. If its going to be an 'external EU frontier' let the EU as a whole contribute to the cost.

Originally posted by Dravokivich: That already happens, although on a minimal level. Fly into Stanstead and you've to show your passport. Get the boat to Holy Head and you've to pass through Customs. They filter out people passed on their Passports / Identifications.

Personally its the option I would put on a more formal basis if Brexit happens.

Dodge

Dravokivich wrote: »

It gets mentioned quite a lot on those Border shows on Sky Living

As a general rule, don't let Sky Living be your primary source of information.

LXFlyer

Dravokivich wrote: »

That already happens, although on a minimal level. Fly into Stanstead and you've to show your passport. Get the boat to Holy Head and you've to pass through Customs. They filter out people passed on their Passports / Identifications.

Passport checks by UK Border Force on ROI - UK flights and ferries tend to be only on a spot check basis rather than every flight - it's to check for non-Irish/UK citizens who may not have a visa.

Airlines may check but that's up to them.

Travelling into the UK from ROI on flights and ferries passengers have always been subject to passing through customs, although I have yet to see a check being performed on any flight I've taken!

CelticRambler

Dravokivich wrote: »

Well to be honest, it's been presented on TV that the French had a habit of passing the buck onto any other country a migrant displayed intent on getting to. It gets mentioned quite a lot on those Border shows on Sky Living, so much so that the UK have presence in French ports such as Calais and can refuse entry at the port before someone even got onto a boat.

They're still the legitimate crossing points though, and the French have a small patch of territory in Folkestone for the same reason. It's the French (and only the French) that guard the coastline and stop people getting into their own boats and sailing to Britain. It's illegal even to try to swim across the Channel from France to the UK for charity (which is why those trips are always done in the opposite direction).

In the last six months, the French have been asking the UK to foot the ever-increasing bill for keeping non-EU migrants from moving to another EU country. Post-Brexit, there'd be no logical reason for the French to continue pouring their resources into stopping non-EU migrants from leaving the EU.

Vic_08

Deleted User wrote: »

Plus what about the expense of doing all this? I as a taxpayer would object to the increased costs it would bring. If its going to be an 'external EU frontier' let the EU as a whole contribute to the cost.

You should know by know that as an Irish taxpayer you are just expected to bend over and take it no matter what.

Will the Mexicans pay for Trump's wall? Like fuk they will. Will the Irish pay for Boris' border? Of course, sure paying for everyone's mistakes without kicking up about it is what we're good at.

First Up

Deleted User wrote:

From the unionist perspective maybe. But what about the nationalist viewpoint? We dogmatically follow the script and return the border to the state it was in the bad old days of the troubles and the pre single European market era with customs, police checkpoints etc. Pure manna from heaven politically for the dissidents I feel. Plus what about the expense of doing all this? I as a taxpayer would object to the increased costs it would bring. If its going to be an 'external EU frontier' let the EU as a whole contribute to the cost.

The "nationalist" viewpoint that matters on this is the British one. If Brexit goes through, the mood in the UK will be to pull up the drawbridge. Similarly the EU mood will be to let them stew.

There has to be EU customs procedures for goods entering the republic. That means a border.

In that environment and that political reality, I see zero chance of the UK imposing an internal border to convenience Ireland or the rest of the EU.

First Up

Vic_08 wrote:

You should know by know that as an Irish taxpayer you are just expected to bend over and take it no matter what.

Ever hear of the External Borders Fund?

No, I expect you haven't. But don't let ignorance slow you down.

First Up

First Up wrote: »

Ever hear of the External Borders Fund?

No, I expect you haven't. But don't let ignorance slow you down.

Appears to be for Schengen countries only. Do you expect Ireland to join Schengen?

http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/financing/fundings/migration-asylum-borders/external-borders-fund/index_en.htm

n97 mini

Charles Babbage wrote: »

On the contrary your post is ridiculous. Even in the troubles when there were thousands of troops it was pretty easy for people to come and go and indeed truck loads of explosives in many cases. It is questionable whether Britain wishes to deploy thousands of troops again, which wouldn't work anyway and would lead to the entire peace settlement failing apart, when a few dozen inspectors in GB could do the job better. There isn't a huge number of EU immigrants trying to get to NI.

Who said anything about re-deploying the British Army. That's nonsense. Re "EU immigrants" trying to get to NI, without wanting to spell it out for you, NI is usually not the destination, but it is used as an easy way to access ROI from GB and vice versa.

First Up

Deleted User wrote: »

Appears to be for Schengen countries only. Do you expect Ireland to join Schengen?

http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/financing/fundings/migration-asylum-borders/external-borders-fund/index_en.htm

It applies to all EU external borders. Its primary stated purpose is to protect the integrity of Schengen (which we might well join after a Brexit) but if Ireland had an external border running through it, we would not have to burden the cost on our own.

GM228

First Up wrote: »

Ever hear of the External Borders Fund?

It's irrelevant, the External Borders Funed (EBF) ceased in 2013! It was replaced by the Internal Security Fund-Borders and Visa (ISF).

First Up wrote: »

It applies to all EU external borders. Its primary stated purpose is to protect the integrity of Schengen (which we might well join after a Brexit) but if Ireland had an external border running through it, we would not have to burden the cost on our own.

Ireland and the UK do not participate in the ISF which replaced the EBF, so the ISF is also irrelevant.

First Up

GM228 wrote:

Ireland and the UK do not participate in the ISF which replaced the EBF, so the ISF is also irrelevant.

Not at the moment. We are talking about a post Brexit scenario - remember?

GM228

First Up wrote: »

Not at the moment. We are talking about a post Brexit scenario - remember?

Post Brexit it still won't apply unless Ireland become part of Schengen.

First Up

First Up wrote: »

the integrity of Schengen (which we might well join after a Brexit).

So having to show passports every time we wanted to go to Newry akin to something like going from Poland to Kaliningrad. Are you aware of the unhappy history of the border in Ireland?

First Up

GM228 wrote:

Post Brexit it still won't apply unless Ireland become part of Schengen.

It has nothing to do with Schengen. If the EU border runs through Ireland the EU will provide resources as they do with all external borders.

First Up

First Up wrote: »

It has nothing to do with Schengen. If the EU border runs through Ireland the EU will provide resources as they do with all external borders.

How? As GM228 states, we are not currently part of this arrangement.

GM228

First Up wrote: »

It has nothing to do with Schengen. If the EU border runs through Ireland the EU will provide resources as they do with all external borders.

But currently all EU border and immigration funds and directives apply to Schengen only so it won't automatically apply unless the EU changes it's directives and the funds can't apply to Ireland unless we join Schengen and the current scheme is in place for several more years until 2020.

First Up

GM228 wrote:

But currently all EU border and immigration funds and directives apply to Schengen only so it won't automatically apply unless the EU changes it's directives and the funds can't apply to Ireland unless we join Schengen and the current scheme is in place for several more years until 2020.

All EU states with land external borders benefit from the fund. The only reason Ireland and UK don't is because they are islands.

If/when we do have an external land border, we will avail of it.

First Up

Deleted User wrote:

So having to show passports every time we wanted to go to Newry akin to something like going from Poland to Kaliningrad. Are you aware of the unhappy history of the border in Ireland?

Not sure why you are taking me to task over it. The EU is not the party that would re-instate the border nor am I advocating Brexit.

First Up

First Up wrote: »

Not sure why you are taking me to task over it. The EU is not the party that would re-instate the border nor am I advocating Brexit.

Why do you want Ireland to join Schengen in the event of a Brexit?

First Up

Deleted User wrote:

Why do you want Ireland to join Schengen in the event of a Brexit?

I haven't said I do but if we have to have a hard border with the UK then we might as well make it easier to travel within the EU.

First Up

First Up wrote: »

I haven't said I do but if we have to have a hard border with the UK then we might as well make it easier to travel within the EU.

I think more people here would desire the same ease of travel to NI & GB as they have now tbh.

First Up

Deleted User wrote:

I think more people here would desire the same ease of travel to NI & GB as they have now tbh.

We all would and the simplest way to get it is for the UK to stay in the EU. But if they decide to leave, we have to make the best of the consequences.

KingBrian2

First Up wrote: »

We all would and the simplest way to get it is for the UK to stay in the EU. But if they decide to leave, we have to make the best of the consequences.

Seems like a sensible course of action.

GM228

First Up wrote: »

All EU states with land external borders benefit from the fund.

No they don't - Ireland and the UK already have external land borders and we don't benefit from the fund. All Schengen states benefit from the fund not all EU states.

First Up wrote: »

If/when we do have an external land border, we will avail of it.

We already do, and no we don't and can't benefit from the fund even post Brexit.

The funds and the regulations concerning borders apply to borders with EU and non EU territories, not just non EU territories.

You do realise that Ireland already has external borders via our massive sea border with the unclaimed part of the North Atlantic Ocean (non-EU) so why aren't we availing of the fund?

The UK also has internal and external land borders with Ireland, France, Belgium, The Netherlands, Germany, Denmark, Norway and the Faroe Islands and North Atlantic Ocean (both non-EU), so again why aren't they availing of the fund at the moment?

Ireland and the UK don't avail of the fund because they can't.

EU Regulation 515/2014 which set up the ISF - Borders and Visa fund is not applicable to Ireland under Article 50 of the regulation. (The fund is not applicable to the UK under article 49).

(50)

This Regulation constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis in which Ireland does not take part, in accordance with Council Decision 2002/192/EC (21). Ireland is therefore not taking part in its adoption and is not bound by it or subject to its application

Their is no all EU border fund as such, just the ISF border fund which is a Schengen area border fund not a whole of the EU area fund, Ireland can't benefit from a fund which dosn't apply to it, which it has opted out of and hasn't contributed to.

Do you honestly think other Schengen members would be happy with Ireland gaining benefit from a fund it isn't entitled to, dosn't recognise and has never contributed to?

The Amsterdam Treaty incorporated Schengen rules into EU law and Ireland and the UK opted out of this making any Schengen rules non applicable to us.

External borders in the EU are governed via EU Regulation 562/2006 (AKA the Shengen Borders Code), again as Ireland (and the UK) is not bound by any Schengen rules following it's opt out of that section of the Amsterdam Treaty the Shengen Borders Code does not apply to Ireland under regulation 28 of the regulation and still won't post Brexit.

SUMMARY

This regulation applies to any person crossing the external borders of all EU countries, except those of the United Kingdom and Ireland, and the internal borders of the Schengen area (a border-free area comprising 22 EU countries, along with Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland).

(28)

This Regulation constitutes a development of provisions of the Schengen acquis in which Ireland does not take part, in accordance with Council Decision 2002/192/EC of 28 February 2002 concerning Ireland's request to take part in some of the provisions of the Schengen acquis (14). Ireland is therefore not taking part in its adoption and is not bound by it or subject to its application.

It's also worth noting that one of the main aims of the various borders funds and directives is to "achieve a uniform and high level of control of the external borders by supporting integrated borders management, harmonising border management measures within the Union and sharing information among EU States, and between EU States and Frontex, in order to halt irregular migration and ensure the smooth crossing of the external borders", but even Frontex which provides cooperation in relation to the management of external borders of the EU doesn't apply to Ireland or the UK either.

EU Regulation 2007/2004 created Frontex (European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union), the agency which is responsible for and provides for the cooperation of external borders between EU states, but just like all other border regulations, funds and agencies it's not applicable to non Schengen states!

(26)

This Regulation constitutes a development of provisions of the Schengen acquis in which Ireland does not take part, in accordance with Council Decision 2002/192/EC of 28 February 2002 concerning Ireland’s request to take part in some of the provisions of the Schengen acquis (9). Ireland is therefore not taking part in its adoption and is not bound by it or subject to its application.

First Up wrote: »

The only reason Ireland and UK don't is because they are islands.

No the only reasons why Ireland and the UK don't is because they didn't sign the Schengen Agreement, are not under the Borders Code, not part of the ISF Fund and not involved with Frontex - not because they are islands.

Iceland, Malta and other territorial islands such as Corsica, Palma, Azores, Madeira, The Balearic Islands, The Canary Islands, Ceutu and Melila, are all "islands" which can benefit from the funds and come under the border directives and Frontex. And some of them also have external sea borders, why are they different? Because they are part of Shengen.


Border protection like nearly everything else Brexit related is a big unknown, to say it will apply is totally incorrect because as it stands it can't unless the EU change directives or Ireland opts in to Schengen as all border protections, funds, immigration policies and directives are currently based entirety on the Schengen area and not the actual EU.

It's fair to say the EU might and probably will deal with it (but then again they might not) or Ireland might opt in, but until we cross that bridge if it comes to it it remains an unknown and nothing is certain bar the fact that if the EU do nothing and Ireland don't opt in it certainly can't apply to Ireland.

First Up

GM228 wrote: »

No they don't - Ireland and the UK already have external land borders and we don't benefit from the fund. All Schengen states benefit from the fund not all EU states.



We already do, and no we don't and can't benefit from the fund even post Brexit.

The funds and the regulations concerning borders apply to borders with EU and non EU territories, not just non EU territories.

You do realise that Ireland already has external borders via our massive sea border with the unclaimed part of the North Atlantic Ocean (non-EU) so why aren't we availing of the fund?

The UK also has internal and external land borders with Ireland, France, Belgium, The Netherlands, Germany, Denmark, Norway and the Faroe Islands and North Atlantic Ocean (both non-EU), so again why aren't they availing of the fund at the moment?

Ireland and the UK don't avail of the fund because they can't.

EU Regulation 515/2014 which set up the ISF - Borders and Visa fund is not applicable to Ireland under Article 50 of the regulation. (The fund is not applicable to the UK under article 49).





Their is no all EU border fund as such, just the ISF border fund which is a Schengen area border fund not a whole of the EU area fund, Ireland can't benefit from a fund which dosn't apply to it, which it has opted out of and hasn't contributed to.

Do you honestly think other Schengen members would be happy with Ireland gaining benefit from a fund it isn't entitled to, dosn't recognise and has never contributed to?

The Amsterdam Treaty incorporated Schengen rules into EU law and Ireland and the UK opted out of this making any Schengen rules non applicable to us.

External borders in the EU are governed via EU Regulation 562/2006 (AKA the Shengen Borders Code), again as Ireland (and the UK) is not bound by any Schengen rules following it's opt out of that section of the Amsterdam Treaty the Shengen Borders Code does not apply to Ireland under regulation 28 of the regulation and still won't post Brexit.






It's also worth noting that one of the main aims of the various borders funds and directives is to "achieve a uniform and high level of control of the external borders by supporting integrated borders management, harmonising border management measures within the Union and sharing information among EU States, and between EU States and Frontex, in order to halt irregular migration and ensure the smooth crossing of the external borders", but even Frontex which provides cooperation in relation to the management of external borders of the EU doesn't apply to Ireland or the UK either.

EU Regulation 2007/2004 created Frontex (European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union), the agency which is responsible for and provides for the cooperation of external borders between EU states, but just like all other border regulations, funds and agencies it's not applicable to non Schengen states!






No the only reasons why Ireland and the UK don't is because they didn't sign the Schengen Agreement, are not under the Borders Code, not part of the ISF Fund and not involved with Frontex - not because they are islands.

Iceland, Malta and other territorial islands such as Corsica, Palma, Azores, Madeira, The Balearic Islands, The Canary Islands, Ceutu and Melila, are all "islands" which can benefit from the funds and come under the border directives and Frontex. And some of them also have external sea borders, why are they different? Because they are part of Shengen.


Border protection like nearly everything else Brexit related is a big unknown, to say it will apply is totally incorrect because as it stands it can't unless the EU change directives or Ireland opts in to Schengen as all border protections, funds, immigration policies and directives are currently based entirety on the Schengen area and not the actual EU.

It's fair to say the EU might and probably will deal with it (but then again they might not) or Ireland might opt in, but until we cross that bridge if it comes to it it remains an unknown and nothing is certain bar the fact that if the EU do nothing and Ireland don't opt in it certainly can't apply to Ireland.

I'm not going to get into a back and forth on this, except to repeat that we do NOT at present have a land border with the non-EU.

Ireland's relations with all EU institutions and procedures have until now been based around our CTA with the UK, which pre-dates the establishment of the State. Our entry to the EU at the same time allowed us to continue that arrangement without alteration. Our reason not to join Schengen (which we would have liked to do) was also because of the CTA. All arrangements concerning external borders are also dictated by that. The fact that we are two islands separated from the rest of the EU is a factor - it isn't that the rules are different because we are islands, its because being islands makes it easier and practical to have different rules. Sorry if that point seems a bit obscure but it is very relevant.

A Brexit would be a complete game changer because it brings a land border into play on Irish soil. We could no longer operate a CTA with the UK and I do not believe it is politically conceivable that Britain would facilitate a CTA within Ireland by introducing a quasi border between NI and Britain.

In those circumstances it is fair to say that we will be operating in uncharted territory but the naive belief that things will continue as before within Ireland by "turning a blind eye" is just nonsense. This will be the most carefully scrutinised border issue the EU has ever faced.

And on the specific point of cost, I will just repeat that there are existing financial instruments available to help with border management and I have no doubt that these would be made available for this.

GM228

First Up wrote: »

I'm not going to get into a back and forth on this, except to repeat that we do NOT at present have a land border with the non-EU.

I'm sorry but you are wrong-we do have a non-EU land border!

Do you realise that land borders includes sea borders of the state. Off shore borders are treated the same as shore borders as per the various EU Shengen reulations.

From the Shengen Border Code which I'll remind you is the EUs legal context for defining external borders:-

‘external borders’ means the Member States' land borders, including river and lake borders, sea borders and their airports, river ports, sea ports and lake ports, provided that they are not internal borders;

We have a huge non EU land border on the North Atlantic Ocean!

First Up wrote: »

Ireland's relations with all EU institutions and procedures have until now been based around our CTA with the UK, which pre-dates the establishment of the State. Our entry to the EU at the same time allowed us to continue that arrangement without alteration. Our reason not to join Schengen (which we would have liked to do) was also because of the CTA. All arrangements concerning external borders are also dictated by that. The fact that we are two islands separated from the rest of the EU is a factor - it isn't that the rules are different because we are islands, its because being islands makes it easier and practical to have different rules. Sorry if that point seems a bit obscure but it is very relevant.

True about why we didn't join the Shengen regarding the CTA, but a Brexit does not automatically mean an end to the CTA and many experts believe the CTA would remain if the UK successfully negotiate it in time, it may pre-date the EU and the state but it was strengthened further in 2011 by the bilateral Ireland-UK Accord which gave commitments on both sides to retain the CTA into the future.

First Up wrote: »

A Brexit would be a complete game changer because it brings a land border into play on Irish soil. We could no longer operate a CTA with the UK and I do not believe it is politically conceivable that Britain would facilitate a CTA within Ireland by introducing a quasi border between NI and Britain.

Indeed a game changer but it's pure speculation that the CTA won't continue, nobody knows if it will or not.

First Up wrote: »

In those circumstances it is fair to say that we will be operating in uncharted territory but the naive belief that things will continue as before within Ireland by "turning a blind eye" is just nonsense. This will be the most carefully scrutinised border issue the EU has ever faced.

I didn't mention any naive belief that things will contiue as before or mention "turning a blind eye", it's true that nobody knows with certainty what way it will pan out post a Brexit.

First Up wrote: »

And on the specific point of cost, I will just repeat that there are existing financial instruments available to help with border management and I have no doubt that these would be made available for this.

And again I'll repeat that the existing financial instruments can't legally help in their current form without EU regulation changes and negotiations between all existing Schengen states or unless Ireland joins Schengen.

CelticRambler

How can the UK renegotiate any kind of CTA when the overwhelming justification for Brexit is a supposed lack of independent border control, allowing millions of immigrants to enter illegally?

A post-Brexit UK can't have it both ways: either it becomes an island quarantine state and sacrifices it's NI population for the "greater good" or it compromises on the one thing that the Daily Mail electorate are most vociferous about and makes a nonsense of the referendum result.

GM228

CelticRambler wrote: »

How can the UK renegotiate any kind of CTA when the overwhelming justification for Brexit is a supposed lack of independent border control, allowing millions of immigrants to enter illegally?

A post-Brexit UK can't have it both ways: either it becomes an island quarantine state and sacrifices it's NI population for the "greater good" or it compromises on the one thing that the Daily Mail electorate are most vociferous about and makes a nonsense of the referendum result.

Independent border control is an overwhelming arguement yes, the argument is the EU have all or too much of the control, the UK want full control, if they left the EU they could re-negotiate the CTA to their terms as opposed to EU terms which they are happy with and still satisfies their "full control" policy. Don't forgot the CTA dates back to when the UK did have full control of it's borders.

It's worth noting that border control isn't the justification for Brexit, it's just an arguement from the leave side. People's say on membership was the justification for the referendum and the Government who arranged the referendum even don't want a Brexit.

brandodub

Brexit looking more likely by the day. Guardian published on line poll result showing 10% ahead for Leave.

First Up

GM228 wrote:

We have a huge non EU land border on the North Atlantic Ocean!

Grand, then lets say that after Brexit our land border with non-EU will be a lot shallower and might need to be more tightly controlled.

GM228 wrote:

True about why we didn't join the Shengen regarding the CTA, but a Brexit does not automatically mean an end to the CTA and many experts believe the CTA would remain if the UK successfully negotiate it in time, it may pre-date the EU and the state but it was strengthened further in 2011 by the bilateral Ireland-UK Accord which gave commitments on both sides to retain the CTA into the future.

A future that assumed both countries would be in the EU.

GM228 wrote:

I didn't mention any naive belief that things will contiue as before or mention "turning a blind eye", it's true that nobody knows with certainty what way it will pan out post a Brexit.

Someone in this thread did. We don't have exclusive use of it.

GM228 wrote:

And again I'll repeat that the existing financial instruments can't legally help in their current form without EU regulation changes and negotiations between all existing Schengen states or unless Ireland joins Schengen.

I said the instruments exist. Adapting them to the new situation is a tecnicality.

HivemindXX

GM228 wrote: »

We have a huge non EU land border on the North Atlantic Ocean!

You are misreading the text that you quoted. Common sense would lead you to question your assumption that a sea border is a land border. Having realised this makes no sense you could look at the text you quoted and realise it means that external borders consist of two thing, land borders (including lakes and rivers) and sea borders. Two different things.

If your reading was correct they would just use 'external borders' and not bother to differentiate between land and sea. Feel free to continue to insist that our border on the Atlantic is a land border but I am probably not the only one who thinks that if you can say that it is not worth trying to determine if anything else you say is also nonsense.

Del2005

GM228 wrote: »

Independent border control is an overwhelming arguement yes, the argument is the EU have all or too much of the control, the UK want full control, if they left the EU they could re-negotiate the CTA to their terms as opposed to EU terms which they are happy with and still satisfies their "full control" policy. Don't forgot the CTA dates back to when the UK did have full control of it's borders.

How can they re-negotiate the CTA to keep an open boarder on this Island? We will be in the EU, where free movement of EU citizens is allowed, and the CTA, where UK and RoI citizens have equal status in each state.

There is no way the that we can refuse EU citizens access to RoI, look what happened the Swiss and they aren't even in the EU. If there's no checks at the only land boarder boarder between the UK and EU then they'll have free access to the remainder of the UK unless the UK implements an internal UK boarder.

GM228 wrote: »

It's worth noting that border control isn't the justification for Brexit, it's just an arguement from the leave side. People's say on membership was the justification for the referendum and the Government who arranged the referendum even don't want a Brexit.

It doesn't matter why the UK wants to stay or go, if they go they'll have a land boarder with an EU State. That means that duties and tariffs will affect good crossing it and if the UK starts restricting access to the country they'll have to have some way of controlling who crosses it.

Sam Russell

First Up wrote: »

And the M1 will still be a road. So what?

Which M1 will that be then?

Sam Russell

The EU border on the Irish side will want to impose import taxes on goods entering the EU (Ireland).

The EU border on the NI side will want to control immigration. This could easily be transferred to the control of the entry to GB of immigrants.

Different problems.

First Up

Sam Russell wrote:

Which M1 will that be then?

Take your pick.

ED E

Sam Russell wrote: »

The EU border on the Irish side will want to impose import taxes on goods entering the EU (Ireland).

Parcel Motel will close doors overnight if it happens and we punters wont be able to shaft RM anymore

CelticRambler

GM228 wrote: »

the UK want full control, if they left the EU they could re-negotiate the CTA to their terms as opposed to EU terms which they are happy with and still satisfies their "full control" policy. Don't forgot the CTA dates back to when the UK did have full control of it's borders.

Negotiate with who? Oh, yeah - with the EU. There'll be no friendly negotiations between Dublin and London, because the EU can't/won't allow it.

Citing the origins of the CTA is irrelevant. For a start, it was challenged by the British government themselves in the ?90s, and only maintained as a concession to the Ulster Unionists. Times have moved on; just because something was acceptable at some point in the last century doesn't mean it's feasible or desireable now.

GM228

HivemindXX wrote: »

You are misreading the text that you quoted. Common sense would lead you to question your assumption that a sea border is a land border. Having realised this makes no sense you could look at the text you quoted and realise it means that external borders consist of two thing, land borders (including lakes and rivers) and sea borders. Two different things.

I do have common sense and know the difference between land and sea, but I always read it as the EU putting the term "land border" under the definition of external borders as meaning all external borders which included sea borders etc, it's extremely common for EU and various national legislation to interpret things differently to the common understanding - it's a simple misunderstanding on how I interpreted the EUs interpretation of external borders, I never gave it much tought to what you pointed out to be honest. My bad I suppose and a bit of a "doh" moment as homer would say on my part

Apologies, First Up is correct that we currently have no non-EU land borders, but my point is still valid that we do already have a non-EU external border.

HivemindXX wrote: »

Feel free to continue to insist that our border on the Atlantic is a land border but I am probably not the only one who thinks that if you can say that it is not worth trying to determine if anything else you say is also nonsense.

What else do you need to determine may be nonsense?

Apart from my misunderstanding of the interpretation given everything else I have stated is correct, a simple misunderstanding of a interpretation dosn't take away from any points I've made.

Ireland does still have a non-EU external border via the Atlantic and the EU border protections are equal for land, sea and air borders so if a land border suddenly becomes a problem for Ireland, why hasn't our non-EU sea border (or the UKs non-EU sea borders) been an issue before now?

Because despite what some believe external border control is not an EU matter, external border control is a matter for individual states subject to EU law, even with Shengen the actual control of external borders is a matter negotiated between the member states of the EU and the non-EU states they border, Shengen states are however afforded a fund to help pay for the protection of those external borders.

Shengen was introduced primarily for the abolishment of internal borders for the freedom of movement in conjunction with directly related flanking measures with respect to external border controls, but apart from Shengen there is nothing whatsoever regarding the protection of external EU borders by the EU, and as I already stated even with Shengen EU law states that external borders are a matter for member states and not the EU.

Del2005 wrote: »

How can they re-negotiate the CTA to keep an open boarder on this Island? We will be in the EU, where free movement of EU citizens is allowed, and the CTA, where UK and RoI citizens have equal status in each state.

It all depends on Ireland-EU and UK-EU negotiations post a Brexit regarding the four freedoms and any bilateral agreements made between the UK-EU or individual EU/EEA/Shengen countries.

It's worth nothing that under EU law nothing enacted under the EU can actually affect any arrangements under the CTA and that Ireland and the UK are free to continue to make arrangements under the CTA agreement and as already stated Ireland is responsible for it's external borders, not the EU.

In other words Ireland can continue to exercise whatever border controls it wished and agrees with the UK without the EU interfering.

Last year a joint Oirachthas Committee on European Affairs regarding the UK/EU relationship post a possible Brexit recommended that the Irish and UK Governments negotiate bilaterally to have Northern Ireland recognised (in an EU context) as having "a special position" in the UK, in view of the Good Friday Agreement, that special arrangements be negotiated at EU level in that context, to maintain North-South relations and Northern Irish EU citizenship rights and protections.

It was also recommended that the Irish and UK Governments work bilaterally to ensure that, in the context of its negotiations with the EU, an accommodation for the continued free movement of goods and services be sought and secured for the highly inter-dependent Irish-UK trading relationship.

Also recommended was that the negotiated exit or reform package for the UK respects the special status of the Irish/UK relationship and that all existing bilateral arrangements between Ireland and the UK are maintained including citizenship arrangements, unrestricted travel and trade arrangements and unhindered borders.

It's also worth noting that currently only an EU exit is on the cards, the UK would still be a part of the EEA and retain access to the common market and maintain the four freedoms, but not be subject to all EU rule, of course the UK could also leave the EEA but thats an argument for post Brexit.

Remaining part of the EEA (commonly referred to as the Norway option) is a preferred option according to a recent Telegraph poll:-

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/06/11/uk-voters-back-norway-style-brexit-poll-reveals/

CelticRambler wrote: »

Negotiate with who? Oh, yeah - with the EU. There'll be no friendly negotiations between Dublin and London, because the EU can't/won't allow it.

The EU can't interfere with the CTA as the CTA and any agreements under it are protected by EU law.

CelticRambler wrote: »

Citing the origins of the CTA is irrelevant. For a start, it was challenged by the British government themselves in the ?90s, and only maintained as a concession to the Ulster Unionists. Times have moved on; just because something was acceptable at some point in the last century doesn't mean it's feasible or desireable now.

Citing the 90s is also irrelevant, as you say times have moved on, but as I already stated Ireland and the UK strengthened their commitments to the CTA in 2011 under the Ireland-UK Accord.

http://www.inis.gov.ie/en/INIS/Pages/IRELAND-UK%20ACCORD%20TO%20FURTHER%20SECURE%20THE%20COMMON%20TRAVEL%20AREA

And yes whilst that was signed on an assumption that the UK would still be in the EU the fact that that may change does not have to change anything, as I stated the CTA operated before the EU and could continue to so post Brexit. The Oirachthas report states that indications from the UK government indicated they wishes to remain committed to the CTA post a Brexit.

CelticRambler wrote: »

How can the UK renegotiate any kind of CTA when the overwhelming justification for Brexit is a supposed lack of independent border control, allowing millions of immigrants to enter illegally?

I suppose another way to look at justification for renegotiation of some form of a CTA is that under UK law Irish citizens are non-foreign aliens under the Commonwealth Immigration Acts and that the Republic of Ireland is not a foreign country under the Ireland Act 1949.

First Up

GM228 wrote: »

The EU can't interfere with the CTA as the CTA and any agreements under it are protected by EU law.

Its not a question of the EU "interfering". We ARE the EU! Border controls are applied on ENTRY. If Ireland shares a border with a non EU country, we will be responsible for operating our side of it. If a post Brexit UK is liable for tariffs, quotas or import procedures on it exports to the EU, then these will be applied at the border between the EU and the UK as it will be at ports and airports. At a minimum, this will require checks of documentation, cargo etc. causing delays and adding cost.

What the UK does on its side of the border is its own business but as uncontrolled immigration from EU countries is one of the main arguments quoted by the Leave side, it seems unlikely that the UK will allow unrestricted and unchecked travel into the UK via NI by Poles, Bulgarians, Romanians etc who have unrestricted access to Ireland. This means checks on entering NI and/or checks between NI and the British mainland.

GM228

First Up wrote: »

Its not a question of the EU "interfering". We ARE the EU!

We arn't the EU, we are however a member of the EU, huge difference, interference from the EU would be in relation to the European Council, the European Commission, other member states etc.

First Up wrote: »

What the UK does on its side of the border is its own business but as uncontrolled immigration from EU countries is one of the main arguments quoted by the Leave side, it seems unlikely that the UK will allow unrestricted and unchecked travel into the UK via NI by Poles, Bulgarians, Romanians etc who have unrestricted access to Ireland. This means checks on entering NI and/or checks between NI and the British mainland.

An argument means nothing (and remember that it's simply an argument from one side only), and does not necessarily shape what is to come.

What's more important about all this is the actual reason for the referendum and not the various arguements made, the reason is because people havn't had a chance to vote to stay or leave since 1975, the reason for the referendum as given by David Cameron was that the EU has basically had too much say and that "It is time for the British people to have their say. It is time to settle this European question in British politics".

And remember the one thing both sides of the argument often forget to mention - it's only a referendum to leave the EU, they will still be a member of the EEA which still gives access to the single market and won't require border checks etc, now if they decide to leave the EEA or perhaps try and agree a "mini Shengen" for example things could change to even more unknows, but lets deal with any potential Brexit first before going to round 2.

Remaining in the EEA does satisfy the people's say if a Brexit is voted for as it reduces the EUs say by about 25% thus giving the British people a greater say and satisfying the reasoning behind the decision to hold the referendum.

First Up

GM228 wrote:

And remember the one thing both sides of the argument often forget to mention - it's only a referendum to leave the EU, they will still be a member of the EEA which still gives access to the single market and won't require border checks etc, now if they decide to leave the EEA or perhaps try and agree a "mini Shengen" for example things could change to even more unknows, but lets deal with any potential Brexit first before going to round 2.

Another of the "best of both worlds" delusions. The UK's membership of the EEA is as a member of the EU. If they leave the EU that is voided and they will need to re-apply for membership of the EEA as a separate entity.

As with all non-EU members of the EEA, that membership will be conditional on them accepting many of the requirements of the single market. There is a queue and they will be free to join it. They needn't expect to jump it though.

GM228

First Up wrote: »

Another of the "best of both worlds" delusions. The UK's membership of the EEA is as a member of the EU. If they leave the EU that is voided and they will need to re-apply for membership of the EEA as a separate entity.

As with all non-EU members of the EEA, that membership will be conditional on them accepting many of the requirements of the single market. There is a queue and they will be free to join it. They needn't expect to jump it though.

Britain is a contractual party to the EEA, you can't simply throw them out just because they leave the EU, it may have been a requirement for initial membership but it's not a requirement for continued membership!

First Up

GM228 wrote:

Britain is a contractual party to the EEA, you can't simply throw them out just because they leave the EU, it may have been a requirement for initial membership but it's not a requirement for continued membership!

Oh yeah?