Brexit borders

Stasi 2.0

Del.Monte wrote: »

Well, I'm going on my own experiences by car, bus and rail from 1969 to the present day and I never found the border greatly inconveniencing - there again I didn't have attitude, wasn't on active service or involved in smuggling.

Or you didn't
4) Ever want to cross the border at odd hours (many crossings were closed at night)
5) Live near an "unapproved road" (there were only around 20 "approved" crossing points) elsewhere roads were blocked and bridges destroyed

Del.Monte

Stasi 2.0 wrote: »

Or you didn't
4) Ever want to cross the border at odd hours (many crossings were closed at night)
5) Live near an "unapproved road" (there were only around 20 "approved" crossing points) elsewhere roads were blocked and bridges destroyed

Agreed, as I said based on my own experiences I had no difficulties, but I can quite see why there would be problems for locals. As for odd hours, I wouldn't go about in parts of Dublin at 'odd' hours let alone the border.

FrancieBrady

Del.Monte wrote: »

Agreed, as I said based on my own experiences I had no difficulties, but I can quite see why there would be problems for locals. As for odd hours, I wouldn't go about in parts of Dublin at 'odd' hours let alone the border.

You do know that parishes were cut in two, sometimes 3 or 4 times by the border, that farms where similarly crossed by it, and in at least one case a house?
Live in others shoes for a while. Your 'experience' is not the only one.

Charles Babbage

Del.Monte wrote: »

Agreed, as I said based on my own experiences I had no difficulties,

The usual I'm alright Jack, I don't live near the border so it isn't a problem, I live on a hill so floodings isn't an issue, my granny left me her house so what's all this homelessness thing aobut.

The border harassment wasn't acceptable then and isn't acceptable now.

Jayop

Some good news.

From the guardian

Lisa O'Carroll
Ireland got prominent mention in the Guy Verhofstadt press conference after the vote and a promise that there will be no hard border will be a boon to border businesses desperately worried about their future.

Asked by an RTE reporter how difficult it would be to achieve the desire for no border controls, Verhofstadt said: “It will be very difficult and it will be very high on the priority list: no hard border, respect in all its aspects of the Good Friday agreement.”

Notably he added: “It is the EU 27 who have to taken on board the [interests] of the Irish Republic, binding the Dublin vote closer to Brussels.”

In a considerable coup for Ireland, the border issue is at the top of the priority list.

The European parliament president Antonio Tajani also mentioned its predicament saying that the Good Friday Agreement, like the EU four freedoms, must not be touched.

Jayop

Rte reporting same

https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2017/0405/865355-meps-northern-ireland/

The European Parliament has endorsed a resolution which states that Brexit negotiations must recognise the "unique and special circumstances confronting the Island of Ireland".

The resolution tabled by four separate groupings in the parliament, including the largest group the European People's Party, insists that negotiators must "ensure continuity and stability of the Northern Ireland peace process, and avoid the reestablishment of a hard border".

The resolution also notes that Ireland will be particularly affected by the withdrawal of the UK from the European Union, and say that the negotiating process must fully reflect the positions and interests of the citizens of all member states including Ireland.

The European Parliament's chief Brexit negotiator has said resolving the question of the Irish border would be "very difficult" but "very high on the priority list".

Guy Verhofstadt said negotiators wanted to ensure that there was no return of a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic.

European Parliament President Antonio Tajani echoed those sentiments, saying Europe was "working for peace, not against it".

They were speaking at a press conference following a vote by MEPs in Strasbourg to adopt a resolution setting out the parliaments priorities during the Brexit discussions.

Speaking during a debate on Brexit, Manfred Weber from the European People's Party said that "the Northern Ireland question is a decisive one" saying it is important to "avoid a hard border in Northern Ireland".


He also warned Britain that there would be no cherry-picking once it leaves the EU.

"A state outside of the European cannot have the same or better conditions than a state inside the European Union," he said.

Gianni Pitella, leader of the Alliance of Socialists and Democrats, said the EU had to defend the peace process in Northern Ireland.

But Phillippe Lamberts of the Green Party said the UK had chosen the most extreme interpretation of the referendum, and opted for a hard Brexit.

"How can you have a hard Brexit, without having a hard border in Ireland?" he asked.

Jayop

This Phillipe Lamberts guy sounds like a bit of a pain. Green liberal apparently but coming out with that.

Del.Monte

Jayop wrote: »

This Phillipe Lamberts guy sounds like a bit of a pain. Green liberal apparently but coming out with that.

Sadly, he is correct, but perhaps it can be portacabins like back in the 1960s rather than fortresses?

Jayop

Del.Monte wrote: »

Sadly, he is correct, but perhaps it can be portacabins like back in the 1960s rather than fortresses?

His seems a sideline view, the chief negotiation team say no hard border. That means no border checks at all. A portacabin with a customs officer is a hard border. They are proposing in effect it stays as is.

FrancieBrady

Jayop wrote: »

His seems a sideline view, the chief negotiation team say no hard border. That means no border checks at all. A portacabin with a customs officer is a hard border. They are proposing in effect it stays as is.

I wish some of these people would start talking about what they envisage instead.
Still very much aspirational talk which could just be a prelude to saying 'Well we tried'.

Jayop

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I wish some of these people would start talking about what they envisage instead.
Still very much aspirational talk which could just be a prelude to saying 'Well we tried'.

This seems to be a vote on what they want to achieve. Hard to say how it will end up before the negotiation takes place.

One thing for sure is that the EU aren't going to be pushed around by Britain and they are taking a hard stance with them. For me the border issue is up to the EU as the English will want to keep the status quo so as to prevent any return to trouble in the north. Now that the EU have declared this is what they want then I'm happy this is what will happen.

FrancieBrady

Jayop wrote: »

This seems to be a vote on what they want to achieve. Hard to say how it will end up before the negotiation takes place.

One thing for sure is that the EU aren't going to be pushed around by Britain and they are taking a hard stance with them. For me the border issue is up to the EU as the English will want to keep the status quo so as to prevent any return to trouble in the north. Now that the EU have declared this is what they want then I'm happy this is what will happen.

But wouldn't you think that by now somebody would be marketing a feasible alternative?
All this aspirational talk isn't allaying any fears up here on the actual border unfortunately.

Jayop

FrancieBrady wrote: »

But wouldn't you think that by now somebody would be marketing a feasible alternative?
All this aspirational talk isn't allaying any fears up here on the actual border unfortunately.

The alternative is the status quo. What needs to change physically? If companies are trading with the north legally they will be paying whatever duties that are required, if not then they are no different to the smugglers operating now.

For movement of people, remember when the EU expanded a few years and Ireland was open to people from Eastern Europe before the north was? There was no hard border put in place then to ensure they weren't crossing the border. I imagine that if someone was in the north and suspected of being there illegally they would be stopped and checked.

That's all that needs to happen.

FrancieBrady

Jayop wrote: »

The alternative is the status quo. What needs to change physically? If companies are trading with the north legally they will be paying whatever duties that are required, if not then they are no different to the smugglers operating now.

For movement of people, remember when the EU expanded a few years and Ireland was open to people from Eastern Europe before the north was? There was no hard border put in place then to ensure they weren't crossing the border. I imagine that if someone was in the north and suspected of being there illegally they would be stopped and checked.

That's all that needs to happen.

Which is fine as long as the status quo remains. What happens if prices fluctuate more, as they may do. Or EU subsidies attract nefarious carry on with livestock etc. or if Britain remains an attractive place for migrants and they begin coming through from the ROI?

Jayop

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Which is fine as long as the status quo remains. What happens if prices fluctuate more, as they may do. Or EU subsidies attract nefarious carry on with livestock etc. or if Britain remains an attractive place for migrants and they begin coming through from the ROI?

None of that has to be dealt with at a border crossing though. Migrants won't find ni too attractive and would be hoping to hop over to the UK. They would still need id to get on a flight. Have the same at the ports and problem solved.

CrabRevolution

Jayop wrote: »

The alternative is the status quo. What needs to change physically? If companies are trading with the north legally they will be paying whatever duties that are required, if not then they are no different to the smugglers operating now.

For movement of people, remember when the EU expanded a few years and Ireland was open to people from Eastern Europe before the north was? There was no hard border put in place then to ensure they weren't crossing the border. I imagine that if someone was in the north and suspected of being there illegally they would be stopped and checked.

That's all that needs to happen.

Ourselves and the UK were 2 of only 3 countries to immediately allow access to all citizens of recently entered EU states. When did the UK bar Eastern Europeans?

Jayop

CrabRevolution wrote: »

Ourselves and the UK were 2 of only 3 countries to immediately allow access to all citizens of recently entered EU states. When did the UK bar Eastern Europeans?

Ah maybe I'm wrong about that. I had thought that we had allowed access before the UK had. Soz.

Elemonator

You're pretty far from right but it could happen someday, though that is a very slim chance. Irish passports have long had a special status in the UK and our Common Travel Area predates the European Union.

InTheTrees

How will it effect the airports? Easy for the UK presumably because they can scrap the EU and Non-EU queue's and just have everyone processed together.

Leonard Hofstadter

Seems like our Government did a damn good job standing up for the North and keeping things as close to the current situation as possible - both the UK and the EU have been singing off more or less the same hymnsheet for a few months now and it's now in the official EU negotiations as well.

Will they get any credit for their quiet diplomacy from the natives? Of course they won't, even though this was no mean achievement on our Government's behalf and totally disproves the notion that we have no say in the supposedly godawful EU.

Jim2007

Elemonator wrote: »

You're pretty far from right but it could happen someday, though that is a very slim chance. Irish passports have long had a special status in the UK and our Common Travel Area predates the European Union.

The treaties of the EU includes a protocol to allow the two EU memeber states to continue to have the CTA agreement. As the U.K. becomes a third country the treaty would an international agreement and thus contrary to EU rules.

Kevhog1988

The op is grossly misinformed. Sure we run almost every construction company in the uk. The palce would grind to a halt.

Jim2007

InTheTrees wrote: »

How will it effect the airports? Easy for the UK presumably because they can scrap the EU and Non-EU queue's and just have everyone processed together.

They also loose access to Schengen databases etc so security clearance may slow down.

Sam Russell

Jim2007 wrote: »

The treaties of the EU includes a protocol to allow the two EU memeber states to continue to have the CTA agreement. As the U.K. becomes a third country the treaty would an international agreement and thus contrary to EU rules.

As we are not in Shengen, and the UK (after it leaves) can implement any version of the CTA it likes - unilaterally, I think they would be outside any EU oversight, (depending on the settlement). I would think we could do the same wrt UK citizens - it is is merely a passport thing. I doubt the EU would be involved given the pointed remarks relating to NI, but anyway, it is all subject to the settlement.

CTA is free movement of Irish and UK passport holders, not everyone. If you need a visa to enter the UK, you still need one even if you are allowed into Ireland. There are people who cannot avail of the CTA, however, it is not policed.

Jim2007

Jayop wrote: »

They would still need id to get on a flight. Have the same at the ports and problem solved.

But that would mean unionists would have to show their passports when traveling in the U.K. - doubt the U.K. Government can sell that one.

Jayop

Jim2007 wrote: »

But that would mean unionists would have to show their passports when traveling in the U.K. - doubt the U.K. Government can sell that one.

I doubt the UK government would give too much of a rats ass tbh. They also could most likely just show any official ID like a license to make it am easier sell.

Nomis21

InTheTrees wrote: »

It doesnt seem right that one part of the UK would have passport controls between it and another part of the UK.
I cant see the northern Irish being happy about that despite the logistical arguments.

What we are going to see (And its already happening) is beefed up immigration between ROI and the rest of the World.

I have many visitors staying with me from overseas and the ones from outside the EU have had a tough time at immigration recently. Two travelers from South America (who did not need visas) were refused entry because they came on a one-way ticket.

Ireland is strengthening its external borders so the border with the North can stay open.

Jayop

That's quite the accusation, to claim there's been a huge unannounced change in Irish immigration policy.

steddyeddy

Nomis21 wrote: »

What we are going to see (And its already happening) is beefed up immigration between ROI and the rest of the World.

I have many visitors staying with me from overseas and the ones from outside the EU have had a tough time at immigration recently. Two travelers from South America (who did not need visas) were refused entry because they came on a one-way ticket.

Ireland is strengthening its external borders so the border with the North can stay open.

It's certainly getting tougher on immigration but this was happening pre-Brexit.

Nomis21

Jayop wrote: »

That's quite the accusation, to claim there's been a huge unannounced change in Irish immigration policy.

The rules have not changed but they are being enforced more.

Last year the Garda unit that checked passports was replaced by a new Irish Immigration Service.

I can only say it as I see it. I have been a Couchsurfing host for eight years but only since last year have I been receiving phone calls from Irish immigration asking questions about people who are staying with me.

Jayop

Nomis21 wrote: »

The rules have not changed but they are being enforced more.

Last year the Garda unit that checked passports was replaced by a new Irish Immigration Service.

I can only say it as I see it. I have been a Couchsurfing host for eight years but only since last year have I been receiving phone calls from Irish immigration asking questions about people who are staying with me.

Ya I totally didn't mean to come across as calling you a liar or anything, I just find that a big change in enforcement attitude coming from an official level would be reported upon or leaked to the press.

Nomis21

Jayop wrote: »

Ya I totally didn't mean to come across as calling you a liar or anything, I just find that a big change in enforcement attitude coming from an official level would be reported upon or leaked to the press.

I don't really see it as a "Big Change". The rules have been there all the time but Garda Immigration Bureau were not enforcing them very severely. The new Irish immigration service are enforcing them much more, whether due to Brexit or just because they are a new service, I can't really say for sure but I think Brexit has something to do with it.

Jayop

Nomis21 wrote: »

I don't really see it as a "Big Change". The rules have been there all the time but Garda Immigration Bureau were not enforcing them very severely. The new Irish immigration service are enforcing them much more, whether due to Brexit or just because they are a new service, I can't really say for sure but I think Brexit has something to do with it.

Ah well if the timing coincided with a new immigration service then that's different. Could be a combination of that and brexit.

Elemonator

Jim2007 wrote: »

The treaties of the EU includes a protocol to allow the two EU memeber states to continue to have the CTA agreement. As the U.K. becomes a third country the treaty would an international agreement and thus contrary to EU rules.

Thank you for the correction! :cool:

Fratton Fred

Jim2007 wrote: »

The treaties of the EU includes a protocol to allow the two EU memeber states to continue to have the CTA agreement. As the U.K. becomes a third country the treaty would an international agreement and thus contrary to EU rules.

it isn't a treaty, it is stand alone legislation in each country.

Jim2007

Fratton Fred wrote: »

it isn't a treaty, it is stand alone legislation in each country.

Go read the protocol to the treaty... the Irish constitution and in particular the provisions restricting the Dail's power to legislate in contradiction of the treaty.

Fratton Fred

Jim2007 wrote: »

Go read the protocol to the treaty... the Irish constitution and in particular the provisions restricting the Dail's power to legislate in contradiction of the treaty.

I would, but it sounds like hard work.

My understanding was that the CTA is a reciprocal agreement, but not one which is actually legislated for. A treaty would suggest that both parties are bound by it, when it reality, either party can withdraw at their own discretion.

Peregrinus

Fred is correct. The CTA - the 'A' stands for "area", not "agreement" - is the result of policy co-ordination by the UK and Irish governments. Each country pursues a policy of having minimal or no movement control over people entering from the other country.

Following Brexit, and assuming the UK is outside the single market, the customs union, etc, then EU rules will require Ireland to control goods entering Ireland from the UK, but SFAIK it will impose no requirement to control people entering Ireland from the UK. EU member states are free to implement their own policy as regards entry by third-country nationals. If Ireland were to join the Schengen zone, then we'd have an obligation to police the Schengen common visa policy, which might required controlling the border with the UK. But Brexit alone won't have that result.

BalcombeSt4

Look on the bright side, it will give the smuggling sector a massive boost.

vg88

How would this work say: Farmer A lives in the South, but half his farm is on the north side of the border while the other half is on the south. How would a border work with half way through the land?

Nomis21

moloner4 wrote: »

How would this work say: Farmer A lives in the South, but half his farm is on the north side of the border while the other half is on the south. How would a border work with half way through the land?

It won't work but he'll get a lot of offers from smugglers.

I suppose he'll have to carry his passport with him when he goes out in his tractor...

BalcombeSt4

moloner4 wrote: »

How would this work say: Farmer A lives in the South, but half his farm is on the north side of the border while the other half is on the south. How would a border work with half way through the land?

I remember reading a story about a south Armagh PIRA man don't know how accurate i was but, it might have been about Slab Murphy or someone like that, who had half their house in the north & half in the south. The front door was in the south & the back door was in the north. When the Gardai would come looking for him to question him about something he'd just walk out the back door & when the RUC came looking for him he would walk out the front.

FrancieBrady

There are plenty of instances where the border cuts through farmland along the border and houses and out buildings and farmyards. And plenty of farmers have parcels of land on both sides.
I am hearing anecdotally that land is changing hands in the south as wealthier unionist farmers organise their own 'special treatment' if Arlene Foster fails to deliver it for them.
Investing in a bit of the republic is not a problem when it comes to subsidies it seems.

jimmycrackcorm

BalcombeSt4 wrote:

I remember reading a story about a south Armagh PIRA man don't know how accurate i was but, it might have been about Slab Murphy or someone like that, who had half their house in the north & half in the south. The front door was in the south & the back door was in the north. When the Gardai would come looking for him to question him about something he'd just walk out the back door & when the RUC came looking for him he would walk out the front.

Heard that also, but one day both arrived at the same time.

InTheTrees

moloner4 wrote: »

How would this work say: Farmer A lives in the South, but half his farm is on the north side of the border while the other half is on the south. How would a border work with half way through the land?

I'd be interested in where he pays taxes too.

Sam Russell

InTheTrees wrote: »

I'd be interested in where he pays taxes too.

What taxes - he's a farmer.

Fratton Fred

BalcombeSt4 wrote: »

I remember reading a story about a south Armagh PIRA man don't know how accurate i was but, it might have been about Slab Murphy or someone like that, who had half their house in the north & half in the south. The front door was in the south & the back door was in the north. When the Gardai would come looking for him to question him about something he'd just walk out the back door & when the RUC came looking for him he would walk out the front.

And how did that work out in the end?

Jim2007

moloner4 wrote: »

How would this work say: Farmer A lives in the South, but half his farm is on the north side of the border while the other half is on the south. How would a border work with half way through the land?

Since it would be an EU customs border exactly the same ways as every where else - it depends on where the farmhouse is located and in the event of it being located on the actual border, where the front door is. Failing that an agreement between the customs officers. This is not a new problem.

Jim2007

Nomis21 wrote: »

I suppose he'll have to carry his passport with him when he goes out in his tractor...

No, probably your passport identity card. You are required to carry it in other parts of the EU, so probably here also.

BalcombeSt4

Fratton Fred wrote: »

And how did that work out in the end?

No idea to be honest, I remember reading it in a article written by someone like Myers or Cusack that indo crowd years ago.