Brexit discussion thread II

The Rape of Lucretia

steddyeddy wrote: »

Great well then you'll agree a country being dragged out of the EU against its will is anti-democratic?

No country is being dragged out of the eu against its will. The UK chose to leave.

ezra_pound

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

No country is being dragged out of the eu against its will. The UK chose to leave.

Is the UK a country? A nation?

Firblog

Dont be at yourself wrote: »

Yes, give me The House of Lords any day! Never mind the collapse of Stormont, the power of the monarchy, or the West Lothian question...

this is your response to my post on 'democracy' in the EU? Which effects us all? You point out some things in the UK that you think are what? Not democratic?

House of lords? How about our Senate? European Commission?

The collapse of Stormont? That's the way it was designed, you probably voted for it, so perhaps you should own it.

The west lothian question? What effect does that have on anything?

First Up

Firblog wrote:

They cannot remain no matter what they do now. If they go independent, then they ask to join the EU, they will not be joining on the conditions they have membership now.

Wanna bet?

Firblog

steddyeddy wrote: »

Great well then you'll agree a country being dragged out of the EU against its will is anti-democratic?

But a country that did vote to leave being forced to stay is?

Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, England, are not members of the EU, the United Kingdom is. The people of the UK voted to join the EEC, and now the people of the same country/member have voted to leave the EU.

The people of Scotland reaffirmed their place as part of the UK just a year earlier, knowing how the system in the UK worked; and in the general election the party advocating independence & remaining in the EU lost 21 out of 56 MP's and dropped it's popular vote by 1/3rd. That hardly demonstrates a huge groundswell of voters wanting either independence or to remain in the EU.

Firblog

First Up wrote: »

Wanna bet?

On which part?

ancapailldorcha

First Up wrote: »

Wanna bet?

Firblog wrote: »

On which part?

Less of this nonsense please.

carrickbally

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

The reason we want the border to remain open is primarily for Northern Ireland and not for the Republic. Decimating Northern Ireland's economy is not an option that anyone should support. The UK won't accept any arrangement that undermines the union so there's not really any point proposing this as a serious scenario.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

By voting for Brexit the people of England de-facto voted to decimate the Northern Ireland economy.

By voting for Brexit the people of England de-facto voted to undermine the unity of the UK.

If they ignored these facts in their blind racism that shows how stupid and venomous the Brexit vote was.

steddyeddy

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

No country is being dragged out of the eu against its will. The UK chose to leave.

The UK is a kingdom. The coutries of Scotland and NI voted remain and are being dragged out of the EU. Not democratic.

carrickbally

The impact of Brexit on Northern Ireland is going to be severe.

The problem is the English who voted for Brexit do not care.

Some are actually enjoying the fact

listermint

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!




I don't know why you both ask this question when I've already answered it.


The 6 month limit isn't effective if you want to prevent against an oversupply of labour in particular sectors. To address this concern properly you need to have quotas to give priority to British workers in contested sectors. This isn't permitted whilst being a member of the EU.


Much thanks,
solodeogloria

I asks these questions because they are full of opinion and scant on fact.

What are these sectors specifically. And how do EU workers differ from the non eu workers that you bring in already with gusto.

The reason I ask this is because it has been proven time and time again that EU workers have a positive net impact on the economy in terms of contributions.

So I'd love to have so factual details on sectors impacted by EU workers and how these workers are taking jobs from British people because that's the crux of this argument you have made.

Please.

carrickbally

The EU is made up of nearly thirty democracies each of which signed a treaty to cooperate in matters of mutual interest and each of which has a veto in matters of vital national interest.

The UK by voting for Brexit are throwing that cooperation back in the face of fellow EU members.

Capt'n Midnight

Firblog wrote: »

What good would that do them? Did the EU say that if the people of Scotland voted for independence in the last referendum they would be outside the EU and would have to apply for admission? And the same will apply to any country/region that gains independence from a current member?

The Irish solution would be to resurrect the Kingdom of Dalriada with both Scotland as a self governing autonomous region.

For a while anyway.

Firblog

carrickbally wrote: »

The EU is made up of nearly thirty democracies each of which signed a treaty to cooperate in matters of mutual interest and each of which has a veto in matters of vital national interest.

The UK by voting for Brexit are throwing that cooperation back in the face of fellow EU members.

Sounds like the majority of those who voted in the UK didn't think that the price of co-operation was worth paying anymore, that the benefits of membership wasn't worth the price.

Shouldn't be taken personally

First Up

Firblog wrote:

Shouldn't be taken personally

It'll be felt personally.

Gerry T

The United Kingdom is not a country, all the others are, except NI which is a part of Ireland. As all other members of the EU are countries I think, with a slight stretch if Scotland or Wales wanted to join the EU it wouldn't take much for it to happen. Logically NI would just go back to where it belongs. Whether people north and south would accept that is another question. Or England leaves the UK, and the rest remain.





Now your leaving out alot. One of the worries Scottish people had was leaving the UK was also leaving the EU which they wanted to stay in. So after the UK lies ( we're staying in the EU, you oil is running out) he Scots narrowly decided to stay in. Run that vote again today and tell the Scots
1. Leave the UK any you'll get automatic EU membership.
2. You oils not running out.
3. The UKs making the second silly decision in the last 100 yrs in Europe.

I think you'd find a different result in Scotland.

carrickbally

Firblog wrote: »

Sounds like the majority of those who voted in the UK didn't think that the price of co-operation was worth paying anymore, that the benefits of membership wasn't worth the price.

Shouldn't be taken personally

Like the consequences of the bankruptcy and collapse that resulted from Celtic Tiger policies here the consequences of Brexit will be felt personally by many people in Ireland, UK and Europe.

The border will be reimposed to prevent free movement of Eastern Europeans from going into the UK and all kinds of goods including stuff like South American beef from crossing.

Economic war has been declared by the English when they voted for Brexit.

All means and methods will be employed in that war.

It will not be nice.

All of us will have to put up with personal consequences.

blanch152

Gerry T wrote: »

The United Kingdom is not a country, all the others are, except NI which is a part of Ireland. As all other members of the EU are countries I think, with a slight stretch if Scotland or Wales wanted to join the EU it wouldn't take much for it to happen. Logically NI would just go back to where it belongs. Whether people north and south would accept that is another question. Or England leaves the UK, and the rest remain.





Now your leaving out alot. One of the worries Scottish people had was leaving the UK was also leaving the EU which they wanted to stay in. So after the UK lies ( we're staying in the EU, you oil is running out) he Scots narrowly decided to stay in. Run that vote again today and tell the Scots
1. Leave the UK any you'll get automatic EU membership.
2. You oils not running out.
3. The UKs making the second silly decision in the last 100 yrs in Europe.

I think you'd find a different result in Scotland.

This idea just isn't going to work. Scotland joining the EU requires the consent of all 27. Given the current political situation in Catalonia, there is no chance of Spain agreeing to that.

steddyeddy

blanch152 wrote: »

This idea just isn't going to work. Scotland joining the EU requires the consent of all 27. Given the current political situation in Catalonia, there is no chance of Spain agreeing to that.

I'll try to put this as simple as possible because what you said has been disputed as wrong again and again.

Spain would rather Scotland not be independent as it gives Catalan ideas. They would not however, block an independent Scotland joining the EU. Guardian article here.

Spain says it will not impose veto if Scotland tries to join EU

Foreign minister says Madrid remains opposed to an independent Scotland, but would not block any EU application

Spain has said it would not veto an attempt by an independent Scotland to join the EU, in a boost to Nicola Sturgeon’s campaign for a second independence referendum and the clearest sign yet that Brexit has softened Madrid’s longstanding opposition to Scottish independence.

Alfonso Dastis, the Spanish foreign minister, made it clear that the government would not block an independent Scotland’s EU hopes, although he stressed that Madrid would not welcome the disintegration of the UK.

He also said Edinburgh would have to apply for membership, a process fraught with uncertainty that is likely to take several years. But asked directly whether Spain would veto an independent Scotland joining the EU, Dastis said: “No, we wouldn’t.”


Guardian Today: the headlines, the analysis, the debate - sent direct to you
Read more
Madrid is keen not to fuel Catalonia’s desire for independence. “We don’t want it [Scottish independence] to happen,” he said. “But if it happens legally and constitutionally, we would not block it. We don’t encourage the breakup of any member states, because we think the future goes in a different direction.”

The change in tone could prove a significant boon to Scotland’s first minister, who has repeatedly demanded the right from Westminster to hold a second independence referendum before Brexit. Scotland voted overwhelmingly to remain in the EU during the referendum last year, but it has been believed Spain would block it from rejoining if independent from the UK.

The softening stance this weekend reflects the new approach being taken by Dastis, a career diplomat, who was promoted to foreign minister last November after the centre-right prime minister, Mariano Rajoy, formed a government following 300 days of political paralysis in 2016.

In the run-up to Scotland’s 2014 independence referendum, Rajoy said Scottish independence would be a catastrophe that would risk Europe’s disintegration, but the political calculus in Madrid and Brussels has shifted since Britain voted to leave the EU.

EU leaders are more sympathetic to Scotland, where 62% voted to remain in the EU, while insisting that Scots cannot inherit Britain’s EU membership.

Play VideoPlay
Current Time 0:00
/
Duration Time 6:23
Loaded: 0%
Progress: 0%
FullscreenMute
Facebook Twitter Pinterest
Angus Robertson: ‘It’s hard to take May at face value on Scotland’ – video interview
The European commission spelled out earlier this month that an independent Scotland would have to apply to join the bloc, a point reinforced by Dastis. “They would have to join the line of candidates at some point and would have to start negotiations,” he said.

Scotland would have no chance of winning the perks enjoyed by the UK, such as the rebate on EU payments. Current EU law also requires new joiners to sign up to the euro, an issue that would pose fundamental problems for Scotland’s trade with the rest of the UK.

Experts have suggested negotiations could take three to four years, but the timing is uncertain. EU diplomats are reluctant to get into the details of a hypothetical event, especially when the bloc’s energies are being absorbed by Brexit.

carrickbally

It is ironic that even after independence decisions made in England and cheer led by the London gutter press still have major negative consequences for this country.

We should have been able to get away from the situation in which decisions made in London and supported by the London media would be detrimental to us.

We think of the examples of allowing a million Irish people to die during the famine when food was being exported to England and the imposition of the border even though the imperial parliament in London had voted against it.

Now we have a declaration of economic war with very negative consequences and with the gutter London media gloating at the fact.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

This idea just isn't going to work. Scotland joining the EU requires the consent of all 27. Given the current political situation in Catalonia, there is no chance of Spain agreeing to that.

It is by no means as simple as that, we don't know what Spain will do as the two situations are different. Any Scottish withdrawal will be constitutional and Rahoy has previously(albeit ambiguously, as seems to be his style) said that Spain would have no grounds to object.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/16/would-spain-block-scottish-membership-of-eu

ArmaniJeanss

The Fantastic Dr Fox is still sticking to his 'easiest trade deal in human history' comments.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-liam-fox-repeats-claim-trade-deal-european-union-trade-deal-easiest-human-history-a8013601.html

jm08

blanch152 wrote: »

This idea just isn't going to work. Scotland joining the EU requires the consent of all 27. Given the current political situation in Catalonia, there is no chance of Spain agreeing to that.

I think they have already said that they would not object if the decision to leave the UK was by a legal referendum.

First Up

jm08 wrote:

I think they have already said that they would not object if the decision to leave the UK was by a legal referendum.

Correct.

cml387

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

The Fantastic Dr Fox is still sticking to his 'easiest trade deal in human history' comments.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-liam-fox-repeats-claim-trade-deal-european-union-trade-deal-easiest-human-history-a8013601.html

Some Conservatives are driven so much by ideology that if there were equivalents in the Labour party they'd be arrested as subversives.

carrickbally

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

The Fantastic Dr Fox is still sticking to his 'easiest trade deal in human history' comments.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-liam-fox-repeats-claim-trade-deal-european-union-trade-deal-easiest-human-history-a8013601.html

Fox says in relation to the UK that in 'the European Union trading agreement we are already at the point where we have no tariffs and we have complete regulatory equivalence'.

If that is the case why does the UK want to change it?

If that is the case why does the UK want to blame the EU for the consequences of changing it?

LeinsterDub

Jim2007 wrote: »

Actual experience back in the day.

I have literally no idea what you're talking about

steddyeddy

carrickbally wrote: »

Fox says in relation to the UK that in 'the European Union trading agreement we are already at the point where we have no tariffs and we have complete regulatory equivalence'.

If that is the case why does the UK want to change it?

If that is the case why does the UK want to blame the EU for the consequences of changing it?

Yep, exactly my thoughts. The Brexiters keep saying the UK is far better on its own, then saying the EU is punishing them if they don't give a good trading deal.

Cognitive dissonance. We don't need you, we want to trade with the whole world, but if you don't give us a good deal you're punishing us.

carrickbally

steddyeddy wrote: »

Yep, exactly my thoughts. The Brexiters keep saying the UK is far better on its own, then saying the EU is punishing them if they don't give a good trading deal.

Cognitive dissonance. We don't need you, we want to trade with the whole world, but if you don't give us a good deal you're punishing us.

The UK has declared economic war on its neighbours.

Then it goes blaming everyone else for the consequences.

Enzokk

carrickbally wrote: »

Fox says in relation to the UK that in 'the European Union trading agreement we are already at the point where we have no tariffs and we have complete regulatory equivalence'.

If that is the case why does the UK want to change it?

If that is the case why does the UK want to blame the EU for the consequences of changing it?

Well, off course they have zero tariffs and equivalency, that is the benefit of the EU. He wants to keep the benefit of the EU without being in the EU. Remember how the EU negotiators said that people in the UK doesn't understand the EU or what it means to leave? I think they meant Dr Liam Fox as one of those.

steddyeddy

Ha ha I'll be in the audience on Question Time in Portsmouth this Thursday. Should be entertaining.

FrancieBrady

steddyeddy wrote: »

Ha ha I'll be in the audience on Question Time in Portsmouth this Thursday. Should be entertaining.

Wave, so as we know you aren't drowning!
How did Portsmouth vote in the referendum?

steddyeddy

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Wave, so as we know you aren't drowning!
How did Portsmouth vote in the referendum?

Not in a good way:

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/politics/portsmouth-has-roared-like-a-lion-as-britain-votes-to-leave-the-eu-1-7447354/amp

steddyeddy

steddyeddy wrote: »

Ha ha I'll be in the audience on Question Time in Portsmouth this Thursday. Should be entertaining.

Be extremely careful not to talk down the country, or ask any questions that might have difficult truths as answers, lest you reveal yourself as an enemy of the people.

steddyeddy

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Be extremely careful not to talk down the country, or ask any questions that might have difficult truths as answers, lest you reveal yourself as an enemy of the people.

I was thinking that. Everytime I watch it there's a mass of people shouting down anyone who brings up the reality of Brexit.

cml387

The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

There's always Yeats to fall back on.

ancapailldorcha

Can we raise the standard of posting please. There are comments here which are definitely not serious discussion.

carrickbally

People who say that they want a frictionless border while at the same time wanting a complete break in the free movement of people through Brexit are not in touch with logic.

For those people the possibility of the UK walking away from the EU without any deal is still an option.

It looks to me to be likely to happen.

It is not going to be funny but I hope I am wrong.

Rain Ascending

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

The Fantastic Dr Fox is still sticking to his 'easiest trade deal in human history' comments.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-liam-fox-repeats-claim-trade-deal-european-union-trade-deal-easiest-human-history-a8013601.html

Thanks for flagging this up. The Guardian has an interesting write-up of the same interview. In particular there is this interesting segment:

At the end of an EU summit in Brussels last week, Macron described the increasing talk about no deal among some Conservatives as “noises, bluff, false information”. Asked whether the French president was wrong to assume this, Fox replied:
“Completely wrong about that.”
Fox said the impact of a no-deal Brexit on the UK economy would depend on mitigation efforts by the government. He said he would not publish impact studies, some of which are reported to predict a serious detrimental impact if a trade deal is not reached.
“Why would we publish data in a negotiation, that might actually diminish our negotiating hand?” Fox said.

While superficially, this line of argument from Fox might look plausible, it's actually deeply flawed on two grounds.

Firstly, if the level of impact depends on the success of mitigation efforts then maximum transparency is needed so that all the resources of the British state, working with willing elements of British society, can be applied effectively. Hiding the analyses that form the basis of understanding the challenge is a recipe for a botched effort.

Secondly, if the UK government wishes to convince its EU negotiation partners that it is seriously considering the no-deal option then it needs to convince the EU that it understands correctly the challenge, plan to deal with it via mitigation actions, and then be willing to take the pain of that option. In other words, the UK has to publish the no-deal analyses for its position regarding this option to be credible.

The fact that the UK government does not publish these suggests that they have a different concern, namely that the negative conclusions in the documents could force a public re-evaluation of the no-deal option.

carrickbally

Rewrite of post deleted.

People who say that they want a frictionless border while at the same time wanting a complete break in the free movement of people through Brexit are not in touch with logic.

For those people the possibility of the UK walking away from the EU without any deal is still an option.

I have a feeling that might happen soon.

If it does the effects will be dire so I hope I am wrong.

Given the propaganda from the gutter London media, however, nothing will surprise me.

Nody

I think that many Tories still think a last minute deal will happen because EU comes begging for it and hence British wit has outsmarted them again by this talk of a "no deal" Brexit. That's also why I'm looking forward to with morbid curiosity how the tone will change during second half of next year when the coin that they are not going to get any deal and the British "wit" turns out to have been utter incompetence from day 1 and there is no plan to save it all after all.

FrancieBrady

Looks like business leaders are about to ramp up the pressure and believe the opposite to Davis.
Who would be a business leader in the UK at the moment.

Britain's five biggest business lobby groups are calling for an urgent Brexit transition deal, or they warn the UK risks losing jobs and investment.
In a joint letter being sent to Brexit Secretary David Davis, the groups, including the Institute of Directors and CBI, will say time is running out.
Sources told the BBC the letter is still in draft form, but will be sent in the next day or two.
A government spokesman said the talks were "making real, tangible progress".
The other lobby groups backing the letter are the British Chambers of Commerce, the Federation of Small Businesses, and the EEF manufacturing body.
Together they represent companies employing millions of workers.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-41716284

Samaris

They really don't seem to see how long they have - or more to the point, don't have. Major decisions will need to be being made by businesses in the first couple of months of next year, probably -by- March 2018, since being able to plan more than a year once we're into March becomes impossible. March is just over five months away.

I think this is largely down to just plain incompetence rather than a Plan. The UK was desperately short of experienced negotiators before it began (it needed to ask for spares from Canada, who had just finished a 7-year negotiation with the EU, and I think Australia chipped in some as well). And the people are watching very closely but with rather limited understanding - hardly surprising, given the government is suppressing reports that aren't favourable to Brexit (what the hell, people?) and then you have a couple of complete idiots like Johnson, buffered against the worst effects of Brexit by personal wealth, who are apparently going to see how much damage they can do to their country before the people revolt.

This is not down to the EU. This is purely British, and has been all the way. The EU have made their position clear and it's not an unreasonable one. We know that Britain is being a bit cagey about paying anything at all and there will be pressure to not pay if the country can possibly get away with it (which it can't), being useless over the border and being extremely cheeky over EU nationals. No kidding that the EU negotiators are sitting on their points until Britain gets its act together. To progress to the lovely trade talks that Britain wants without nailing the negotiating team to the wall on the three sticking points would be rash stupidity.

gimli2112

one thing I'm getting from all this is just how unlikeable to Tory party is.

murphaph

We'll according to the FAZ May has essentially begged Merkel, Macron and Juncker for help.

According to the article the British are also prepared to concede ECJ jurisdiction on EU citizens rights after Brexit:

"Die britischen Unterhändler zeigen sich nun dafür offen, dass der Europäische Gerichtshof auch nach dem Brexit Streitfragen schlichtet."

The article goes on to say what many of us have also said, that Northern Ireland is very difficult to solve completely without knowing the future trading relationship with the UK as a whole. It states that the EU knows this and would not prevent the negotiations progressing to trade if NI remained the only issue.

It states also that the biggest problem remains the exit bill. It will be somewhere between 60 and 90 billion Euro apparently.

http://m.faz.net/aktuell/politik/ausland/brexit-verhandlungen-ohne-qualen-geht-es-nicht-15257859.html

LuckyLloyd

Sand wrote: »

The EU may not want to undermine May, but she is already teetering and seems to lack the authority or conviction to face down the Tory lunatic fringe. I don't see how it ends other than May resigning, or going for a ultra hard Brexit to try buy a few more months in power. Tory brexit policy is under a terrible inertia.

I think the only way for May to get out of the corner she has painted herself into is by seeking some form of cross-party support with Labour and the LibDems to get enough moderate, soft brexit MPs to secure a parliamentary majority on brexit terms. It could also offer her political cover for abandoning stupid red lines. The Tory lunatic fringe would be livid, but would they topple the government to invite in Corbyn instead?

I don't think May will go for it though, I don't think she has the charisma to pull it off and I don't think Labour would respond positively. They would likely see it as an opportunity to kick the chair out from under May, hoping for an early election. But its the only way I see the British position breaking free of its current trajectory.

Ultimately though, attempts by the EU to go easy on May only delay the inevitable. She is getting weaker and weaker, not stronger. There's no advantage to giving her time.

And to think that she was being labelled a tough savvy political force when she called the election. I would agree with your analysis - for me the EU should be asking themselves who is likely to be in power in the UK come the second half of the process through to the end and start negotiating as if they were already there.

Enzokk

murphaph wrote: »

We'll according to the FAZ May has essentially begged Merkel, Macron and Juncker for help.

According to the article the British are also prepared to concede ECJ jurisdiction on EU citizens rights after Brexit:

"Die britischen Unterhändler zeigen sich nun dafür offen, dass der Europäische Gerichtshof auch nach dem Brexit Streitfragen schlichtet."

The article goes on to say what many of us have also said, that Northern Ireland is very difficult to solve completely without knowing the future trading relationship with the UK as a whole. It states that the EU knows this and would not prevent the negotiations progressing to trade if NI remained the only issue.

It states also that the biggest problem remains the exit bill. It will be somewhere between 60 and 90 billion Euro apparently.

http://m.faz.net/aktuell/politik/ausland/brexit-verhandlungen-ohne-qualen-geht-es-nicht-15257859.html

Those are two points that solo have been arguing against here for some time. That the ECJ should have no more say in the UK and that the UK shouldn't pay more than X amount (did he mention £30b?) or the EU can go and whistle. It seems that the negotiations are moving towards a point that most seemed to recognise. The EU has the upper hand. ("John Doe has the upper hand")

murphaph

Enzokk wrote: »

Those are two points that solo have been arguing against here for some time. That the ECJ should have no more say in the UK and that the UK shouldn't pay more than X amount (did he mention £30b?) or the EU can go and whistle. It seems that the negotiations are moving towards a point that most seemed to recognise. The EU has the upper hand. ("John Doe has the upper hand")

If the article is true in its entirety then it shows the UK position to be as weak as most sensible people recognised all along.

They desperately need a deal on trade that goes well beyond the FTA with Canada or the UK economy will be severely damaged. Such a FTA has never been signed anywhere as far as I know. Only the EU can gift them this. Even if they can get on to talking trade (assuming the Tories don't implode when May admits the ECJ will be the arbiter on citizens' rights) I expect they'll quickly recognise that a very long transitional phase of perhaps 5 years will be required before the UK could conceivably leave the single market and customs union, giving both sides time to build customs infrastructure and to actually negotiate the details. Personally I think if they can sell ECJ jurisdiction in citizens' rights they'll try to sell it in respect to continued access to the SM and CU. I mean if you're prepared to cross your own red line then you may as well cross it with both feet and extract maximum benefit.

A long transitional phase could kill Brexit better than anything else.

carrickbally

murphaph wrote: »

We'll according to the FAZ May has essentially begged Merkel, Macron and Juncker for help.

According to the article the British are also prepared to concede ECJ jurisdiction on EU citizens rights after Brexit:

"Die britischen Unterhändler zeigen sich nun dafür offen, dass der Europäische Gerichtshof auch nach dem Brexit Streitfragen schlichtet."

The article goes on to say what many of us have also said, that Northern Ireland is very difficult to solve completely without knowing the future trading relationship with the UK as a whole. It states that the EU knows this and would not prevent the negotiations progressing to trade if NI remained the only issue.

It states also that the biggest problem remains the exit bill. It will be somewhere between 60 and 90 billion Euro apparently.

http://m.faz.net/aktuell/politik/ausland/brexit-verhandlungen-ohne-qualen-geht-es-nicht-15257859.html

There is an article in the Irish Times today about the 'hard/soft' border.

When is everyone going to accept the fact that Brexit means a hard border and any talk of it being otherwise is rubbish?

Nody

carrickbally wrote: »

There is an article in the Irish Times today about the 'hard/soft' border.

When is everyone going to accept the fact that Brexit means a hard border and any talk of it being otherwise is rubbish?

The question is where the hard border will be though...