Brexit discussion thread II

demfad

demfad wrote: »

Please post a link to where the reason for Brexit was given as getting 'tired for the rules' or else post some substantiation for your opinion.

its certainly a far more believable reason than this one:-

carrickbally wrote: »

Much of the motivation for Brexit is that the English resent having to put up with those lower order countries not knowing their place as they expected them to do in imperial/colonial times.

LeinsterDub

blanch152 wrote: »

What worries me most about that statement is the last sentence.

Ireland wants an open border, the UK claims to want an open border, but if the UK won't stay in the single market and the customs union, the EU may rightly and correctly insist that we impose border controls.

We've a veto. Don't have to do anything we don't want to

carrickbally

Aegir wrote: »

its certainly a far more believable reason than this one:-

The hysterical right wing London press campaign against the EU went on for decades.

Brexit is the result.

Those are the facts whether you believe them or not.

carrickbally

Brexit is racially motivated.

The anti-EU campaign that went on for decades in the London gutter media was fundamentally racist.

The Rape of Lucretia

Mezcita wrote: »

“The outcome we want is as close to the status quo as we can get. I’m not sure that view is necessarily shared – and understandably so – by other EU members states.”"

blanch152 wrote: »

What worries me most about that statement is the last sentence.

“The outcome we want is as close to having their cake and eating it as we can get. I’m not sure that view is necessarily shared – and understandably so – by other EU members states.”"

ancapailldorcha

carrickbally wrote: »

Brexit is racially motivated.

The anti-EU campaign that went on for decades in the London gutter media was fundamentally racist.

Please stop the soapboxing. You've already been warned about it. Your last few posts are just attempts to labour this point and it is not adding anything constructive to the debate.

Nody

LeinsterDub wrote: »

We've a veto. Don't have to do anything we don't want to

And what happens after for some reason Ireland vetoes the final deal? Hard brexit and hard border required...

So yea; Ireland has a veto but if UK don't play ball and move the border to the sea (since customs union appears to be out which was the other option) it's going to be a hard border and there's nothing Ireland can do about it (nor EU for that matter).

steddyeddy

blanch152 wrote: »

What worries me most about that statement is the last sentence.

Ireland wants an open border, the UK claims to want an open border, but if the UK won't stay in the single market and the customs union, the EU may rightly and correctly insist that we impose border controls.

Agreed. The UK still haven't faced this reality.

Capt'n Midnight

This one made me LOL
Brexit: EU bank may not fully repay UK until 2054 :eek:

"Everyone on both sides of the negotiating table agree that we have to pay back the 3.5 billion euro, basically in cash, and that will happen over a long period, up until 2054, because that's when the loans are amortised."

Another example of the slow motion train wreck that is Brexit. It's obvious once it's explained but it's another example of how Brexit won't be a windfall.

Firblog

steddyeddy wrote: »

Agreed. The UK still haven't faced this reality.

It's not only the UK that has to face this reality, it's a shared one. It's not just up to the UK as to what type of border is going to exist between NI and the rest of the Island, the EU also has responsibility here.
I don't believe our govt is facing upto the reality that there most probably will be a hard border between on this Island, and constantly repeating that it is up to the UK to come up with solutions is not being constructive, it's more akin to Fr Jack answering that 'it's an ecumenical matter' when asked a question he doesn't have an answer to.

Nate--IRL--

Firblog wrote: »

It's not only the UK that has to face this reality, it's a shared one. It's not just up to the UK as to what type of border is going to exist between NI and the rest of the Island, the EU also has responsibility here.
I don't believe our govt is facing upto the reality that there most probably will be a hard border between on this Island, and constantly repeating that it is up to the UK to come up with solutions is not being constructive, it's more akin to Fr Jack answering that 'it's an ecumenical matter' when asked a question he doesn't have an answer to.

A Hard Border is inevitable with the current direction of the talks. Unless Northern Ireland achieves customs and regulatory equivalence, there will be a border.

It is not within our power to grant the above, however Westminster can. One suggestion being Northern Ireland seeking to become a separate entity in the WTO.

Nate

steddyeddy

Firblog wrote: »

It's not only the UK that has to face this reality, it's a shared one. It's not just up to the UK as to what type of border is going to exist between NI and the rest of the Island, the EU also has responsibility here.
I don't believe our govt is facing upto the reality that there most probably will be a hard border between on this Island, and constantly repeating that it is up to the UK to come up with solutions is not being constructive, it's more akin to Fr Jack answering that 'it's an ecumenical matter' when asked a question he doesn't have an answer to.

The EU does have responsibility, but they are also the ones who hold all the cards. We're the far bigger power in this negotiation and should put as much onto the British government as possible. After all this is their choosing.

blanch152

steddyeddy wrote: »

The EU does have responsibility, but they are also the ones who hold all the cards. We're the far bigger power in this negotiation and should put as much onto the British government as possible. After all this is their choosing.

It does look like the EU are gambling on the UK crumbling and accepting Norway status for a decade or so while it gets ready to properly leave.

carrickbally

Firblog wrote: »

It's not only the UK that has to face this reality, it's a shared one. It's not just up to the UK as to what type of border is going to exist between NI and the rest of the Island, the EU also has responsibility here.
I don't believe our govt is facing upto the reality that there most probably will be a hard border between on this Island, and constantly repeating that it is up to the UK to come up with solutions is not being constructive, it's more akin to Fr Jack answering that 'it's an ecumenical matter' when asked a question he doesn't have an answer to.

I have been banned for expressing my opinion on this thread so I do not know if I am allowed to say anything more in case I am banned again.

Anyway I will risk it.

It was the UK that took the initiative to vote for Brexit.

That was not constructive since a hard border is the inevitable result.

Nobody can do anything about that since the UK seem to want to be outside the customs union and do not want free movement of people.

Unless they change that attitude everyone involved - the UK, the EU and especially Ireland - will have to put up with the consequences.

First Up

blanch152 wrote:

It does look like the EU are gambling on the UK crumbling and accepting Norway status for a decade or so while it gets ready to properly leave.

No gambling involved. The EU has contingency plans for any of the various ways the UK exit could go. Whichever version the UK decides upon will be fine.

The UK has bet the family home on this. The EU 27 has the price of a night out at stake. Ireland is the most exposed; the EU knows that and that's in the plans.

Charles Babbage

First Up wrote: »

The UK has bet the family home on this. The EU 27 has the price of a night out at stake. Ireland is the most exposed; the EU knows that and that's in the plans.

If the UK creates a crisis hard Brexit, this would be very unusual thing, as there is a very influential lobby of business etc against this and it would be remarkable for a government to committ suicide in this way. Some sort of delay, in the form of a transition period, or an extension of Article 50, seems more likely than pulling the trigger.

carrickbally

First Up wrote: »

No gambling involved. The EU has contingency plans for any of the various ways the UK exit could go. Whichever version the UK decides upon will be fine.

The UK has bet the family home on this. The EU 27 has the price of a night out at stake. Ireland is the most exposed; the EU knows that and that's in the plans.

I am sorry but I think that is too complacent.

I do not see Brexit as anything but a disaster in world terms.

It will have negative effects on the EU which is hard to forecast.

But Brexit is damaging a union of democracies which vary from former imperial powers to former members of the Soviet Union.

That is a hugely negative historical development.

Nody

Btw here's a fun fact of hard brexit; on the day of the hard brexit we've all talked about these trucks being stuck in Calais etc. Well there's another knife twist to that reality; every single UK driving license will not longer be valid in EU (and vice versa) as they will not longer be recognised by the other paty. That means no car, truck or other vehicle can pass the border unless the driver can show appropriate license and that trip will be a one way trip (i.e. in or out of UK).

carrickbally

Nody wrote: »

Btw here's a fun fact of hard brexit; on the day of the hard brexit we've all talked about these trucks being stuck in Calais etc. Well there's another knife twist to that reality; every single UK driving license will not longer be valid in EU (and vice versa) as they will not longer be recognised by the other paty. That means no car, truck or other vehicle can pass the border unless the driver can show appropriate license and that trip will be a one way trip (i.e. in or out of UK).

But that is not funny.

It is a disaster.

It is especially a disaster for this country.

Junkyard Tom

I'd say a hard border in Ireland would return a pro-UI vote in less than 10 years.

Charles Babbage

Nody wrote: »

Btw here's a fun fact of hard brexit; on the day of the hard brexit we've all talked about these trucks being stuck in Calais etc. Well there's another knife twist to that reality; every single UK driving license will not longer be valid in EU (and vice versa) as they will not longer be recognised by the other paty. That means no car, truck or other vehicle can pass the border unless the driver can show appropriate license and that trip will be a one way trip (i.e. in or out of UK).

This does not seem likely. Driving licences from a variety of countries throughout the world are recognised.

What might be a problem is that a non EU citizen would not be allowed work in the EU, so the truck would have to change driver, if he wasn't a citizen. Irish people would be able to work both in the UK and the EU so would have an advantage.

kingbhome

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

I'd say a hard border in Ireland would return a pro-UI vote in less than 10 years.

Agree, it might even be the start of the troubled times again. Not like before but its own troubled times and could end up 15-20 years down teh line worse.

Charles Babbage

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

I'd say a hard border in Ireland would return a pro-UI vote in less than 10 years.

If you saw the Lucidtalk poll this week than a UI is 46% in the event of a hard Brexit. It is 56% among under 45s and simple maths would mean a UI majority in 12-14 years.

blanch152

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

I'd say a hard border in Ireland would return a pro-UI vote in less than 10 years.

That assumes a lot of things.

What if the UK prospers post-Brexit? In that case, a UI would be further away than ever.

More pertinently, what if NI benefits from a hard Brexit, both through illegal (the good republicans in South Armagh expanding business) and legally, the link between the EU and the UK. NI would continue the drift away from the South that has quickened in recent years and a UI would also drift.

Either of those outcomes is up there is the possibility of a UI becoming more likely. I mean, if Sinn Fein believed a hard Brexit would bring a UI, they would be all for it.

Charles Babbage

blanch152 wrote: »

What if the UK prospers post-Brexit? In that case, a UI would be further away than ever.

This is about as likely as Arlene Foster deciding to promote a United Ireland.

More pertinently, what if NI benefits from a hard Brexit, both through illegal (the good republicans in South Armagh expanding business) and legally, the link between the EU and the UK. NI would continue the drift away from the South that has quickened in recent years and a UI would also drift.

A more serious point is that Brexit might undermine legitimate business in NI and promote irregular business. This would not mean prosperity, other than for individuals, but the public finances would in rag order. The real danger is a poor and divided NI where the model to cure the problem isn't obvious.

steddyeddy

blanch152 wrote: »

That assumes a lot of things.

What if the UK prospers post-Brexit? In that case, a UI would be further away than ever.

More pertinently, what if NI benefits from a hard Brexit, both through illegal (the good republicans in South Armagh expanding business) and legally, the link between the EU and the UK. NI would continue the drift away from the South that has quickened in recent years and a UI would also drift.

Either of those outcomes is up there is the possibility of a UI becoming more likely. I mean, if Sinn Fein believed a hard Brexit would bring a UI, they would be all for it.

How could NI prosper being out of the single market?

Junkyard Tom

blanch152 wrote: »

That assumes a lot of things.

What if the UK prospers post-Brexit? In that case, a UI would be further away than ever.

More pertinently, what if NI benefits from a hard Brexit, both through illegal (the good republicans in South Armagh expanding business) and legally, the link between the EU and the UK. NI would continue the drift away from the South that has quickened in recent years and a UI would also drift.

Either of those outcomes is up there is the possibility of a UI becoming more likely. I mean, if Sinn Fein believed a hard Brexit would bring a UI, they would be all for it.

Yes, yes, anything but your worst nightmare. Regardless I think the possibility of a cliff-edge Brexit and hard border is fading. Also, the Tories, the DUP, and the lunatic fringe, will be out of UK government before anything of substance happens.

I guess then you'll have to worry about a Republican-sympathetic Labour-led government who may well support a border poll which is the beginning of the end of the north regardless of its outcome.

Nody

Nody wrote: »

Btw here's a fun fact of hard brexit; on the day of the hard brexit we've all talked about these trucks being stuck in Calais etc. Well there's another knife twist to that reality; every single UK driving license will not longer be valid in EU (and vice versa) as they will not longer be recognised by the other paty. That means no car, truck or other vehicle can pass the border unless the driver can show appropriate license and that trip will be a one way trip (i.e. in or out of UK).

Are you sure about that? I’ve just had colleagues over from both the us and India and they all hired cars. Similarly my Irish liccence was perfectly acceptable in Texas last month.

Rain Ascending

Charles Babbage wrote: »

This does not seem likely. Driving licences from a variety of countries throughout the world are recognised.

What might be a problem is that a non EU citizen would not be allowed work in the EU, so the truck would have to change driver, if he wasn't a citizen. Irish people would be able to work both in the UK and the EU so would have an advantage.

I think you have this roughly right.

BTW, just for clarity, we are discussing the "no-deal" Brexit scenario. There is the agreed hard-Brexit scenario where there is some agreement on the phase 1 issues (divorce bill, existing ex-pats, Irish boarder), but limited or no free trade agreement. In the agreed hard Brexit, it is likely that there would be a number of minor agreements regarding mutual recognition of things like driving licenses and driver CPC. No guarantees, however, as to exactly what would be in or what would be out.

In the "no-deal" scenario, things get <ahem> interesting.

As you point out, Charles, the driver license issue probably won't be a problem. At worst, drivers from the North might need an International Driver Permit to drive in the Republic. Insurance might or might not be okay -- I'd guess the main motor insurance companies would have to clarify what the situation would be.

However, things would be more difficult for professional truck or bus drivers working across the border. As I understand it anybody in this line of business in the EU needs a Driver CPC (Certificate of Professional Competence). After a no-deal Brexit, the UK equivalent of Driver CPCs would automatically be no longer recognized in the Irish Republic. However, assuming the UK Great Repeal Bill goes through, I suspect that Irish Driver CPCs would be still be recognized in the UK, because the relevant regulation would likely be adopted directly into British law unchanged.

So we could end up in a farcical situation whereby UK professional truck and bus drivers are banned from the rest of the EU, but EU professionals can still operate in the UK. That's political suicide territory for any UK government. Remember the fuel protests in 2000? My guess is that the UK would eventually be forced to remove recognition of Driver CPCs from other countries, but probably give an exemption for Irish Driver CPC drivers.

Welcome to the bonkers world of the "no deal" Brexit. Many UK qualifications/certifications suddenly losing all validity in the EU, but EU-equivalents being recognized in the UK.

I've seen zero discussion of this in UK media, outside of posts on one or two blogs. I guess that some British civil servants understand the ramifications, but I very much doubt that any UK politicians do.

steddyeddy

Tory donors tell May that walking away from negotiations should be an option.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2017/oct/28/tory-donors-tell-may-no-deal-is-better-than-a-bad-brexit

Charles Babbage

steddyeddy wrote: »

Tory donors tell May that walking away from negotiations should be an option.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2017/oct/28/tory-donors-tell-may-no-deal-is-better-than-a-bad-brexit

In that article, retailers, the City, universities, the freight industry, overseas investors and food suppliers all sound the alarm over the consequences of crashing out, but a handful of rich Brexiteers should set the policy? They might be able to fund the Conservatives but who would vote for them? It might be hard to get the back benchers to vote for their own destruction.

Junkyard Tom

Charles Babbage wrote: »

In that article, retailers, the City, universities, the freight industry, overseas investors and food suppliers all sound the alarm over the consequences of crashing out, but a handful of rich Brexiteers should set the policy? They might be able to fund the Conservatives but who would vote for them? It might be hard to get the back benchers to vote for their own destruction.

It's perverse and nobody is calling them out on it. An awful lot of the most fervent Brexit proponents and all of the Tory donors are insulated from economic shocks by their wealth.

Enzokk

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

I'd say a hard border in Ireland would return a pro-UI vote in less than 10 years.

I think that is the most likely way forward. Like most difficult decisions a country has to make it will come down to the economy and peoples prosperity. If the UK finds their place in the world very quickly and peoples lives and standard of living doesn't fall then the argument for a UI is not going to be made.

If however people see a fall in wages and living standards then it becomes more persuasive. Then you have the added complication of how Ireland is doing as well. If Ireland prospers while the UK suffers then it could happen even sooner as well. Granted there are a lot of ifs in this post so I will not make a prediction, but it seems to me that the DUP could have thought a little longer than just their noses when they made their choice on whether to back Brexit or not. I could not see a UI in 50 years with the UK in the EU and growing, but I can see one in 10 years with the UK outside of the EU.

First Up

carrickbally wrote:

I am sorry but I think that is too complacent.

Not being complacent; of course it will do damage - not least in Ireland.

But we have friends who will help. The UK doesn't and it will do much more damage there.

Nody

Charles Babbage wrote: »

This does not seem likely. Driving licences from a variety of countries throughout the world are recognised.

But that's just it; the current law and recognition is based on the fact UK license (or EU country license) is an EU law of mutual recognition and recognition of the quality & standard of testing etc. meeting the relevant requirements as verified by UK authorities. If UK crashes out without a deal that mutual recognition which depends on UK being a EU country and hence complying with EU laws is no longer valid and hence there is no law recognising any UK driving licenses any more as UK is a third country to EU like Chad or Belize. It's the same setup as verification of products which are recognised only as long as UK remains in EU but from day 1 of leaving on a hard brexit that previously approved recognition is no longer valid which means not a single product is allowed to enter EU from UK without a new EU done verification.

mickoneill31

Aegir wrote: »

Are you sure about that? I’ve just had colleagues over from both the us and India and they all hired cars. Similarly my Irish liccence was perfectly acceptable in Texas last month.

https://www.ndls.ie/holders-of-foreign-licences.html#holders-of-licences-issued-by-recognised-states

Licences from other countries are valid for 12 months. If you live here and you're not from an worked country you have to exchange your licence for an Irish one.

Ireland will only allow exchanges (I.e. no test) from certain states. The UK isn't on that list yet.

Capt'n Midnight

mickoneill31 wrote: »

https://www.ndls.ie/holders-of-foreign-licences.html#holders-of-licences-issued-by-recognised-states

Licences from other countries are valid for 12 months. If you live here and you're not from an worked country you have to exchange your licence for an Irish one.

Ireland will only allow exchanges (I.e. no test) from certain states. The UK isn't on that list yet.

TBH mutual recognition of licences is a trivial matter easily agreed unless one side is acting the maggot. It's a no-brainer.

Technically I'd imagine that existing 10 year EU licences would continue to be recognised by both sides, so it's not as easy as tearing them up on the day. Also a lot of UK drivers are EU citizens, and a lot of UK haulage companies use foreign drivers. So you'd have to check what nationality a driver was too.

But yeah expect a lot of people renewing their passports and driving licences next year to get an EU one with the longest validity possible.

Also expect a lot of people wanting to get a UK licence and UKpassport and then complaining about how they are singled out when they visit the EU.

This spike of demand will be a cost to the UK.


I might be more worried about Irish haulage companies using foreign drivers in the UK. An Irish driver will be able to go to France no bother thanks to the CTA , but an Eastern European one having to apply for a visa every trip ? Might partially explain why some operators are considering more continental ferry routes.

Capt'n Midnight

Enzokk wrote: »

I could not see a UI in 50 years with the UK in the EU and growing, but I can see one in 10 years with the UK outside of the EU.

Interestingly enough
https://sluggerotoole.com/2017/10/25/lucidtalk-poll-on-a-border-poll-irish-unity/

The poll found that more than 60% of respondents thought a poll should be held within the next 10 years.

One of the more interesting findings was that 56% of the 18-44 year old respondents said they would vote Yes in a potential referendum.

Overall around 55% of respondents favour Northern Ireland staying within the UK.

You also have to take into account demographics and social welfare.
Demographics because there are more foreign born people now and the DUP/TUV/UUP and their policies aren't making an inroad there. Same sex marriage is just one issue where some of the unionist community have voted for the other side, something unthinkable not so long ago.

Social welfare because NI has a disproportionate number of people in government jobs or on various kinds of benefit. If Fianna Fail were a 32 county party with a shot at power and thought they could buy an election and or unity by making sure none of those people would be worse off I reckon they'd go for it. And if that had an added effect of undermining support for SF that would be the icing on the cake.

As for the cost do you think FF would care ?, that can would kicked down the road and then some.

Samaris

The question of what this will do to Ireland is also a big one. Ireland is going to be the most affected country outside Britain itself. We'll have some support from the EU, as the collective group of nations don't want a sick man of Europe off the coast again, but we are going to take a hit and it will be down to whether our collective systems are stable enough to cope with it after the recession. The worse exit Britain makes, the more painful for us.

So the whole UI thing could come down to "it's sh*t here, but it's not much less sh*t over there and the transition would heap a lot more sh*t on top."

Although there is also the question of how shafted NI gets by Westminster. If this free-travel-for-people-but-not-goods notion comes in, NI is going to be a bit abandoned, with customs checks needed crossing the Irish sea and some sort of identification required for NI citizens. Along with the Unionist political representation apparently abandoning their duties towards power-sharing and going off to play Tory kingmakers and the very real issue of NI receiving a lot of funding from the EU that the UK may not be able to provide, along with the deep-seated divisions in the north already, NI could get very resentful. On top of all of that, NI ofc voted to Remain.

I've never been a huge pro-UIer. I've never thought that the Republic was in a strong enough state to take it on, and that's without the worries of whether civil war would break out again. But in a case of Britain merrily throwing itself off a cliff...I don't know where I'd stand on it. Maybe it's the best choice in this rather unprecedented set of circumstances, even if it does harm in the short-term (which it almost certainly will).

Sand

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

TBH mutual recognition of licences is a trivial matter easily agreed unless one side is acting the maggot. It's a no-brainer.

But we already have the UK acting the maggot about basic points such as settling the accounts, protection of citizens rights and the Irish border. There is an idea in the UK of pursuing a "no deal" deal. Its very stupid, but the gist is the UK walks out of negotiations with the EU over the Phase 1 issues but then somehow the EU agrees to everything the UK wants outside of those negotiations. So no deal, but lots of little deals.

If talks go well, mutual recognition is a fairly easy point in Phase 2. If talks break down before Phase 2 even opens, there will be no goodwill from the EU side. Even things as basic as mutual recognition of driving licences will be seen as leverage to force the UK back to the table to settle the Phase 1 issues that the EU sees as a priority.

This is the hard Brexit the UK wants.

Jim2007

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

TBH mutual recognition of licences is a trivial matter easily agreed unless one side is acting the maggot. It's a no-brainer.

It would be an agreement between a third country and the EU, not Ireland... Council of ministers approval, Parliament approval... so not necessarily a no-brainer.

solodeogloria

Nody wrote: »

But that's just it; the current law and recognition is based on the fact UK license (or EU country license) is an EU law of mutual recognition and recognition of the quality & standard of testing etc. meeting the relevant requirements as verified by UK authorities. If UK crashes out without a deal that mutual recognition which depends on UK being a EU country and hence complying with EU laws is no longer valid and hence there is no law recognising any UK driving licenses any more as UK is a third country to EU like Chad or Belize. It's the same setup as verification of products which are recognised only as long as UK remains in EU but from day 1 of leaving on a hard brexit that previously approved recognition is no longer valid which means not a single product is allowed to enter EU from UK without a new EU done verification.

Good afternoon!

Have you taken the British driving test? Here's some thoughts from an American taking it in the Guardian a few years ago. As someone who went through a fairly lengthy rigmarole to get it I can agree with the author. I seriously doubt that British standards in respect to driving tests are more lenient than other member states.

Moreover I doubt it could be applied retrospectively to licenses issued while the UK was still a member.

I think inventing fear stories or Armageddon scenarios without citation to a reputable source is just empty fearmongering.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Sam Russell

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

Have you taken the British driving test? Here's some thoughts from an American taking it in the Guardian a few years ago. As someone who went through a fairly lengthy rigmarole to get it I can agree with the author. I seriously doubt that British standards in respect to driving tests are more lenient than other member states.

Moreover I doubt it could be applied retrospectively to licenses issued while the UK was still a member.

I think inventing fear stories or Armageddon scenarios without citation to a reputable source is just empty fearmongering.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

I suspect that all EU licences are issued on the same basis in all member states and testing has been converging for years - that is why one can swap one for another. However, one is only allowed to hold ONE EU licence, so when the UK leaves the EU, the equivalence ceases and mutual recognition - well that depends.

The recognition of UK licences, like many other standards will cease, as they will no longer be equivalent, unless that is part of the deal to leave the EU.

Will air traffic control allow fights between the UK and EU? Depends.
Will 5th freedom rights for aviation be allowed? Depends.
Will Euratom and UK atomic standards be equivalent? Depends.
Will medicine standards be equivalent? Depends.
Will food standards be equivalent? Depends.
Will customs examination be required on every shipment? Depends.

I can see plenty of room for sill beggars and acting the maggot between now and March 2019, and plenty of room for compromise and negotiation. Which wins out depends.

solodeogloria

Sam Russell wrote: »

I suspect that all EU licences are issued on the same basis in all member states and testing has been converging for years - that is why one can swap one for another. However, one is only allowed to hold ONE EU licence, so when the UK leaves the EU, the equivalence ceases and mutual recognition - well that depends.

The recognition of UK licences, like many other standards will cease, as they will no longer be equivalent, unless that is part of the deal to leave the EU.

Will air traffic control allow fights between the UK and EU? Depends.
Will 5th freedom rights for aviation be allowed? Depends.
Will Euratom and UK atomic standards be equivalent? Depends.
Will medicine standards be equivalent? Depends.
Will food standards be equivalent? Depends.
Will customs examination be required on every shipment? Depends.

I can see plenty of room for sill beggars and acting the maggot between now and March 2019, and plenty of room for compromise and negotiation. Which wins out depends.

Good morning!

I think the best policy is to let the negotiations proceed without panicking at every twist and turn. A lot of progress has already been made, proposed end points are openly being discussed in European circles. I'm of the mind that we need to allow the negotiators to do their job and come up with the best conclusion that they can. I still don't think that recognition of driving licences will be an issue, particularly for those issued within the time of membership. I'd love a good citation to prove me wrong however.

Meanwhile, it looks like some of the more extreme prophesies about the City aren't quite transpiring. In the last few days UBS have received assurances that they can keep operating given that they already have operations within the EU and the job moves are no longer 1,000 but 250.

If this is true for UBS, it's more than likely true for most of the investment banks and wealth managers operating in the City.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Roanmore

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

It's perverse and nobody is calling them out on it. An awful lot of the most fervent Brexit proponents and all of the Tory donors are insulated from economic shocks by their wealth.

You have unelected people telling elected people what to do and if you say anything negative about Brexit you are accused of being anti democratic by those same people.

Enzokk

solodeogloria wrote: »

I think the best policy is to let the negotiations proceed without panicking at every twist and turn. A lot of progress has already been made, proposed end points are openly being discussed in European circles. I'm of the mind that we need to allow the negotiators to do their job and come up with the best conclusion that they can. I still don't think that recognition of driving licences will be an issue, particularly for those issued within the time of membership. I'd love a good citation to prove me wrong however.

Meanwhile, it looks like some of the more extreme prophesies about the City aren't quite transpiring. In the last few days UBS have received assurances that they can keep operating given that they already have operations within the EU and the job moves are no longer 1,000 but 250.

If this is true for UBS, it's more than likely true for most of the investment banks and wealth managers operating in the City.

That is an interesting article where its not said why UBS thinks it only needs to move 250 jobs, only that it thinks this because of reassurances given to them. I get the feeling though the more jobs are kept in London the less of a "hard" brexit it will be and you may just have to be happy with ECJ jurisdiction and free movement of goods in some way. You have to be careful to be happy about the UK keeping jobs in the city as it probably means all those things you want to break with the EU is more than likely to be kept.

Nody

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

I think the best policy is to let the negotiations proceed without panicking at every twist and turn. A lot of progress has already been made, proposed end points are openly being discussed in European circles. I'm of the mind that we need to allow the negotiators to do their job and come up with the best conclusion that they can. I still don't think that recognition of driving licences will be an issue, particularly for those issued within the time of membership. I'd love a good citation to prove me wrong however.

The same rule that applies to all UK certifications for products etc. applies to driving licenses and as you should be aware UK specifically requested that existing UK certifications would be recognised and treated as EU certificates after leaving as per their own trade paper. The reason is the same in both cases; the underlying recognition of the certification and authority is based on the fact that they are EU members (and hence compliant with EU regulation); once they leave even if nothing is changed said recognition due to being done by a UK entity is no longer valid as UK is not a member state but a third country (with all the limitations that comes with it).

Meanwhile, it looks like some of the more extreme prophesies about the City aren't quite transpiring. In the last few days UBS have received assurances that they can keep operating given that they already have operations within the EU and the job moves are no longer 1,000 but 250.

If this is true for UBS, it's more than likely true for most of the investment banks and wealth managers operating in the City.

Except UBS was already third party to EU in the first place due to being Swiss and Switzerland does not have the same rights as UK does in terms of financial services. And you only need to look at the likes of Morgan Stanley's CEO's comment to see that this is only the start of the migration. It will go the same route as the car manufacturers etc. were the new lines will simply not be installed in the UK leading to a long term decline as new services and offices get installed in EU countries instead.

solodeogloria

Good evening!

Enzokk wrote: »

That is an interesting article where its not said why UBS thinks it only needs to move 250 jobs, only that it thinks this because of reassurances given to them. I get the feeling though the more jobs are kept in London the less of a "hard" brexit it will be and you may just have to be happy with ECJ jurisdiction and free movement of goods in some way. You have to be careful to be happy about the UK keeping jobs in the city as it probably means all those things you want to break with the EU is more than likely to be kept.

The article is referring to reassurances they've received about continued trade in the EU after Brexit. Not about what shape Brexit will take.

The reason why there will be very little impact to UBS is because it has a branch in the EU already in Frankfurt and will be able to trade. The same is true of most investment banks and wealth management.

Nody wrote: »

The same rule that applies to all UK certifications for products etc. applies to driving licenses and as you should be aware UK specifically requested that existing UK certifications would be recognised and treated as EU certificates after leaving as per their own trade paper. The reason is the same in both cases; the underlying recognition of the certification and authority is based on the fact that they are EU members (and hence compliant with EU regulation); once they leave even if nothing is changed said recognition due to being done by a UK entity is no longer valid as UK is not a member state but a third country (with all the limitations that comes with it).

I asked for a citation for your claim that all of a sudden British driving licences won't be recognised in the EU.

If there isn't one this is just baseless conjecture.

Nody wrote: »

Except UBS was already third party to EU in the first place due to being Swiss and Switzerland does not have the same rights as UK does in terms of financial services. And you only need to look at the likes of Morgan Stanley's CEO's comment to see that this is only the start of the migration. It will go the same route as the car manufacturers etc. were the new lines will simply not be installed in the UK leading to a long term decline as new services and offices get installed in EU countries instead.

From what I can read in your link about financial services companies are moving figures in the low hundreds rather than the thousands on average. It looks like Morgan Stanley and Standard Chartered aren't moving much more than UBS. The apocalyptic accounts of 75,000 jobs moving from the City don't seem to be transpiring. It seems like Project Fear round two.

UBS isn't helped by the fact it's based in Switzerland (only part of its business). Being a third country company doesn't give it an advantage. Having a legal entity ready to go in Germany does. But most British banks will have something like this already or if they don't they can be incorporated.

The doomsday accounts are over the top and premature.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Jim2007

solodeogloria wrote: »

I asked for a citation for your claim that all of a sudden British driving licences won't be recognised in the EU.

Simply read A50 and note that it terminates all treaties: Open Skies, Pet Passports, you name it including licences.

solodeogloria wrote: »

UBS isn't helped by the fact it's based in Switzerland (only part of its business). Being a third country company doesn't give it an advantage.

Actually UBS have licences to operate in all major EU locations not just Frankfurt. And Switzerland is not exactly a third country since they have a bilateral agreements and will commence negotiations in January to obtain full passporting facilities. And yes, we fully expect to have to accept ECJ supervisions etc.... in any case we already do in other areas via the bilateral agreements.

murphaph

Solo I'm amazed you seem to think that a UK driving licence will continue to be recognised exactly as it is today. It so obviously won't.