Brexit discussion thread II

flaneur

I’m seeing plenty of it emerging.

As for calling the Irish government position stupid?!

Compared to what? “Brexit means Brexit” We have no plan?

I would also add the DUP’s image in Continental Europe is not good. They’re, correctly, understood to be very far right and from a background of religious extremism and ultra nationalism. If you google them you typically hit images of Ian Paisley and things like the ranting at the Pope during the European Parliament visit etc etc etc or modern hardline views on things like same sex marriage.

Leroy42

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

I don't think the UK's position could be perceived as bullying. Their stated intent is to keep the border open. Discussions towards that end could open if phase 2 is given the green light.

Since the UK are changing the process that was agreed to, ie phase 1 being the the settlement and border, what should the UK give in return for that?

Ireland are looking for a written confirmation that no border will exist after Brexit, which according to you is exactly what the UK what.

So shouldn't they give that commitment in writing?

solodeogloria

flaneur wrote: »

I’m seeing plenty of it emerging.

As for calling the Irish government position stupid?!

Compared to what? “Brexit means Brexit” We have no plan?

I would also add the DUP’s image in Continental Europe is not good. They’re, correctly, understood to be very far right and from a background of religious extremism and ultra nationalism.

Good morning!

Again, the DUP's responsibility is to represent the unionist constituency that they represent. I don't think they care much about how they are thought of. This is why I find that some of the concern for Northern Ireland on this thread is faux concern. It's only with consideration to the standpoint of nationalists that it is expressed. A sea border is a huge concern to unionists who want to see their standing in the United Kingdom maintained.

The Irish government position is mindblowingly stupid because we all know that the UK aren't going to agree to membership of the customs union and the single market at a national level or a sub-national level. Therefore the only thing that the Irish Government are doing is blocking discussions on this issue and on the wider trade links with the UK that they heavily depend on.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Leroy42

flaneur wrote: »

I’m seeing plenty of it emerging.

As for calling the Irish government position stupid?!

Compared to what? “Brexit means Brexit” We have no plan?

I would also add the DUP’s image in Continental Europe is not good. They’re, correctly, understood to be very far right and from a background of religious extremism and ultra nationalism. If you google them you typically hit images of Ian Paisley and things like the ranting at the Pope during the European Parliament visit etc etc etc or modern hardline views on things like same sex marriage.

The imagine of the DUP in the UK is not good either. Remember the surprise in the media when May began talks with the DUP on just how right wing they actually were?

Schorpio

solodeogloria wrote: »

The Irish government position is mindblowingly stupid because we all know that the UK aren't going to agree to membership of the customs union and the single market at a national level or a sub-national level. Therefore the only thing that the Irish Government are doing is blocking discussions on this issue and on the wider trade links with the UK that they heavily depend on.

Solo - I don't think you're in the best position to refer to anything the Irish government does as 'mindblowingly stupid'. People in glass houses and all that. I could very easily refer to quite a number of things the UK government has done which I believe are mindblowingly stupid (not least calling a referendum in the first place), but I think we are all keeping this discussion respectful (or trying to anyway).

I fail to see how you don't see a contradiction in what you say. "the UK aren't going to agree to membership of the customs union and the single market at a national level or a sub-national level", but they also don't want a border, so please allow us move to the next phase of talks without providing any commitments. Those two viewpoints directly oppose each other. Also, the DUP are "in power", and they really wouldn't mind at all if the border were to reappear. How can you not understand the Irish government's concern here?!

We don't want a border. But it's important that we don't commit to that. So that we won't put up a border. But it's important that we can. So that we won't.

flaneur

Leroy42 wrote: »

The imagine of the DUP in the UK is not good either. Remember the surprise in the media when May began talks with the DUP on just how right wing they actually were?

True, but, worryingly not a bad fit for aspects of the far right of the Tories, aspects of English nationalism and much of the tabloid press, at least in terms of bellicose jingoism.

I don’t think that’s really very representative of modern Britain, but it’s who they have up front and centre.

I’m sure Borris Johnson as foreign minister will smooth it over with his astounding diplomatic skills.

It will be a “titanic success!”

solodeogloria

Schorpio wrote: »

Solo - I don't think you're in the best position to refer to anything the Irish government does as 'mindblowingly stupid'. People in glass houses and all that. I could very easily refer to quite a number of things the UK government has done which I believe are mindblowingly stupid (not least calling a referendum in the first place), but I think we are all keeping this discussion respectful (or trying to anyway).

I fail to see how you don't see a contradiction in what you say. "the UK aren't going to agree to membership of the customs union and the single market at a national level or a sub-national level", but they also don't want a border, so please allow us move to the next phase of talks without providing any commitments. Those two viewpoints directly oppose each other. Also, the DUP are "in power", and they really wouldn't mind at all if the border were to reappear. How can you not understand the Irish government's concern here?!

We don't want a border. But it's important that we don't commit to that. So that we won't put up a border. But it's important that we can. So that we won't.

Good morning!

Again, I don't consider myself as being in a "glass house" just at your stating such!

I'm entitled to say that the Irish Government's position is incredibly stupid when it is and I won't say otherwise.

There's no contradiction at all. The UK Government have always stated they want the Northern Ireland border open. The restrictions for the rest of the EU (bar Ireland) are in respect to employment and not to travel. Therefore biometric ID will be made available to those who apply for settled status to prove that they have the right to work in Britain.

On the DUP - they aren't in "power". They are in a confidence and supply arrangement. You can't blame them for taking the opportunity either. Again, I'm not convinced that the DUP are the spawn of the devil in the same way that I'm not convinced SF are.

The UK have stated that they do not want to put infrastructure on the border. The only people at the moment who are making that more likely are the EU and Ireland by delaying phase 2 discussions on trade and customs and the border. The pressure is in the wrong place. It ought to be on the EU to progress.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Schorpio

If it's so clear-cut, why are the UK failing to provide a written agreement that there will be no border?

You don't want a border, we don't want a border. Let's sign an agreement and all move on with our lives. Biometric ID's - all that stuff - can be worked out during the next round.

Leroy42

solodeogloria wrote: »

The Irish government position is mindblowingly stupid because we all know that the UK aren't going to agree to membership of the customs union and the single market at a national level or a sub-national level. Therefore the only thing that the Irish Government are doing is blocking discussions on this issue and on the wider trade links with the UK that they heavily depend on.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

And that is fine, but apart from smart technology (of which they haven't actually given any details) how are the UK going to square the circle of removing themselves from the mechanisims that removed the need for borders and not having a border.

You seem to be suggesting that the UK simply won't erect a physical border, thus it won't be them to blame. But whomever actually builds it it needs to be built. And why would the UK voters, who voted to take back control, then cede control of their border to the EU?

And if they have open borders in NI, will they also have them throughout the UK and if not why not? If it is acceptable in one place surely it is acceptable in all?

We all know the position of the UK, they want everything for nothing. We know that the brexiteers want all the access and freedom of the EU but none of the responsibility. Wanting it does not mean that it is possible.

Leroy42

Schorpio wrote: »

If it's so clear-cut, why are the UK failing to provide a written agreement that there will be no border?

You don't want a border, we don't want a border. Let's sign an agreement and all move on with our lives. Biometric ID's - all that stuff - can be worked out during the next round.

Exactly, why are the UK not giving this commitment?

Fox said yesterday that it would part of the negotiations.

Again, the UK already agreed to this being part of phase 1, now they are insisting that it is part of phase 2 are you are calling the Irish government stupid for sticking to an agreement.

Well then, what does that make the UK government for agreeing to it in the first place? And if they are so quick to renege on an agreement why should the Irish government, or the EU, take them at their word on anything?

solodeogloria

Leroy42 wrote: »

And that is fine, but apart from smart technology (of which they haven't actually given any details) how are the UK going to square the circle of removing themselves from the mechanisims that removed the need for borders and not having a border.

You seem to be suggesting that the UK simply won't erect a physical border, thus it won't be them to blame. But whomever actually builds it it needs to be built. And why would the UK voters, who voted to take back control, then cede control of their border to the EU?

And if they have open borders in NI, will they also have them throughout the UK and if not why not? If it is acceptable in one place surely it is acceptable in all?

We all know the position of the UK, they want everything for nothing. We know that the brexiteers want all the access and freedom of the EU but none of the responsibility. Wanting it does not mean that it is possible.

Good morning!

If the EU progress the discussions to phase 2 alternative arrangements can be effectively discussed. It is impossible to discuss this unless the EU are willing to discuss it. There are a number of other models in operation today.

The key to progress is discussing trade and customs. Ireland needs to discuss this for other reasons also.

Edit:

Leroy42 wrote: »

Since the UK are changing the process that was agreed to, ie phase 1 being the the settlement and border, what should the UK give in return for that?

Ireland are looking for a written confirmation that no border will exist after Brexit, which according to you is exactly what the UK what.

So shouldn't they give that commitment in writing?

I already told you this isn't true in a different post. The EU and the UK never agreed to solve all the border issues in phase 1. I also told you that the UK and the EU made progress on the CTA and on cross border institutions.

What's the point in discussing if you're not going to listen to what I say?

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

FrancieBrady

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

Again, the DUP's responsibility is to represent the unionist constituency that they represent. I don't think they care much about how they are thought of. This is why I find that some of the concern for Northern Ireland on this thread is faux concern. It's only with consideration to the standpoint of nationalists that it is expressed. A sea border is a huge concern to unionists who want to see their standing in the United Kingdom maintained.

The Irish government position is mindblowingly stupid because we all know that the UK aren't going to agree to membership of the customs union and the single market at a national level or a sub-national level. Therefore the only thing that the Irish Government are doing is blocking discussions on this issue and on the wider trade links with the UK that they heavily depend on.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

The UK are not to be trusted on the border because they are being disingenuous on it.

How can you on the one hand say 'There will be no hard border' and then on the other say 'it cannot be decided until there are trade talks'.?

Ellian

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

Again, the DUP's responsibility is to represent the unionist constituency that they represent.

An MP's responsibilities extend to all their constituents, not just the ones that voted for them.

FrancieBrady

Ellian wrote: »

An MP's responsibilities extend to all their constituents, not just the ones that voted for them.

The Queen's University poll posted above tends to suggest that the DUP are trying to lead unionism behind the barricades again, against unionism's better judgement.
I expect the DUP to ramp up the anti Irish rethoric some more. That would be par for the course - scaremongering.

Ellian

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The Queen's University poll posted above tends to suggest that the DUP are trying to lead unionism behind the barricades again, against unionism's better judgement.
I expect the DUP to ramp up the anti Irish rethoric some more. That would be par for the course - scaremongering.

I agree and it tends to undercut Mr. Foxes statements, even if one were willing to be generous to the point of naivety and take them as genuine, rather than just moving the goalposts to get to the stuff that the government really cares about.

Leroy42

solodeogloria wrote: »

I already told you this isn't true in a different post. The EU and the UK never agreed to solve all the border issues in phase 1. I also told you that the UK and the EU made progress on the CTA and on cross border institutions.

What's the point in discussing if you're not going to listen to what I say?

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Apologies, I may have missed up and I certainly do not recall.

My understanding was that Phase 1 related to settlement, EU citizens rights and the NI border. On the first day of the talks David Davies agreed that trade would not be discussed until those were settled.

I also based my understanding on the basis that both the EU and Ireland seem to think that was the case as well.

Taking that you are right and it was never agreed, we still revert back to the point that you continue to claim that the UK don't want a border, yet Fox came out on Sunday and stated it would be part of the negotiations. Now either you believe that their will be no border or that Fox is lying.

From an Irish POV, I think it prudent to take the word of a senior government minister when he says that the existence or not of a NI will be open to negotiation and thus we cannot simply assume that there will be no border.

Given that, is it not right that Ireland should stand up for what it believes is the best policy for the country?

Schorpio

Schorpio wrote: »

If it's so clear-cut, why are the UK failing to provide a written agreement that there will be no border?

You don't want a border, we don't want a border. Let's sign an agreement and all move on with our lives. Biometric ID's - all that stuff - can be worked out during the next round.

Solo - I'm keen to hear what you've got to say to this. I noticed that you didn't address it in your most recent post.

What's the point in discussing if you're not going to listen to what I say?

I think you might be coming around to how we've felt for a while....

First Up

The UK has very few cards to play and it was obvious from the start that they would try to use the Irish border as leverage.

Brussels, Barnier and the rest of the EU saw that a mile off and that bluff has been called. The fact that the UK is still trying to play it shows how hopelessly short of options they are.

solodeogloria

Schorpio wrote: »

Solo - I'm keen to hear what you've got to say to this. I noticed that you didn't address it in your most recent post.

I think you might be coming around to how we've felt for a while....

Good morning!

I'd be happy for this to happen if it wasn't an obvious attempt to keep the UK or part thereof in the single market and customs union. The UK can't agree to this because it doesn't deliver on the referendum result which is about taking back control.

If the EU stated it was willing to discuss alternatives to this in phase 2 I'd be happy to do this.

However it seems like Ireland and the EU are trying to keep the UK or part thereof in the single market and customs union according to leaked documents and public statements. This isn't acceptable.

The UK have already stated that their position is to have no hard infrastructure on the border. The border cannot be dealt with until trade and customs terms are agreed. This is a matter for phase two.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

LeinsterDub

solodeogloria wrote: »

I'd be happy for this to happen if it wasn't an obvious attempt to keep the UK or part thereof in the single market and customs union. The UK can't agree to this because it doesn't deliver on the referendum result which is about taking back control.

The UK said they have a solution that doesn't require a hard border and one would assume doesn't require NI to be in the CU . So what is it?


Also the referendum was to leave the EU it said nothing of the SM or CU.

flaneur

Schorpio wrote: »

If it's so clear-cut, why are the UK failing to provide a written agreement that there will be no border?

You don't want a border, we don't want a border. Let's sign an agreement and all move on with our lives. Biometric ID's - all that stuff - can be worked out during the next round.

It would involve commitment and facts and all of those things the current U.K. government is afraid of.

What they’re looking for is something non committal. Friends with benefits. Cake and eat it...

wes

The Brits racism is starting to show again (sure not even mentioning the crap said about our Taoiseach):

Brexit: Labour MP draws Trump comparison for claiming Ireland would pay for border


Britain should threaten ‘weak’ and ‘subservient’ Ireland to get its way on Brexit, Ukip says


The fact that they don't realize, the crap there saying will not go down well here is astounding. I think its best that out government use our veto, if this is the kind of crap we are to expect from "Brexit" Britain. There no friend of ours if this is how they choose to act.

flaneur

Great to see they’re keeping it classy, just like their football supporters do.

Leroy42

solodeogloria wrote: »

I'd be happy for this to happen if it wasn't an obvious attempt to keep the UK or part thereof in the single market and customs union. The UK can't agree to this because it doesn't deliver on the referendum result which is about taking back control.

So what is the alternative? You keep giving both the desire for an open border and yet red lines including closing the open borders with no discussion of how to solve it.

solodeogloria wrote: »

If the EU stated it was willing to discuss alternatives to this in phase 2 I'd be happy to do this.

Why only in phase 2, why not now? I get it that you don't want to actually deal with it and hope to use it as a bargaining chip to get a better deal but as I pointed out many times the EU have, from the start, stated that settlement, EU citizens rights and NI border needs to be dealt with before trade talks. This was agreed to by David Davies.

solodeogloria wrote: »

However it seems like Ireland and the EU are trying to keep the UK or part thereof in the single market and customs union according to leaked documents and public statements. This isn't acceptable.

Only because that appears to be the only workable solution to the NI issue.

solodeogloria wrote: »

The UK have already stated that their position is to have no hard infrastructure on the border. The border cannot be dealt with until trade and customs terms are agreed. This is a matter for phase two.

I think you are mixing up a position with a wish. They wish there to be no border, but their position is the red lines which are contrary to that wish. Which should be take more seriously? The stated red lines or an undefined wish?

wes

wes wrote: »

The Brits racism is starting to show again (sure not even mentioning the crap said about our Taoiseach):

Brexit: Labour MP draws Trump comparison for claiming Ireland would pay for border


Britain should threaten ‘weak’ and ‘subservient’ Ireland to get its way on Brexit, Ukip says


The fact that they don't realize, the crap there saying will not go down well here is astounding. I think its best that out government use our veto, if this is the kind of crap we are to expect from "Brexit" Britain. There no friend of ours if this is how they choose to act.

how is any of that remotely racist?

murphaph

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

I don't think the UK's position could be perceived as bullying. Their stated intent is to keep the border open. Discussions towards that end could open if phase 2 is given the green light.

If it isn't the only interpretation that could be given is that the Irish government and the EU don't want to make progress on the issue. This is again why I feel the pressure is being misdirected. It should be on the EU to move forward.

I hope progress can be made, but I personally can't stand much the desperation amongst some to find some reason why some people are determined to find "paddywhackery" (what a word!) where it doesn't exist.

The British press are entitled to criticise the stupidity that is emerging from the Irish government on this issue.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

You believe the Irish government to be acting stupidly while apparently supporting the Tories' decision to set all sorts or arbitrary red lines that were nowhere to be found on the ballot paper and for triggering A50 without am actual plan!

<SNIP>

kowtow

Schorpio wrote:

If it's so clear-cut, why are the UK failing to provide a written agreement that there will be no border?

Probably because they are being asked to agree that nobody will put a border there.

It's one thing for the UK to undertake.. which it has IMO.. not to put infrastructure on the border but what Ireland appears to be saying is "give us a written agreement that we won't be made to put a border there either" . Given the nature of the single market and the role of Brussels that would obviously be a hostage to fortune.

flaneur

flaneur wrote: »

Great to see they’re keeping it classy, just like their football supporters do.

And you see no irony in that post whatsoever?

wes

Aegir wrote: »

how is any of that remotely racist?

Aping Trumps bull**** for one. Sorry, not going to pretend, we all don't know exactly where this is coming from.

flaneur

Aegir wrote: »

And you see no irony in that post whatsoever?

No, I don’t actually as the comparison in aspects of the media and fringe (but close to government) commentary is sadly, accurate.

Leroy42

kowtow wrote: »

Probably because they are being asked to agree that nobody will put a border there.

It's one thing for the UK to undertake.. which it has IMO.. not to put infrastructure on the border but what Ireland appears to be saying is "give us a written agreement that we won't be made to put a border there either" . Given the nature of the single market and the role of Brussels that would obviously be a hostage to fortune.

Yes, and both yourself and Solo continue to state that UK do not want a border, and that therefore we can all take comfort from that. Although that doesn't appear to be the UK governments position which seems to be (based on what Fox stated on Sunday) that the border should form part of the negotiations. Based on that statement it is reasonable to conclude that should the Uk not get the trade deal they like they will insist on a border.

The option of a border has nothing to do with what Ireland or indeed the UK wants. It is a simple matter of the laws and how to control movement of people and goods.

wes

wes wrote: »

Aping Trumps bull**** for one. Sorry, not going to pretend, we all don't know exactly where this is coming from.

She isn't though, not if you read what she said properly.

I think you are looking for something that isn't there.

murphaph

Already the kippers are directing their invective towards the Irish.

This is going to turn nasty fast.

wes

Aegir wrote: »

She isn't though, not if you read what she said properly.

I think you are looking for something that isn't there.

I read it, and I think she knows full well what she is doing. All she did was say it in a far smarter way then Trump.

We are already seeing the invective from the Brits, showing there true colors. Its didn't take much for this to happen. Look at the comments in regards to Varadkar as another example.

flaneur

Bear in mind the UK first mooted an end or severe modification to the CTA in 2008 that would have ended up with a sea border between the two islands.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/new-border-control-will-abolish-free-movement-between-uk-and-ireland-0fw72cfk93c

That was under Labour and Jacqui Smith’s tenure as Home Secretary.

That’s one reason I would most definitely insist on a written bilateral agreement. The CTA is a very weak arrangement that seems to have no legally binding basis at all.

ancapailldorcha

Grim reading in the Spectator though not for the usual reasons I find that publication to make for grim reading:

Alex Massie, The Spectator wrote:

Tone matters, however, and the message being received in Dublin is that the British expect the troublesome Micks to pipe down and get in line. Small things matter more than you might like them to. When David Davis’s officials send emails to the Irish asking for a meeting with ‘Kenny’ you can’t quite be sure whether this is a demonstration of rudeness (the meeting would be with ‘the Taoiseach’) or ignorance (the then-Taoiseach’s forename is Enda). Either way, it seems like a fail.

....James Forsyth writes that ‘Dublin is taking a huge risk with its hardline approach’ and this is something well-understood in Ireland too. But the Irish position is not altogether unreasonable. It is asking the British government to honour promises made by the British government. Viewed from Dublin’s perspective, this is not outrageous.

The difficulty is that the British government cannot honour those pledges while also delivering a Brexit which means Brexit in the way the government has chosen to define Brexit. That, the Irish will say, is hardly Ireland’s fault and perhaps London should have thought about that before assuring everyone Brexit would be easy.

In other news, the co-founder of Cobra beer Lord Bilimore has said that any trade deal with India will involve some sort of deal on migration:

Business Insider wrote:

LONDON — Britain will struggle to sign new free trade deals with economic powerhouses like India after Brexit unless it is willing to accept high levels of immigration from these countries into Britain.

That's according to Lord Bilimoria, co-founder of Cobra beer, and one of Britain's most well-known entrepreneurs.

Bilimoria spoke to Business Insider on Friday following International Trade Secretary Liam Fox's claim that his efforts to make Britain a great trading nation are being undermined by the unwillingness of British businesses to export.

The Indian-born British businessman described Fox as "utterly unfit" to serve as International Trade Secretary and claimed that nobody "across the board" in British business "has any respect" for the Conservative minister.

wes

wes wrote: »

I read it, and I think he knows full well what she is doing. All she did was say it in a far smarter way then Trump.

We are already seeing the invective from the Brits, showing there true colors. Its didn't take much for this to happen. Look at the comments in regards to Varadkar as another example.

Kate Hoey is saying that the UK government isn't going to put in a hard border and if one goes in, it will the the Irish government that do it. This is nowhere near Trumps declaration that he was going to build a wall and make the Mexicans pay for it.

It makes good headlines though.

wes

Aegir wrote: »

Kate Hoey is saying that the UK government isn't going to put in a hard border and if one goes in, it will the the Irish government that do it. This is nowhere near Trumps declaration that he was going to build a wall and make the Mexicans pay for it.

It makes good headlines though.

The only difference between, what she and Trump said, is that she was a bit more polite about it. Still exact same intent behind there words. She and her Brexiter ilk are no better than Trump and his ilk.

solodeogloria

Leroy42 wrote: »

Yes, and both yourself and Solo continue to state that UK do not want a border, and that therefore we can all take comfort from that. Although that doesn't appear to be the UK governments position which seems to be (based on what Fox stated on Sunday) that the border should form part of the negotiations. Based on that statement it is reasonable to conclude that should the Uk not get the trade deal they like they will insist on a border.

The option of a border has nothing to do with what Ireland or indeed the UK wants. It is a simple matter of the laws and how to control movement of people and goods.

Good afternoon!

What Fox said was that the shape of the border depends on trade and customs discussions. This is what the UK have said since last July. This is a common sense position. The UK don't want infrastructure on the border. That depends on the EU providing trade and customs terms that allow for that to happen.

Despite what you have claimed the EU and the UK both acknowledged that the border issue wouldn't be completely solved in phase 1.

The UK have already said they are not going to remain a part of the single market and customs union. That position isn't going to change. This means alternative options need to be considered in phase 2. That is unless the EU was to promise no tariffs and customs options that would allow the border to be open without joining the single market or customs union in phase 1.

Now, I doubt that will happen. Therefore we need phase 2. Not just because of the UK's position but also because of the EU's position.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

ancapailldorcha

solodeogloria wrote: »

What Fox said was that the shape of the border depends on trade and customs discussions. This is what the UK have said since last July. This is a common sense position. The UK don't want infrastructure on the border. That depends on the EU providing trade and customs terms that allow for that to happen.

If this is true, why did the UK delegation agree to the EU's timetable for the negotiations?

Leroy42

Just on the position that some in the UK seem to be taking, Kate Hoey for eg, that if a border needs to go up it will be the EU and Ireland will have to pay for it.

Who bears the responsibility for any border between two countries? I mean, is it acceptable, from an international trade arrangement, that one side will simply do no checks whatsoever on their border?

From my understanding, it would seem quite a strange position that the UK are stating that they want a trade deal yet at the same time effectively saying that they care little for the regulations of the EU and will do nothing to stop goods from the UK flooding into EU.

ancapailldorcha

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

If this is true, why did the UK delegation agree to the EU's timetable for the negotiations?

did they have a choice?

Zubeneschamali

solodeogloria wrote: »

What Fox said was that the shape of the border depends on trade and customs discussions.

From the Irish perspective, this is backwards. There can be no hard border, the UK must agree that before we move on, and then the shape of the trade and customs discussions will depend on that agreement.

You don't like this order of things because it clearly means NI must stay within the customs union, at the least, but that is not Ireland's problem, it is a matter for Westminster to sort out.

ancapailldorcha

Aegir wrote: »

did they have a choice?

There's been plenty of posturing about walking away. They knew that this was how it would be before the referendum and yet a clear majority vote for it regardless.

Leroy42

Aegir wrote: »

did they have a choice?

Of course. Might not have been much of a choice.

Does Eu get a choice on whether Uk leaves?

kowtow

wes wrote:

The only difference between, what she and Trump said, is that she was a bit more polite about it. Still exact same intent behind there words. She and her Brexiter ilk are no better than Trump and his ilk.

Seriously?

Did Trump say "We aren't going to build a wall but if Mexico want one they'll have yo build it"

If he did then he and Kate Hoey are saying the same thing. If not, then you are twisting her words to suit your agenda.

murphaph

flaneur wrote: »

Bear in mind the UK first mooted an end or severe modification to the CTA in 2008 that would have ended up with a sea border between the two islands.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/new-border-control-will-abolish-free-movement-between-uk-and-ireland-0fw72cfk93c

That was under Labour and Jacqui Smith’s tenure as Home Secretary.

That’s one reason I would most definitely insist on a written bilateral agreement. The CTA is a very weak arrangement that seems to have no legally binding basis at all.

To be honest I don't care about the CTA with Great Britain. I've no problem with full passport controls with an island you can only reach by air or sea.

I only care about the economic fortunes of Ireland. These are best served with a sea border.

Sure, it's a gamble because vetoing trade talks could in theory be the cause of the UK crashing out without a deal but a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

We have no idea what this unpredictable British government will do in any case so we should use our veto now if needs be to secure something. It's a calculated risk.

This all stems from a poorly prepared for referendum that didn't outline the real problems with Brexit.

Zubeneschamali

Aegir wrote: »

did they have a choice?

Since they are backtracking now and arguing to move on without settling these points, they could obviously have done the same at the start.

But they have no plan and no end goal, so they can't think that far ahead. It is all about keeping the Government going for another month, another week.

solodeogloria

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

If this is true, why did the UK delegation agree to the EU's timetable for the negotiations?

Good afternoon!

The UK and the EU both said that they didn't anticipate all border discussions to be complete in phase 1. I don't know why people are claiming that they did. Progress has been made in negotiating rounds on cross border institutions and the CTA.

This revisionist re-writing of what people said at the start of the negotiations isn't helpful and it isn't really honest.

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

From the Irish perspective, this is backwards. There can be no hard border, the UK must agree that before we move on, and then the shape of the trade and customs discussions will depend on that agreement.

You don't like this order of things because it clearly means NI must stay within the customs union, at the least, but that is not Ireland's problem, it is a matter for Westminster to sort out.

This won't be agreed, so it's just a waste of time. Ireland needs good trade terms. If good trade terms and customs terms are agreed then the border can be open. That's in Ireland's interest to seek.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Leroy42

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

What Fox said was that the shape of the border depends on trade and customs discussions.

So why do you keep repeating that the position of the Uk is that there will be no border? That is clearly not the case. At least you have acknowledged that much.

UK position is that the question of a border should be discussed as part of the trade talks. One can only summise that the UK will therefore use it as part of the deal. I say that as a outcome of the statement not in any way whether it is 'good' or not.

So, we now have the position that the UK is open to the border if it can sell it based on getting something in return. And you wonder why Ireland is uneasy with the UK position?