Brexit discussion thread II

Water John

We didn't keep Foot and Mouth out because we were turning a blind eye to lorry loads of sheep coming in from Scotland, through Larne.

Rain Ascending

Hmm, some weird signals coming out from the Tory party conference.

From the Guardian yesterday, they reported on some comments from the immigration minister, Brandon Lewis, at a Conservative fringe meeting:

Lewis confirmed that the final version [of the government white paper on post-Brexit immigration policy] will include a commitment that freedom of movement for EU migrants will end in March 2019 – on Brexit day

Also, on Newsnight on BBC2, Chris Grayling refused to confirm that the ECB will have supremacy over UK courts for the operation of the Single Market.

The latter might possibly prove to be true, by re-using for example, the Norwegian model of an independent arbitration panel, albeit reusing a lot of ECB case law. However, it seems a little improbable that this would be set up just for a transition period. By far the simplest approach would be to accept the ECB's jurisdiction for a temporary period and this is the most likely outcome given the slow progress of negotiations.

As for abrogating freedom of movement during the transition period -- forget that, it's a complete non-runner from the EU side. There may be some restrictions arising from the expectation that freedom of movement ends in 2021, but the basic principles will still apply.

I can think of a number of theories for such rather incredible positions being signalled ... and none of them reflect favourably on the current Conservative government.

I'd hate to be in a business trying to make Brexit go/no-go decisions on the run-up to March 2019. All this might be posturing for the Conservative party conference, but in that case, it will take months to roll back these public pronouncements that jeopardize the transition period being agreed to by the EU. The uncertainty levels are rising again...

Capt'n Midnight

steddyeddy wrote: »

I think Vince Cable is being the most honest with the British people right now.

Including the bit about him being the next PM with just 7.4% of the national vote ?

Problem is with both major parties hell bent on Brexit to appease slightly more than half of each of their respective electorate for opposite reasons.

FrancieBrady

Water John wrote: »

We didn't keep Foot and Mouth out because we were turning a blind eye to lorry loads of sheep coming in from Scotland, through Larne.

It was generally accepted that a good job was done on F&M. But it cost astronomical amounts of money and caused untold amount of hassle.
And even after that it probably only worked because there was a large degree of compliance and understanding.

You cannot hope to secure a border in the same way or to have the same resources to do it.
As I asked before, what happens after a dissident attack on one post? (which will surely happen)

You will have a quickly escalating descent into having to have an armed and provocative border again, and all bets are off after that imo.

Nody

FrancieBrady wrote: »

As I asked before, what happens after a dissident attack on one post? (which will surely happen)

You will have a quickly escalating descent into having to have an armed and provocative border again, and all bets are off after that imo.

Well for starters you limited the number of allowed border crossings for road traffic and ensure the other points are not usable (digging a hole, concrete blocks etc.). Then you ensure the border crossings you keep open (and once again these will be limited) are heavily reinforced with concrete walls and buildings and a few suitable towers. Put them about a km in on Irish soil (with concrete walls from the border to avoid people turning off and spreading along the wall) with open fields around it to allow snipers a good long view around the point.

Can it still be attacked? Of course but it's going to be a hell of a lot harder...

murphaph

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It was generally accepted that a good job was done on F&M. But it cost astronomical amounts of money and caused untold amount of hassle.
And even after that it probably only worked because there was a large degree of compliance and understanding.

You cannot hope to secure a border in the same way or to have the same resources to do it.
As I asked before, what happens after a dissident attack on one post? (which will surely happen)

You will have a quickly escalating descent into having to have an armed and provocative border again, and all bets are off after that imo.

A dissident attack on an Irish customs post in the Republic you mean? I don't see that quickly escalating tbh. Where would the popular support for such attacks come?

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It was generally accepted that a good job was done on F&M. But it cost astronomical amounts of money and caused untold amount of hassle.
And even after that it probably only worked because there was a large degree of compliance and understanding.

You cannot hope to secure a border in the same way or to have the same resources to do it.
As I asked before, what happens after a dissident attack on one post? (which will surely happen)

You will have a quickly escalating descent into having to have an armed and provocative border again, and all bets are off after that imo.

The world is different today than in the 1970s.

Social media would ensure that the full horror of any dissident activity would be publicised. Not even the hard men in Sinn Fein would be able to avoid condemning it. There would be overwhelming public condemnation of any such violence.

The only need for an armed border would be if there were republicans stupid enough to commit violent acts. Of course, there will be "good republicans" like Slab who will want to protect their criminal smuggling rackets and may well sponsor "dissident" activity.

Zubeneschamali

Nody wrote: »

Well for starters you limited the number of allowed border crossings for road traffic and ensure the other points are not usable (digging a hole, concrete blocks etc.).

The border is 500 km long, and does not follow any natural boundary like a river or mountain range.

There are more than 200 roads crossing the border. Many were blocked or blown up by the British Army during the troubles, and then quietly re-opened by locals. Many, many times.

There are roads that cross and recross the border multiple times going from A to B. There are farms that straddle the border. There are probably farm sheds that have a door either side.

It simply isn't a border that can be closed without huge, huge investment: compulsory purchases, land clearance, wholesale road closures, destruction of the livelihoods of people, farms and whole towns. And the locals will not co-operate with any such efforts.

Nody

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

The border is 500 km long, and does not follow any natural boundary like a river or mountain range.

Which makes it a short border that's easier to control.

There are more than 200 roads crossing the border. Many were blocked or blown up by the British Army during the troubles, and then quietly re-opened by locals. Many, many times.

500km means a single patrol can drive the whole distance in a day to check for that.

There are roads that cross and recross the border multiple times going from A to B. There are farms that straddle the border. There are probably farm sheds that have a door either side.

So put up the concrete wall 3m high 50m in on Irish side of the border with a road next to it with a patrol driving down the road once a day.

It simply isn't a border that can be closed without huge, huge investment: compulsory purchases, land clearance, wholesale road closures, destruction of the livelihoods of people, farms and whole towns. And the locals will not co-operate with any such efforts.

Well NI then gets to petition their government to move the border checks as proposed by EU to the water edge to avoid exactly that; if not then yes that is exactly what Brexit means and welcome to the reality folks. As for huge investments we're talking about mandatory forced buying of land on the Irish side only (NI gets to ask the UK government for funds) for a 75m x 500km road implementation basically; same way they would go for a new highway. That is not going to be an excessive cost esp. with EU funded support to implement it.

FrancieBrady

murphaph wrote: »

A dissident attack on an Irish customs post in the Republic you mean? I don't see that quickly escalating tbh. Where would the popular support for such attacks come?

Entirely possible, if the Irish Gov are seen to be implementing partition, then god only knows where it could end up.

FrancieBrady

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

The border is 500 km long, and does not follow any natural boundary like a river or mountain range.

There are more than 200 roads crossing the border. Many were blocked or blown up by the British Army during the troubles, and then quietly re-opened by locals. Many, many times.

There are roads that cross and recross the border multiple times going from A to B. There are farms that straddle the border. There are probably farm sheds that have a door either side.

It simply isn't a border that can be closed without huge, huge investment: compulsory purchases, land clearance, wholesale road closures, destruction of the livelihoods of people, farms and whole towns. And the locals will not co-operate with any such efforts.

A lot of the posters seem unaware of how complex the geography/topography is.

Nody

FrancieBrady wrote: »

A lot of the posters seem unaware of how complex the geography/topography is.

China built a railway line all the way to the Tibet going up over 5000 meters over sea through the mountains; I think you overestimate the complexity by comparison.

Zubeneschamali

Nody wrote: »

So put up the concrete wall 3m high 50m in on Irish side of the border with a road next to it with a patrol driving down the road once a day.

You should be able to do that for the cheap end of the cost of a motorway - say €5 mil per km, €2.5 billion, take about 20 years to complete.

steddyeddy

MEPs are going to vote on a motion that states the UK's approach to financial issues, such as the divorce bill has "seriously impeded" talks. The first bit in bold is great advice for the UK right now, this is not about you Boris, nor is it about the Tory party. The British people need to get angry at the fact that people like Boris and Jacob are destroying their country based on some sick power play. The second bit in bold details that the UK hasn't made progress on any of the important issues. Also inside, Nigel Farage claims the EU is holding the UK hostage.....

The BBC reports on the latest.

There has not been "sufficient progress" in Brexit talks yet to open trade discussions, EU negotiator Michel Barnier has suggested.
He told the European Parliament Theresa May's Florence speech "gave us some openings which are starting to be reflected in the negotiations".
MEPs are debating a motion urging any decision on the next phase of talks be delayed pending a "big breakthrough".
The UK insists there is a new dynamic and "real momentum" behind the process.
But during the debate in Brussels, a number of MEPs drew attention to what they claimed were divisions in the Conservative government and Mrs May's cabinet.
Manfed Weber, a German member of the European People's Party grouping, said: "Who do I call in London - Theresa May, Boris Johnson or David Davis? Please don't put your party first".
MEPs will vote later on a motion saying the UK's approach to financial issues has "seriously impeded" progress, a motion the UK said was drafted before the most recent round of negotiations.
Rolling updates from the European Parliament
What we learned from Theresa May's Florence speech
Former UKIP leader Nigel Farage accused the EU of "treating us (the UK) like a hostage".
"Unless we pay a ransom and meet your demands you won't have an intelligent conversation with us about trade... and no guarantee when we meet your demands you will come to us and have a sensible trade agreement," he said.
The Department for Exiting the EU said that since Mrs May's speech "the dynamic of the negotiations has shifted and we have instilled real momentum into the talks".
The European Parliament, home to 751 MEPs from across the EU, has no formal role in the Brexit negotiations - but will get to approve any final deal agreed between the UK and Brussels.
Tuesday's vote in Strasbourg is not binding, but does represent a chance to "take the political temperature", BBC Brussels reporter Adam Fleming said.
It comes with the UK keen to start talking about what kind of trading relationship it will have with the EU after Brexit.
The original aim had been to get the go-ahead for these discussions when EU leaders meet next month.
But the EU says this can only happen when the European Council decides there has been "sufficient progress" on three issues: the so-called divorce bill when the UK leaves, the rights for EU citizens in the UK and UK citizens in the EU and the Northern Ireland border.

flatty

Teresa may is as lucky as a black cat. The only reason she is still in power, is that no one in the tory party will oust her, risking a general election.
It is a perfect storm of unfortunate events.

FrancieBrady

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

You should be able to do that for the cheap end of the cost of a motorway - say €5 mil per km, €2.5 billion, take about 20 years to complete.

And then the cost of fixing the holes that will be constantly put in it.

Perfectly ordinary law abiding citizens will (and already are) resist any attempt to build a wall.

Society right along the frontier and beyond would be completely destabilised. Would that be a price worth paying when there are other options.

solodeogloria

murphaph wrote: »

We don't want them but we're not children. We understand that it's a choice between membership of the single market or not. It's just as much our responsibility to protect the integrity of the single market as our other EU partners. If the UK crashes out, we either police the external frontier or we will find our own exports to the rest of the single market will face inspections as if they came from the UK itself.

Good morning!

Ladies and gentlemen, we see that the most ardent of Euro-federalists actually want a hard border.

Admittedly, I'm not so enthusiastic about the "integrity of the single market". Not that a progressive trading arrangement with the UK would actually undermine the "integrity of the single market".

There are solutions to the border depending on how willing the EU are about discussing it with Britain. At present the border issue cannot be resolved until we move on to the second round of discussions.

There are a number of options of getting there. The strongest seems to be to tie the continued shortfall of the EU budget to the transitional period.

To Nody and anyone else who claims that putting a wall on the border would be easy, please try drive between Cavan and Monaghan on the N54 / A3. You will cross the border 4 times for a small number of km per stretch. Are you proposing customs and border controls for each of these 4 times?

It is up to the EU to decide if they are willing to deal with the trade and customs issues on the border. Britain has been clear that it doesn't want hard infrastructure on the border and has put forward some proposals to discuss this. The EU are unwilling to discuss this. This isn't Britain's fault.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Nody

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Society right along the frontier and beyond would be completely destabilised. Would that be a price worth paying when there are other options.

Well Ireland can leave the single market and EU in general; that's the other option if the UK government will block the idea of the control being put in the water (i.e. between UK mainland and NI). Which do you think is going to cheaper and better for Ireland in the long term? Ireland with in EU with controls on every truck going in / out of Ireland in every port or implementing a hard border in the north? Because leaving the NI border open is not going to happen; EU will then simply move the border control to encompass everything from Ireland instead with all the delays that will encompass.

joe40

The British approach to the border in my opinion is totally contradictory. On one hand they claim to want a "frictionless border" in Ireland with electronic checks for goods etc. On the other hand the rhetoric is all about taking back control of their borders with special emphasis on stemming immigration.
What will stop an EU citizen legally entering Ireland nip across the "frictionless" border and suddenly they're in the UK. It makes no sense to me but very few commentators in Britain are questioning this.

Enzokk

solodeogloria wrote: »

It is up to the EU to decide if they are willing to deal with the trade and customs issues on the border. Britain has been clear that it doesn't want hard infrastructure on the border and has put forward some proposals to discuss this. The EU are unwilling to discuss this. This isn't Britain's fault.

So Brittain has in effect abdicated all responsibility of the border and how to manage it to the EU. The UK doesn't want any infrastructure on the border so that is what will happen, what happens on the other side is the EU's problem, right?

I think this is the Jacob Rees-Mogg solution, if its not there then its not a problem. I see you follow this thinking as well.

Igotadose

Nody wrote: »

China built a railway line all the way to the Tibet going up over 5000 meters over sea through the mountains; I think you overestimate the complexity by comparison.

China's not a democracy. If you're in the way of progress good luck.

FrancieBrady

Nody wrote: »

Well Ireland can leave the single market and EU in general; that's the other option if the UK government will block the idea of the control being put in the water (i.e. between UK mainland and NI). Which do you think is going to cheaper and better for Ireland in the long term? Ireland with in EU with controls on every truck going in / out of Ireland in every port or implementing a hard border in the north? Because leaving the NI border open is not going to happen; EU will then simply move the border control to encompass everything from Ireland instead with all the delays that will encompass.

That isn't the only option here.

Zubeneschamali

solodeogloria wrote: »

Admittedly, I'm not so enthusiastic about the "integrity of the single market".

As a non-member of the Royal County Down Golf Club, I am not so enthusiastic about their £200 a round fees for visitors.

Nody

FrancieBrady wrote: »

That isn't the only option here.

If UK refuses to play ball and go for a hard brexit (which everything points towards) yes those are the only two options. UK refuses to be part of the customs union means all goods have to be checked coming in from UK territories. Now you could in theory have UK do those checks but honestly between UK refusing being under any EU legislation and control and their general incompetence in performing the duties today, why? That leaves a hard border control between NI and Ireland since UK insists that NI is to be dealt with as one union with the mainland.

Now the alternatives that are available are all "red lines" according to what UK/EU has shared which includes:

1. UK part of the EU customs union (not an option)
2. NI remains in EU customs union and border control at NI ports / UK ports (DUP blocking & government saying no)
3. UK performs the checks on behalf of EU (UK refuses to be under EU control & legislation & incompetence in execution today)
4. EU says "screw our rules we'll remove all our controls since UK is third party country and then all countries will get same free movement over the border" (never going to happen)

That leaves Hard border in the north OR hard border around the Island of Ireland in general at mainland to perform said controls.

solodeogloria

Nody wrote: »

If UK refuses to play ball and go for a hard brexit (which everything points towards) yes those are the only two options. UK refuses to be part of the customs union means all goods have to be checked coming in from UK territories. Now you could in theory have UK do those checks but honestly between UK refusing being under any EU legislation and control and their general incompetence in performing the duties today, why? That leaves a hard border control between NI and Ireland since UK insists that NI is to be dealt with as one union with the mainland.

Now the alternatives that are available are all "red lines" according to what UK has shared which includes:

1. UK part of the EU customs union (not an option)
2. NI remains in EU customs union and border control at NI ports / UK ports (DUP blocking & government saying no)
3. UK performs the checks on behalf of EU (UK refuses to be under EU control & legislation & incompetence in execution today)

That leaves Hard border in the north OR hard border around the Island of Ireland in general at mainland to perform said controls.

Good morning!

Or, the EU could discuss trade and customs terms and be willing to be flexible and come up with a new arrangement for a new reality and a new situation. Britain is willing to be flexible here, and I think the EU should be also.

Please answer my question about the N54 and A3 between Monaghan and Cavan with bits of Fermanagh in the middle.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

FrancieBrady

Nody wrote: »

If UK refuses to play ball and go for a hard brexit (which everything points towards) yes those are the only two options. UK refuses to be part of the customs union means all goods have to be checked coming in from UK territories. Now you could in theory have UK do those checks but honestly between UK refusing being under any EU legislation and control and their general incompetence in performing the duties today, why? That leaves a hard border control between NI and Ireland since UK insists that NI is to be dealt with as one union with the mainland.

Now the alternatives that are available are all "red lines" according to what UK has shared which includes:

1. UK part of the EU customs union (not an option)
2. NI remains in EU customs union and border control at NI ports / UK ports (DUP blocking & government saying no)
3. UK performs the checks on behalf of EU (UK refuses to be under EU control & legislation & incompetence in execution today)

That leaves Hard border in the north OR hard border around the Island of Ireland in general at mainland to perform said controls.

As long as we are in negotiations then we must insist on no hard border.

If Britain goes out without a deal from those negotiations then we have a new ball game.

murphaph

joe40 wrote: »

The British approach to the border in my opinion is totally contradictory. On one hand they claim to want a "frictionless border" in Ireland with electronic checks for goods etc. On the other hand the rhetoric is all about taking back control of their borders with special emphasis on stemming immigration.
What will stop an EU citizen legally entering Ireland nip across the "frictionless" border and suddenly they're in the UK. It makes no sense to me but very few commentators in Britain are questioning this.

Yeah it's nonsense but the incompetent Home Office (which already sent illegal deportation notices to EU citizens) will, we are told, be able to ensure there is no illegal working through employment checks. Quite how a small company is supposed to verify that Pavel A is legally entitled to work in the UK and Pavel B (with good fake documents) isn't, hasn't been mentioned.

The UK is becoming a laughing stock. Taking back control of its borders with the EU by leaving 500km of that border completely open.

Anyway, that's their problem.

Our problem is maintaining the integrity of the single market if (when?) the babies crash out in 2019.

A border wall is not necessary nor practical. It would be cheaper to use a fleet of 400 drones permanently airborne, relieving each other during charging cycles and relaying anpr data to a central control centre or centres, deploying "flying squads" to intercept commercial vehicles that are not registered.

The EU will not expect us to hermetically sealed the border. No border, even a sea border, is impenetrable. We'll be expected to do our best. The vast majority of the Irish population would opt for a border with customs controls over leaving the single market.

Solo...please don't quote me then go on to say exactly the opposite of what I wrote. I clearly said we don't want a hardened border but we understand the necessity should our big baby of a neighbour flounce out of the single market.

Lemming

Ah, solo, nice of you to join us again for another day. Some of us are still awaiting responses to the Boeing issue & the gold-export-numbers-fudge revelation, which you have conveniently dodged thus far in your desire to be honest. And all that.

murphaph

Enzokk wrote: »

So Brittain has in effect abdicated all responsibility of the border and how to manage it to the EU. The UK doesn't want any infrastructure on the border so that is what will happen, what happens on the other side is the EU's problem, right?

I think this is the Jacob Rees-Mogg solution, if its not there then its not a problem. I see you follow this thinking as well.

They can't abdicate all responsibility. Article 1 of GATT says you must treat all country's exports equally. If the UK levies no tariffs on EU imports at the Irish border then it can't levy tariffs on anything from anywhere!

murphaph

FrancieBrady wrote: »

That isn't the only option here.

What are the other options if there's a hard Brexit and the UK won't allow NI to be part of the single market?

ambro25

murphaph wrote: »

They can't abdicate all responsibility. Article 1 of GATT says you must treat all country's exports equally. If the UK levies no tariffs on EU imports at the Irish border then it can't levy tariffs on anything from anywhere!

More to the point, the UK could not claim the benefit of WTO MFN trading terms with 3rd party WTO members either (contrary to proposals/slogans of the most economically-illiterate Leavers, levying tariffs is not optional).

solodeogloria wrote: »

Or, the EU could discuss trade and customs terms and be willing to be flexible and come up with a new arrangement for a new reality and a new situation. Britain is willing to be flexible here, and I think the EU should be also.

Details, please?

Nody

solodeogloria wrote: »

Or, the EU could discuss trade and customs terms and be willing to be flexible and come up with a new arrangement for a new reality and a new situation. Britain is willing to be flexible here, and I think the EU should be also.

You mean EU should give up their core principle and lower their standards globally and remove a red line while you insist on UK should retain them? Because UK will be a third party country which means all other WTO countries have to have the same access possibilities. In fact it's the exact same thing raised earlier that you ignore as you appear to be not able to grasp the implications of what you're suggesting and the implications that would have in general.

Please answer my question about the N54 and A3 between Monaghan and Cavan with bits of Fermanagh in the middle.

Right after you answer the questions raised to you in regards to Bombardier toll war with the US that you've ignored since post 3753.

FrancieBrady

murphaph wrote: »

What are the other options if there's a hard Brexit and the UK won't allow NI to be part of the single market?

There are other options while we are negotiating a deal, is my point.
A no deal scenario is different and the consequences will be the same, unfortunately in my opinion. Underlining yet again what a disaster this Brexit ref was.

murphaph

ambro25 wrote: »

More to the point, the UK could not claim the benefit of WTO MFN trading terms with 3rd party WTO members either (contrary to proposals/slogans of the most economically-illiterate Leavers, levying tariffs is not optional).

That's what I said, isn't it? :-)

They either levy tariffs on goods crossing the Irish border from the EU or they levy no tariffs on any goods coming from anywhere (well, from any WTO country...are there any non-WTO countries they can agree trade deals with lol).

ArmaniJeanss

murphaph wrote: »

If the UK levies no tariffs on EU imports at the Irish border then it can't levy tariffs on anything from anywhere!

'No tariffs from anywhere' is a genuine suggestion of Boris and one of his favored private think-tanks The Institute for Free Trade.

murphaph

FrancieBrady wrote: »

There are other options while we are negotiating a deal, is my point.
A no deal scenario is different and the consequences will be the same, unfortunately in my opinion. Underlining yet again what a disaster this Brexit ref was.

But we're talking about the event of no deal right now. We need to prepare for no deal.

Nody

FrancieBrady wrote: »

There are other options while we are negotiating a deal, is my point.
A no deal scenario is different and the consequences will be the same, unfortunately in my opinion. Underlining yet again what a disaster this Brexit ref was.

As the old saying goes; plan for the worst and hope for the best. As things stands there's no reason not to prepare to set up a hard border today because being realistic that's the most likely outcome and it's not something you can put in place over night without proper planning. That means planning on how are roads going to be shut down short term/long term, how many customs agents are there to be at what controls etc. How are the armed forces going to be deployed to support the border controls, the Gardai etc. All things which should be planned now rather than hoping UK will somehow suddenly regain their sanity and do a deal.

Zubeneschamali

Nody wrote: »

As things stands there's no reason not to prepare to set up a hard border today because being realistic that's the most likely outcome and it's not something you can put in place over night without proper planning.

It's not something you can put in place with a 2 billion euro budget and a 10 year run-up, either.

And we don't have either of those.

murphaph

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

It's not something you can put in place with a 2 billion euro budget and a 10 year run-up, either.

And we don't have either of those.

The EU will foot the bill as a whole. They know we didn't ask to be thrown under the bus by our crazy neighbours.

It won't be perfect but you can set up a rudimentary regime if you have done some planning.

joe40

I cross the border everyday for work as do hundreds/thousands of others in both directions. A hard border will be a disaster on so many levels, but it is hard to see how it can be avoided.

FrancieBrady

joe40 wrote: »

I cross the border everyday for work as do hundreds/thousands of others in both directions. A hard border will be a disaster on so many levels, but it is hard to see how it can be avoided.

I crossed it 6 times this morning on a short trip.

A fence/wall is not a workable solution. Just as Trump's Mexican wall was not feasible.

Samaris

murphaph wrote: »

The EU will foot the bill as a whole. They know we didn't ask to be thrown under the bus by our crazy neighbours.

It won't be perfect but you can set up a rudimentary regime if you have done some planning.

I'd say we'll certainly get help with it, but other EU countries have landborders with non-EU countries too, so we'll probably be expected to make the best of it same as they have, however that's been brought about (I don't know if the EU contributes towards those - probably should, since the border countries are protecting the inner countries from having to spend too much on that themselves.)

We will have to man it though, and if the UK get very stroppy, possibly alone. Ireland is at a disadvantage to the UK there, since, let's face it, we have no reason to believe that EU standards will drop and if EU goods get onto the British market, they shouldn't, but there probably won't be a standards or safety issue. We have no idea whatsoever what British standards will be like if they drop them for competitiveness' sake (which is what every indication so far leads to) and partly for our own citizens and partly for our duty to the common market, we can't let those into general circulation in the south.

Given our geographical position, it will be relatively more difficult for these goods to get into the rest of the EU, but Ireland is in the tighter corner in terms of the border, should the UK continue on its course to let the rest of the world hang and screw its neighbours (again, which every indication so far leads to).

Actually, this is probably why the EU countries as a whole are so insistent on this point being laid to rest before moving on - we have all seen what the British approach to this has been like, and there is little reason to believe that the UK will deal honestly without being pinned to a wall on this.

joe40

A fence/wall is absolutely not workable. They will set up some controls and accept the leaks of which there will be plenty, both goods and people. Smugglers paradise

steddyeddy

The European Parliament has voted to delay the UK's progression to the next stage of talks as sufficient progress has not been made. The vote passed by 557 to 92. From the Independent.

The European Parliament is calling for Brexit talks to be delayed after it warned that "sufficient progress has not yet been made" on key areas, including citizens’ rights and the so-called divorce bill.

MEPs overwhelmingly backed a resolution saying not enough progress on key separation issues had been made.

They and warned that a “major breakthrough” was now needed to reenergise talks.

The vote represents a blow to Theresa May, who had hoped that her speech in Florence would act as a catalyst for talks to move to the future relationship between the UK and Brussels.

MEPs passed the resolution, drawn up by the Parliament’s Brexit Steering Group, following a debate on Tuesday morning with EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker and chief negotiator Michel Barnier.

It was approved by a vote of 557 to 92 with 29 abstentions.

mountaintop

Did anyone notice Ray Bassett, Ireland's one time ambassador to Canada call recently for Ireland to seriously consider leaving the E.U. along with Britain? He was interviewed on RTE newsand I was glad to see that he appeared rather uncomfortable spouting a strategy that would send Ireland straight back to the era of the donkey and cap tipping the Brits. What people don't realise is that his views were canvassed and instigated as part of Michael Gove's what is called 'Policy Exchange', it's basically a mouthpiece for Gove to put forward his self interest pro Brexit views. The man is such a weasel. The Sunday Times is the only newspaper I know that highlighted the Gove link. This whole Brexit debate is based on lies and falsehoods that pander to peoples narrow racist angst when in reality they are expressing dissatisfaction with their own lives and Europe is being used as the scapegoat. They should look closer to home for causes to their problems. Give me what they call faceless European bureaucrats anyday rather than the Tory scoundrels everyone actually knows the faces of. Britain leaving the E.U. undermines the vision of a pan European consensus in favour of the blinkered self obsession of the nation state. Britain has a blinkered vision of its past, and I believe it's its ambition to go back to it that is the heart of Brexit. When the dust settles, and Britain is sailing its two new aircraft carriers around the world and is suddenly struggling to pay for their upkeep, when it realises that leaving Europe did not, after all, solve ts problems (has everyone forgotten what the pre-Europe days of the 1970s) what will they do, say sorry, we got it wrong? The Goves and Johnson's and the Solo's of this site will be very quiet I imagine, but by then it will be too late!

Water John

Yeah Corbyn and labour will be in govn't and they'll blame them.

steddyeddy

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

Morning S.

Or, the EU could discuss trade and customs terms and be willing to be flexible and come up with a new arrangement

Or the UK could be more sensible in discussing trade and customs terms.

for a new reality and a new situation. Britain is willing to be flexible here, and I think the EU should be also.

The EU is being flexible. I think the UK should too.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

No, thank you!

Professor Moriarty

steddyeddy wrote: »

The European Parliament has voted to delay the UK's progression to the next stage of talks as sufficient progress has not been made. The vote passed by 557 to 92. From the Independent.

The Tory press will be even more righteously indignant over the next few days. Tick tock.

Nody

As a side note Tory continues to show their disconnect with the world; how to fix the missing EU workers at farms? Well no problem says Tory MP Craig Mackinlay:

I was struggling to think why wouldn't a youngster from Glasgow without a job come down to the south to work for a farm for the summer with loads of gorgeous EU women working there?"

"What's not to like? Get on your bike and find a job.

There ya go; farm worker problem solved for UK after Brexit!

Samaris

Nody wrote: »

As a side note Tory continues to show their disconnect with the world; how to fix the missing EU workers at farms? Well no problem says Tory MP Craig Mackinlay:

I was struggling to think why wouldn't a youngster from Glasgow without a job come down to the south to work for a farm for the summer with loads of gorgeous EU women working there?"

"What's not to like? Get on your bike and find a job.

There ya go; farm worker problem solved for UK after Brexit!

...And the award for most spectacular missing of the point goes to Tory MP Craig Mackinley.

Has he been under a rock for two years?