Irish Border and Brexit

murphaph

Charles Babbage wrote: »

Well if you believe that then you will be opposing the British unilaterally changing the border. All people want is present agreements to continue.

They can't. We are part of the EU and have to play our part in maintaining the integrity of such things as food standards in the EU. If the UK allows hormone laced beef to be imported from the US, we have to prevent it from entering the EU through NI. It's the same at all EU external frontiers. We rely on them and they will be relying on us. It's a union.

Chips Lovell

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

It's quite frightening to see how willing the hardcore Europhiles are to accept a hard border.

I don't think anyone (beyond some unionists) actually wants a hard border. It's more that by voting to leave the EU, the UK has made that a possibility that may be unavoidable.

The UK government, at the moment, has the self-contradictory position of wanting an open border but rejecting any of the institutions that facilitate it, such as full EU membership, free market membership, Schengen (which it never opted into in the first place), or even a customs union.

Meanwhile the clock is ticking towards March 2019 and we're still none the wiser about what they really want.

FrancieBrady

murphaph wrote: »

Last time it was completely different. Catholics were treated like dogs by the state. The British government finally came in and imposed direct rule and certainly by the mid 70's the inequalities in housing provision etc. had been addressed.

There was no excuse for events that happened after that for sure.

I do believe that there will be a small handful of criminals who will take a shot at anything that says "border" but I don't believe they should be able to force the Republic of Ireland out of the EU!!

We don't welcome this mess the British have landed on us but I am not about to saw my arm off because I have a sore finger. We'll have to make do as best we can with the border post Brexit.

I'd like to see it pushed back to the Irish sea but I don't see how that's compatible with EU regulations as you could have all sorts of US produced sub standard food in NI and this would be unnaceptable to the EU (as it would be to us if the Polish-Ukrainian border had some oddity that allowed substandard US food in via the Ukraine. We in the EU ALL rely on the proper controls at the external border to help ensure our food is safe and up to standard.

I'd welcome a "special status" for NI within the EU but there is zero chance of that happening (from both sides).

I'm a realist. Some form of border controls are on the way. Some criminals will shoot at people working on these controls. These criminals cannot be allowed to determine the path of an entire nation.

I am not going to labour the point...but it will have nothing to do with our relationship with the EU but will be about partition.

And the choice isn't between us or the EU. It is about being imaginative with the solutions. Everyone bar a few random internet people recognise the dangers this poses. Therefore the onus should be kept on them not to renege on their responsibilities...again.

murphaph

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I am not going to labour the point...but it will have nothing to do with our relationship with the EU but will be about partition.

And the choice isn't between us or the EU. It is about being imaginative with the solutions. Everyone bar a few random internet people recognise the dangers this poses. Therefore the onus should be kept on them not to renege on their responsibilities...again.

I hear nothing concrete here Francie, just vague aspirations...much like Brexit itself.

solodeogloria

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

I don't think anyone (beyond some unionists) actually want a hard border. It's more that by voting to leave the EU, the UK has made that a possibility that may be unavoidable.

The UK government, at the moment, has the self-contradictory position of wanting an open border but rejecting any of the institutions that facilitate it, such as full EU membership, free market membership, Schengen (which it never opted into in the first place), or even a customs union.

Meanwhile the clock is ticking towards March 2019 and we're still none the wiser about what they really want.

Good morning!

Neither the UK or Ireland are members of Schengen. This is why British and Irish travellers are subject to border controls in mainland Europe.

The EU can also be flexible. This is a possibility that has been routinely ignored on this thread. If you propose "creative solutions" you should be willing to be a part of them.

I'm looking forward to seeing the UK position paper but it's simply not true that the EU can't be flexible on this matter.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Chips Lovell

Again, it isn't really the EU's problem to solve. It's not like the EU voted to expel Britain.

Anyway, one can only be "flexible" if one knows what the other side is looking for. That, at present, is very unclear.

solodeogloria

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

Again, it isn't really the EU's problem to solve. It's not like the EU voted to expel Britain.

Anyway, one can only be "flexible" if one knows what the other side is looking for. That, at present, is very unclear.

Good morning!

I question your assumption that only one party can be flexible in a bilateral negotiation. I don't share it in the same obvious regard you do.

The border was always going to be complex because it cannot be fully dealt with until trade and customs terms with the EU become clear. I personally don't think immigration is the major concern. There are secondary controls you can apply on this as I've discussed on the other thread.

I don't accept that a matter dealing with one of the EU's member states is not it's problem.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

blanch152

murphaph wrote: »

Last time it was completely different. Catholics were treated like dogs by the state. The British government finally came in and imposed direct rule and certainly by the mid 70's the inequalities in housing provision etc. had been addressed.

There was no excuse for events that happened after that for sure.

I do believe that there will be a small handful of criminals who will take a shot at anything that says "border" but I don't believe they should be able to force the Republic of Ireland out of the EU!!

We don't welcome this mess the British have landed on us but I am not about to saw my arm off because I have a sore finger. We'll have to make do as best we can with the border post Brexit.

I'd like to see it pushed back to the Irish sea but I don't see how that's compatible with EU regulations as you could have all sorts of US produced sub standard food in NI and this would be unnaceptable to the EU (as it would be to us if the Polish-Ukrainian border had some oddity that allowed substandard US food in via the Ukraine. We in the EU ALL rely on the proper controls at the external border to help ensure our food is safe and up to standard.

I'd welcome a "special status" for NI within the EU but there is zero chance of that happening (from both sides).

I'm a realist. Some form of border controls are on the way. Some criminals will shoot at people working on these controls. These criminals cannot be allowed to determine the path of an entire nation.

An excellent summation of the position.

The Good Friday Agreement has changed the game utterly. Anyone born in the North now has Irish citizenship if they want it - that is in effect unity. Nationhood and nationality are no longer based on territory.

Yes a united island is symbolic and it would be great if it happened but it is extremely unlikely during any of our lifetimes. However, through citizenship all Irish are already united, North and South.

Anyone born in the north who wants to be Irish can be Irish, that also means accepting the societal norms of the South which means anyone who turns to violence for political ends can't really call themselves Irish.

murphaph

solodeogloria wrote: »

I'm looking forward to seeing the UK position paper but it's simply not true that the EU can't be flexible on this matter.

Let's just take food safety as an example. Assuming the UK diverges from the EU (and why wouldn't it) and food hormones are allowed in beef in the UK, how would the EU ensure this stuff cannot enter the EU via NI? What would you propose in concrete terms?

Chips Lovell

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

I question your assumption that only one party can be flexible in a bilateral negotiation. I don't share it in the same obvious regard you do.

The border was always going to be complex because it cannot be fully dealt with until trade and customs terms with the EU become clear. I personally don't think immigration is the major concern. There are secondary controls you can apply on this as I've discussed on the other thread.

You're absolutely right, it can't. And until the British government settles on what it actually wants, the border won't be resolved.

There's several options on the table, but at the moment they don't seem to be keen on any.

I think one of the main difficulties that has to be crossed is that the British government needs to stop viewing the EU as a charity from which it deserves to get something. It isn't. It will act in its own self-interest and any deal will take that into account.

Peregrinus

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

Neither the UK or Ireland are members of Schengen. This is why British and Irish travellers are subject to border controls in mainland Europe.

The EU can also be flexible. This is a possibility that has been routinely ignored on this thread. If you propose "creative solutions" you should be willing to be a part of them.

This is ironic, given that a whole suite of creative and flexible solutions have already been imagined and indeed implemented, and the UK has dismissed them all.

As you say, it doesn't have to be the case that only one party to this discussion can be flexible. The UK can also be flexible. So far, though, we've not seen much sign of it.

I note that you say that the UK is about to produce a position paper on this. Until they do, they had better stop bleating about others being flexible; it merely highlights what up to now has been their own intransigence.

swampgas

FrancieBrady wrote: »

And the choice isn't between us or the EU. It is about being imaginative with the solutions. Everyone bar a few random internet people recognise the dangers this poses. Therefore the onus should be kept on them not to renege on their responsibilities...again.

Have you any idea what these imaginative solutions might look like?

This is a political problem, not a technical one where some clever thinking can get us out of a hole. The political problem is that the British Government have decided to break away from the EU and they don't seem to care about the impact on themselves, Ireland, NI, the GFA, or anything else really.

Any solution needs the buy-in of the British government. And as along as the current mob of inept, unprofessional and unprincipled politicians are running the UK there isn't much hope of anything positive happening in the short term.

The only "solution" I can offer is a mass movement to bring down the current UK government, to replace it with one that will stop Brexit.

knipex

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

It's quite frightening to see how willing the hardcore Europhiles are to accept a hard border.

Let's look at the facts:
The Irish government want an open border.
The UK government want an open border.
The European Union have called for "creative solutions".

The UK Government will be publishing a position paper on the matter over the next few weeks.

The European Commission is accountable here also. It needs to stand by the Good Friday Agreement also and respect the interests of Ireland as its member state. If the EU impose a hard border against the will of the UK or Ireland that is it's fault not the UK's.

It's unbelievable how willing people are to accept that the EU has a right to impose a hard border! I suspect those arguing for it haven't been to Donegal very often.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

The Irish Government or the Irish people didn't impose or want this. The UK did.

There was a referendum that specifically asked if the the people of the UK if they wanted to leave he EU and all that entailed (common market trade, free movement etc etc..). They voted to go.

We are left dealing with the consequences.

We are in the EU, the EU has trading and border arrangement that it must and should enforce.

Do you think that Ireland should keep the border open to the UK and allow the UK access to the European market through that border ?
Do you think Ireland should become a rat-run to allow the UK to smuggle stuff into and out of the EU ?
Do you think Ireland should destroy its reputation, its agriculture, its international markets purely because the UK decided to so something that it felt was to its benefit and screw everyone else ??

The UK wanted out of the EU, that means borders.

That's not Ireland's decision, that not Europe's decision,, that is the UK's decision.. Full stop..

Blaming Europe is nonsense,..

Peregrinus

knipex wrote: »

The Irish Government or the Irish people didn't impose or want this. The UK did.

There was a referendum that specifically asked if the the people of the UK if they wanted to leave he EU and all that entailed (common market trade, free movement etc etc..). They voted to go . . .

Nitpick: The referendum didn't "specifically ask" people if they wanted to leave the single market, the customs union, terminate free movement, etc. It just asked them if they wanted to leave the EU, and indeed much of the Leave campaign rhetoric assured them that they could still retain many of the incidents of EU membership.

It was the Tory government which, after the refefendum, chose to adopt the least flexible interpretation possible of the result, and to treat it as precluding not only EU membership but also EEA membership, customs union membership, etc, etc.

All of this makes demands for the EU to show flexiblity sound a little hollow.

(Unless, perhaps, those demands are intended to prepare the ground for the UK government itself to row back a bit and display a degree of flexibility, to try to get at least a little way out of the corner into which it has painted itself. We can always hope, I suppose.)

jm08

blanch152 wrote: »

Well, actually it isn't quite clear. It basically seems to me that he believes that if some dissident terrorists cold-bloodedly murder ordinary decent customs officers, that the communities will be so outraged by the PSNI, the Gardai and the Army attempting to bring the cold-blooded murdering terrorists to justice, that they will arise up and support the terrorists. At least it seems that is the logic.

I don't think that is the point at all. The point is that it will be impossible to maintain an invisible (or even a visible) customs border between NI and ROI/EU and the whole border area will become bandit country again. Now this is not good for the ROI or NI.

knipex

Peregrinus wrote: »

Nitpick: The referendum didn't "specifically ask" people if they wanted to leave the single market, the customs union, terminate free movement, etc. It just asked them if they wanted to leave the EU, and indeed much of the Leave campaign rhetoric assured them that they could still retain many of the incidents of EU membership.

And anyone that actually pointed out that the EU was more than just migration and included markets, education, health, food, agriculture and the millions of other positive things that the EU brought to the UK was called a academic and laughed at or scorned.

That's the thing about democracy you have to live with the consequences..

Peregrinus wrote: »

t was the Tory government which, after the refefendum, chose to adopt the least flexible interpretation possible of the result, and to treat as precluding not only EU membership but also EEA membership, customs union membership, etc, etc.

They could apply for EEA membership but that would involve free movement and the ECJ both of which are absolute redline issues and both of which are what the majority of bexiters actually voted to get rid of.

Peregrinus wrote: »

All of this makes demands for the EU to show flexiblity sound a little hollow. Unless, perhaps, those demands are intended to prepare the ground for the UK government itself to row back a bit and display a degree of flexibility after all, to try to get at least a little way out of the corner into which they have painted themselves.

The UK want Europe to throw out the rules and make exception for the UK, allow them all benefits of the EU while ignoring the obligations every other member country has to follow.

The scary part is that some really don't understand why Europe wont say OK so. They think their are entitled to what they want an that the EU should be thankful to them. They do not appear to grasp the fact that the rules apply to them. That they are not so big and so important that they can ride roughshod over everyone else.

When the full impact of Brexit finally hits home (and its not even close to happening yet) its going to cause a shock in the UK that I don't think the political system is even contemplating.. To be honest it scares me and it should terrify the residents of the UK..

Ireland and the Irish economy should be pulling back from the UK, establishing relationships and markets elsewhere.. Not damaging those markets and relationships to try and and support a UK that has gone out of its way to give everyone else (including Ireland) the finger..

Peregrinus

knipex wrote: »

. . . They could apply for EEA membership but that woudl involve free movement and the ECJ both of which are absolute redline issues . . .

They are redline issues because the UK government has decided that they are redline issues. They didn't have to decide that. It was a choice they made after the referendum.

knipex wrote: »

. . . and both of which are what the majority of bexiters actually voted to get rid of.

A majority of Brexiters, though, is a minority of voters. Remember, only 52% of the vote was for Brexit. If, say, one Brexit voter in twenty had in mind to leave the EU but stay in the customs union, the a majority favoured staying in the customs union.

We don't know that, of course, because the question wasn't put to voters. But I pointed out on these boards at the time that the Brexit majority was pretty thin, and had been secured after a dismally inadequate public debate, and that a wise UK government would try to craft a Brexit that sought to address some of the concerns of the 48%, and hopefully could win some degree of buy-in from at least some of them.

But the Tories chose precisely the opposite tack, absolutely ruling out single market participation, customs union membership, etc, etc, on the grounds that being outside the EU must also mean being outside these institutions, despite the fact that it was repeatedly pointed out during the campaign that there are countries which are outside the union but are in these institutions.

jm08

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

I question your assumption that only one party can be flexible in a bilateral negotiation. I don't share it in the same obvious regard you do.

The border was always going to be complex because it cannot be fully dealt with until trade and customs terms with the EU become clear. I personally don't think immigration is the major concern. There are secondary controls you can apply on this as I've discussed on the other thread.

I don't accept that a matter dealing with one of the EU's member states is not it's problem.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

I think the imaginative solution is to make NI a special case that it remains in the EU, but there will be a customs border between the island of Ireland and GB. I think that is the Irish Gov's solution and I think the EU would support that. It would probably save a lot of headaches for the British Gov. as well. The only people who won't like it are the DUP.

knipex

Peregrinus wrote: »

A majority of Brexiters, though, is a minority of voters. Remember, only 52% of the vote was for Brexit. If, say, one Brexit voter in twenty had in mind to leave the EU but stay in the customs union, the a majority favoured staying in the customs union.

We don't know that, of course, because the question wasn't put to voters. But I pointed out on these boards at the time that the Brexit majority was pretty thin, and had been secured after a dismally inadequate public debate, and that a wise UK government would try to craft a Brexit that sought to address some of the concerns of the 48%, and hopefully could win some degree of buy-in from at least some of them.

But the Tories chose precisely the opposite tack, absolutely ruling out single market participation, customs union membership, etc, etc, on the grounds that being outside the EU must also mean being outside these institutions, despite the fact that it was repeatedly pointed out during the campaign that there are countries which are outside the union but are in these institutions.

As I said..

That's the problem with Democracy..

You live with the consequences..

knipex

jm08 wrote: »

I think the imaginative solution is to make NI a special case that it remains in the EU, but there will be a customs border between the island of Ireland and GB. I think that is the Irish Gov's solution and I think the EU would support that. It would probably save a lot of headaches for the British Gov. as well. The only people who won't like it are the DUP.

More than the DUP I would expect.

The entire unionist community would be well placed to be annoyed.

It would be defacto unification.. I'm not sure a majority of people in the republic woudl be happy with that..

Charles Babbage

knipex wrote: »

More than the DUP I would expect.

The entire unionist community would be well placed to be annoyed.

It would be defacto unification.. I'm not sure a majority of people in the republic woudl be happy with that..

It wouldn't be de facto unification, any more tan the present situation where trade flows freely.

murphaph

jm08 wrote: »

I think the imaginative solution is to make NI a special case that it remains in the EU, but there will be a customs border between the island of Ireland and GB. I think that is the Irish Gov's solution and I think the EU would support that. It would probably save a lot of headaches for the British Gov. as well. The only people who won't like it are the DUP.

The EU will not allow bits of countries to be in the EU. This has already been ruled out AFAIK.

jm08

murphaph wrote: »

The EU will not allow bits of countries to be in the EU. This has already been ruled out AFAIK.

Dismissed by some British politicians and DUP. I don't think Leo would be flying such kites if they hadn't tested the waters with other EU countries. Only objection I've heard about has come from France whose concern was about Ireland being used as a back door into the EU.

A customs border between GB & island of Ireland would solve that.

knipex

Charles Babbage wrote: »

It wouldn't be de facto unification, any more tan the present situation where trade flows freely.

I will leave it to you to explain to the Unionist community

That they can freely walk back and forth between The republic and the north but to go to Great Britain (Or the mainland if you prefer but lets use GB for short) they will need a passport and to go through customs.

That they will have to pay VAT and tariffs on anything that comes in from GB but not from the republic.

That they will not be able to bring in agricultural products from GB.

That the EU (where the will be represented presumably by the republic unless they get their own seat at the board) and not Westminster will do trade deals, be responsible for their defense and the bulk of their foreign relations.

That the people of northern Ireland unlike those of GB will be subject to the ECJ.

That the people of northern Ireland unlike those of GB will have free movement of people.

That the people of northern Ireland will be subject to different laws that those of GB.

etc etc etc.

But they are still part of the UK and not begin pushed together with the Republic..

Charles Babbage

murphaph wrote: »

The EU will not allow bits of countries to be in the EU. This has already been ruled out AFAIK.

The EU does allow variety of distinct customs arrangements though, Being in the EU is not needed, especially as people have freedom of movement owing to their Irish citizenship.

The UK needs a deal anyway, so most manufactures will not be a problem anyway.
So we need an All Ireland animal health regime etc to allow agrifood be integrated and some scheme for all services within the island.

The EU is not the problem here, the British are.

jm08

knipex wrote: »

More than the DUP I would expect.

The entire unionist community would be well placed to be annoyed.

It would be defacto unification.. I'm not sure a majority of people in the republic woudl be happy with that..

I can see it appealing to farmers in NI to remain within the EU - they would still get EU subsidies (and would probably have the best of both worlds being able to access the GB market as well as the EU one tariff free). Fishermen might also like it - I saw recently where Brexit supporting Kilkeel fishing fleet does something like 60% of its fishing in ROI waters. They listened to Boris and Co who told them nothing would change.

FrancieBrady

murphaph wrote: »

I hear nothing concrete here Francie, just vague aspirations...much like Brexit itself.

There are no concrete proposals from anybody which is in itself potentially destabilising.

knipex

jm08 wrote: »

I can see it appealing to farmers in NI to remain within the EU - they would still get EU subsidies (and would probably have the best of both worlds being able to access the GB market as well as the EU one tariff free).

It cannot work that way.

The EU will not allow NI to become a back door to avoid trade tariffs between the UK and Europe It would make a mockery of any trade birders or tariffs..

A deal like this would put an end to the UK as a market or trading entity. It would become Great Britain with Northern Ireland in the EU.

If the North remains in the EU then its will trade with the EU and not Great Britain. There woudl be a customs border (including tariffs etc) between the North and GB.

Still see the unionist community begin happy ????

jm08

knipex wrote: »

I will leave it to you to explain to the Unionist community

That they can freely walk back and forth between The republic and the north but to go to Great Britain (Or the mainland if you prefer but lets use GB for short) they will need a passport and to go through customs.

Up to the British Gov. to decide whether they need to do that. Reentering the island of Ireland they would have to do it though.

That they will have to pay VAT and tariffs on anything that comes in from GB but not from the republic.

Not necessarily. Continue to pay British VAT. The British Gov. have agreed to allow NI to change its Corporate Tax rate to that of ROI, so they can be flexible.

That they will not be able to bring in agricultural products from GB.

Correct. But how much agricultural produce does NI import from GB?

That the EU (where the will be represented presumably by the republic unless they get their own seat at the board) and not Westminster will do trade deals, be responsible for their defense and the bulk of their foreign relations.

No, British Gov. are still responsible for all of that. EU will continue to do trade deals.

That the people of northern Ireland unlike those of GB will be subject to the ECJ.

Yes. All matters to do with trade.

That the people of northern Ireland unlike those of GB will have free movement of people.

Yes.

That the people of northern Ireland will be subject to different laws that those of GB.

Only to do with trade. Civil law would still be British.

But they are still part of the UK and not begin pushed together with the Republic..

I think it could save the UK Union.

solodeogloria

knipex wrote: »

The Irish Government or the Irish people didn't impose or want this. The UK did.

There was a referendum that specifically asked if the the people of the UK if they wanted to leave he EU and all that entailed (common market trade, free movement etc etc..). They voted to go.

We are left dealing with the consequences.

We are in the EU, the EU has trading and border arrangement that it must and should enforce.

Do you think that Ireland should keep the border open to the UK and allow the UK access to the European market through that border ?
Do you think Ireland should become a rat-run to allow the UK to smuggle stuff into and out of the EU ?
Do you think Ireland should destroy its reputation, its agriculture, its international markets purely because the UK decided to so something that it felt was to its benefit and screw everyone else ??

The UK wanted out of the EU, that means borders.

That's not Ireland's decision, that not Europe's decision,, that is the UK's decision.. Full stop..

Blaming Europe is nonsense,..

Good afternoon!

I'm just outlining a simple fact. If the UK and Ireland both don't want a hard border and have been clear about it and then the EU insists that there must be one by virtue of its own policy, you cannot insist that this has been imposed by the UK.

That's a very simple point. It is dishonest of posters on this thread to claim the UK wants a hard border. The Government have been clear on this.

The EU can claim this is a consequence but they can't say that they won't be imposing the consequence if this happens. Moreover the EU can be considered to be letting down its own member state if this happens.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

knipex

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

I'm just outlining a simple fact. If the UK and Ireland both don't want a hard border and have been clear about it and then the EU insists that there must be one by virtue of its own policy, you cannot insist that this has been imposed by the UK.

That's a very simple point. It is dishonest of posters on this thread to claim the UK wants a hard border. The Government have been clear on this.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Now your just begin awkward.

The UK wants outside the EU and the customs union. That means the UK wants a border.

End of story..

You cannot be outside the customs union and not have a border..

The very idea is nonsense..

Putting the border on the Island of Ireland or outside of the Island of Ireland depends on Northern Ireland's position with respect the the EU. If its in the EU and customs union then no border, if its not .. then border..

Charles Babbage

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

I'm just outlining a simple fact. If the UK and Ireland both don't want a hard border and have been clear about it and then the EU insists that there must be one by virtue of its own policy, you cannot insist that this has been imposed by the UK.

That's a very simple point. It is dishonest of posters on this thread to claim the UK wants a hard border. The Government have been clear on this.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

The misleading presentation of information has been made again and again. The present situation works, if the UK changes this to something that doesn't work then it and it alone is responsible.

solodeogloria

knipex wrote: »

Now your just begin awkward.

The UK wants outside the EU and the customs union. That means the UK wants a border.

End of story..

You cannot be outside the customs union and not have a border..

The very idea is nonsense..

Putting the border on the Island of Ireland or outside of the Island of Ireland depends on Northern Ireland's position with respect the the EU. If its in the EU and customs union then no border, if its not .. then border..

Good afternoon!

The UK have said they want an open border. Claiming otherwise is dishonest.

The UK are open to discussing alternative trade and customs arrangements with the EU even if it rejects membership of preexisting structures.

The UK won't be the one insisting on border posts. If anyone that will be the EU.

That's the truth. I won't lie and claim otherwise.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

jm08

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

The UK have said they want an open border. Claiming otherwise is dishonest.

That is having your cake and eating it. The UK wants access to the EU, but doesn't want to contribute anything to it or abide by any of its rules & regs. Its just not on.

Chips Lovell

The UK government has said it doesn't want a hard border. What it hasn't be been clear about is how it's going to avoid one if it opts out of all of the institutions that allow for one.

It's not even a case of wanting its cake and eating it. It's more like it doesn't even know what the cake is yet.

Geuze

By wanting to leave the Customs Union, the UK is causing there to be a hard border.

If the UK don't want a hard border, then don't leave the Customs Union.

blanch152

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

I'm just outlining a simple fact. If the UK and Ireland both don't want a hard border and have been clear about it and then the EU insists that there must be one by virtue of its own policy, you cannot insist that this has been imposed by the UK.

That's a very simple point. It is dishonest of posters on this thread to claim the UK wants a hard border. The Government have been clear on this.

The EU can claim this is a consequence but they can't say that they won't be imposing the consequence if this happens. Moreover the EU can be considered to be letting down its own member state if this happens.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

The UK does want a border - it voted for one.

blanch152

jm08 wrote: »

I don't think that is the point at all. The point is that it will be impossible to maintain an invisible (or even a visible) customs border between NI and ROI/EU and the whole border area will become bandit country again. Now this is not good for the ROI or NI.

There is smuggling and criminality everywhere there is a customs border in the world. No doubt some of the Great Republicans in South Armagh will be rubbing their hands in glee at the prospect of a return to greater profitability - cigarette smuggling and diesel laundering doesn't produce enough.

However, that is a long way from the position advocated that the North will rise up in support of criminal terrorists.

jm08

blanch152 wrote: »

There is smuggling and criminality everywhere there is a customs border in the world. No doubt some of the Great Republicans in South Armagh will be rubbing their hands in glee at the prospect of a return to greater profitability - cigarette smuggling and diesel laundering doesn't produce enough.

However, that is a long way from the position advocated that the North will rise up in support of criminal terrorists.

You think that only republicans will only be interested in making money out of the border with NI? Northern Ireland is already a backdoor for illegals into the UK. And it will only get worse as soon as FoM is gone (and a ready supply of cheap labour from eastern Europe is cut off).

Then take into consideration the economic hit that NI is going to have to take once it exits the EU, you will end up with some very angry people who won't take it sitting down.

Jim2007

solodeogloria wrote: »

The UK have said they want an open border. Claiming otherwise is dishonest.

And claiming you want an open border, without making a proposal, acting in such a way to make it impossible is not???

If the UK does not enter into customs union with the EU, then the minute they sign traded deal with the US or whoever, the open border is gone. And on the other side, to control immigration they are going to have to roll out some kind of border, because we will not be doing for them at Irish ports after BREXIT.

knipex

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

The UK have said they want an open border. Claiming otherwise is dishonest.

The UK are open to discussing alternative trade and customs arrangements with the EU even if it rejects membership of preexisting structures.

The UK won't be the one insisting on border posts. If anyone that will be the EU.

That's the truth. I won't lie and claim otherwise.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

You sound like a brexiter.

UK wants out of the customs union. UK wants to end free movement.. therefore UK wants border controls and customs.



UK was not kicked out of EU, UK was not encouraged to leave EU, UK voted to leave EU.

You can delude yourself all you want buy no one is buying that lien of crap..

solodeogloria

knipex wrote: »

You sound like a brexiter.

UK wants out of the customs union. UK wants to end free movement.. therefore UK wants border controls and customs.



UK was not kicked out of EU, UK was not encouraged to leave EU, UK voted to leave EU.

You can delude yourself all you want buy no one is buying that lien of crap..

Good afternoon!

It's not delusional to be honest about the Government's position. It's also not delusional to point out that the leave campaign were unanimous about keeping the Northern Ireland border open. People didn't vote to leave the EU based on a hard border in Northern Ireland.

Yes the UK voted to leave the EU but there are alternative customs arrangements that don't require a hard border and there are alternative ways of controlling illegal immigration in Northern Ireland including employment checks.

I'm simply trying to present the truth. Which is at no time did anyone desire a hard border and if one is imposed it will be because the EU desire for it to be imposed.

There's still hope it won't come to that.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

blanch152

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

It's not delusional to be honest about the Government's position. It's also not delusional to point out that the leave campaign were unanimous about keeping the Northern Ireland border open. People didn't vote to leave the EU based on a hard border in Northern Ireland.

Well, that only reinforces the case that the UK population didn't know what they were voting for. Once you withdraw from free movement and a customs union, a hard border is inevitable. Unless you are arrogant enough to believe that Ireland should follow the UK out of the EU just because big brother UK decided it was a good idea.

solodeogloria wrote: »

Yes the UK voted to leave the EU but there are alternative customs arrangements that don't require a hard border and there are alternative ways of controlling illegal immigration in Northern Ireland including employment checks.

I'm simply trying to present the truth. Which is at no time did anyone desire a hard border and if one is imposed it will be because the EU desire for it to be imposed.

There's still hope it won't come to that.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

The alternative customs arrangements require membership of the customs union. The alternative ways of controlling illegal immigration require a lot of expense and a compulsory national identity card, both here and in the UK.

Is that what they voted for?

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

However, that is a long way from the position advocated that the North will rise up in support of criminal terrorists.

The north will spiral into conflict.
Whether paramilitaries get involved (i believe they will) is moot.

The question is, does anyone care enough to stop what they know will happen, happening.

An Irish government stood idly by last time and the IRA (who at that time had no interest in getting involved) filled the vacuum.

The conflict in the north only ended when both governments lived up to their responsibilities.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The north will spiral into conflict.
Whether paramilitaries get involved (i believe they will) is moot.

The question is, does anyone care enough to stop what they know will happen, happening.

An Irish government stood idly by last time and the IRA (who at that time had no interest in getting involved) filled the vacuum.

The conflict in the north only ended when both governments lived up to their responsibilities.

The north won't spiral into conflict - that is hyperbole. Talk of the Irish government standing idly by is nonsense.

The republicans who talk about the north returning to conflict as in the 1960s and 1970s are the equivalent of the old dinosaur unionists who still won't support marriage equality. Different issue, same old tired sectarian ideas and politics.

The world has moved on, time for the dinosaurs to realise it.

solodeogloria

blanch152 wrote: »

Well, that only reinforces the case that the UK population didn't know what they were voting for. Once you withdraw from free movement and a customs union, a hard border is inevitable. Unless you are arrogant enough to believe that Ireland should follow the UK out of the EU just because big brother UK decided it was a good idea.

The alternative customs arrangements require membership of the customs union. The alternative ways of controlling illegal immigration require a lot of expense and a compulsory national identity card, both here and in the UK.

Is that what they voted for?

Good evening!

According to whom on both counts?

UK border controls can be handled with passports and visas (in the UK these already come with biometric ID cards) on registering for employment in NI or employers checks. There's a legal obligation to report violations to the Home Office. There's no need for everyone to have an ID card.

The UK and the EU can discuss flexible ways of handling customs without a hard border during the negotiations.

I'm not suggesting Ireland should leave the EU at all.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

knipex

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

It's not delusional to be honest about the Government's position. It's also not delusional to point out that the leave campaign were unanimous about keeping the Northern Ireland border open. People didn't vote to leave the EU based on a hard border in Northern Ireland.

You cannto elave a customs union without imposing a border. Thats a fact. They can say what ever the like, as politician's tend to do, but their actions and the actions of the UK public are clear,,

solodeogloria wrote: »

Yes the UK voted to leave the EU but there are alternative customs arrangements that don't require a hard border and there are alternative ways of controlling illegal immigration in Northern Ireland including employment checks.

Yes there are if the UK are willing to play by the rules. The UK do not want to play be the rules,. They do not want free movement of people, they do not want the European court of justice, They do not want to be part of the customs union.

solodeogloria wrote: »

I'm simply trying to present the truth. Which is at no time did anyone desire a hard border and if one is imposed it will be because the EU desire for it to be imposed.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

No You are spouting propaganda and blaming other for the UK's decisions.

UK voted out of EU and customs union..
UK doe not want free movement of people
UK does not want to be bound by ECJ.
UK wants out of the European project.

Not Ireland, not Europe the UK..

You cannot be out of the union and have access. You cannot do trade deals with the US that allows them to export goods not allowed in Europe and then try and remain border free. The fact that you believed you could and continue to believe you can is not Europe's problem.. Blame Boris, Nigel et al. They lied to you..

Europe tried to explain it, Business leaders tried to explain it,. academics tried to explain it, journalists but you listened to Nigel and Borris.

blanch152

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

According to whom on both counts?

UK border controls can be handled with passports and visas (in the UK these already come with biometric on registering for employment in NI or employers checks. There's a legal obligation to report violations to the Home Office. There's no need for everyone to have an ID card.

The UK and the EU can discuss flexible ways of handling customs without a hard border during the negotiations.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

If it isn't compulsory to carry a national identity card, spot-checks are useless. I'll be back with it tomorrow, mate, says the illegal immigrant, but you'll never see him again.

jm08

blanch152 wrote: »

The north won't spiral into conflict - that is hyperbole. Talk of the Irish government standing idly by is nonsense.

The republicans who talk about the north returning to conflict as in the 1960s and 1970s are the equivalent of the old dinosaur unionists who still won't support marriage equality. Different issue, same old tired sectarian ideas and politics.

The world has moved on, time for the dinosaurs to realise it.

So as long as they don't start killing each other again you are willing to turn your back on NI if a hard border is introduced on the island?

blanch152

jm08 wrote: »

So as long as they don't start killing each other again you are willing to turn your back on NI if a hard border is introduced on the island?

A united Ireland is decades away at best. The UK rejoining the EU will happen quicker. So how will we be turning our back on NI?