Irish Border and Brexit

solodeogloria

knipex wrote: »

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,,

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.



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.

Good evening!

You're entitled to get as irritated about my point as you wish but it's true both that the UK didn't vote for a hard border and that the EU can be flexible or recognise Northern Ireland as a special case or use technology to pre-register goods vehicles for customs. There are other options which I hope to see discussed.

I don't accept your view that Ireland isn't the EU's problem. As a member state of course it is.

It isn't propaganda to say that if Ireland doesn't want the border and if the UK doesn't want a border and one gets imposed by the EU then it is the EU that wants a border.

I'm sorry but I won't lie for you.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

FrancieBrady

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.

This would be hilarious if it wasn't so dangerous.

So if we try to have a UI (or even a discussion of it) unionists will bring about some typ of armageddon and therefore talk of a UI is not allowed.
But the re-imposition of a border that underscores the core of the problem, i.e. partition, will not bring two communities back into conflict again?

Flagrant refusal to accept how symbolic a border is and, as said, a dangerous ignorance.

Luckily the EU, the British and the Irish are fully aware of the dangers it poses and hopefully will act on it and use some imagination.

jm08

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 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.

Today's Guardian:

Tens of thousands of modern slavery victims in UK, NCA says

Wide range of cases include human trafficking and prostitution, as well as people forced to work at car washes

They have a slavery hotline now in the UK and they have 300 live policing operations for slavery.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/aug/10/modern-slavery-uk-nca-human-trafficking-prostitution

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

Plenty of Brexit supporters have suggested that as a solution. Jeffrey Donaldson seems to think that the UK is Ireland's biggest export market.

paul2013

Question for you all, it's slightly complicated. If you travel through the UK after BREXIT has been completed and the English are out of the EU. What does it mean for an Irish registered car in Calais? Does it mean we are subject to Custom checks entering a non EU country! and are we going to be the subject of delays entering the UK as I Know people who travel through Calais port with live Irish livestock and onto Italy and France or will the Irish get waiver at the Eurostar train?

jm08

blanch152 wrote: »

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?

By allowing a stupid border to be erected again. The reason this island has been such a mess for most of the last 100 years is because of that border. The most prosperous time for the whole island when that border has been invisible (the last 20 years).

solodeogloria

jm08 wrote: »

Plenty of Brexit supporters have suggested that as a solution. Jeffrey Donaldson seems to think that the UK is Ireland's biggest export market.

Good evening!

Last post for today. I don't know how the prostitution bit related to my post.

However, it's worth pointing out I'm entitled to a different view to Jeffery Donaldson. You need to take my posts from my perspective on the basis of what I say and I'll do the same for you.

I'm Irish, I'm a Eurosceptic and want to see a good Brexit deal for both parties. I voted remain in the referendum, but I'm convinced that the vote must be respected and the UK must come out.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

First Up

paul2013 wrote:

Question for you all, it's slightly complicated. If you travel through the UK after BREXIT has been completed and the English are out of the EU. What does it mean for an Irish registered car in Calais? Does it mean we are subject to Custom checks entering a non EU country! and are we going to be the subject of delays entering the UK as I Know people who travel through Calais port with live Irish livestock and onto Italy and France or will the Irish get waiver at the Eurostar train?

Travel between any EU and non-EU country in either direction is subject to customs. It doesn't matter what your nationality - or car registration. (Switzerland and Monaco are exceptions but I doubt the UK's arrangements will replicate theirs.)

jm08

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

Last post for today. I don't know how the prostitution bit related to my post.

I brought up the subject of slavery as its topical today in the UK to illustrate the point that not all UK citizens are law abiding and I wouldn't depend too much on legal employment controlling emigration.

Jim2007

jm08 wrote: »

The most prosperous time for the whole island when that border has been invisible (the last 20 years).

Hmmm, it might just be because we are able to trade in an undervalued currency and have dramatically increase our exports, thus earning badly needed revenues.

Jim2007

paul2013 wrote: »

Question for you all, it's slightly complicated. If you travel through the UK after BREXIT has been completed and the English are out of the EU. What does it mean for an Irish registered car in Calais? Does it mean we are subject to Custom checks entering a non EU country! and are we going to be the subject of delays entering the UK as I Know people who travel through Calais port with live Irish livestock and onto Italy and France or will the Irish get waiver at the Eurostar train?

Yes of course, if you enter the EU from a third country you will be subject to controls. But you should also be aware that any goods flowing into Italy as you describe are already subject to Swiss control when the trucks are loaded on to the trains for the journey through the alps to Italy and subject to Italian control when offloaded at the Swiss/Italian border.

First Up

Jim2007 wrote:

Hmmm, it might just be because we are able to trade in an undervalued currency and have dramatically increase our exports, thus earning badly needed revenues.

You think the Euro is a weaker currency than the old punt?

jm08

Jim2007 wrote: »

Hmmm, it might just be because we are able to trade in an undervalued currency and have dramatically increase our exports, thus earning badly needed revenues.

As pointed out elsewhere, the punt we used to devalue the punt to remain competitive back then. It was quite a shock to the system when that option wasn't avail and interest rates went shooting up.

The problems of NI didn't spill over into the republic, we had no bombings, kidnappings or bank or post office hoists.

blanch152

jm08 wrote: »

By allowing a stupid border to be erected again. The reason this island has been such a mess for most of the last 100 years is because of that border. The most prosperous time for the whole island when that border has been invisible (the last 20 years).

That completely ignores reality. Joining the Euro and opening our markets towards the continent have had a much bigger positive effect than the border with the North.

murphaph

jm08 wrote: »

As pointed out elsewhere, the punt we used to devalue the punt to remain competitive back then. It was quite a shock to the system when that option wasn't avail and interest rates went shooting up.

??

When did interest rates shoot up under the Euro?

My parents were paying over 17% APR at one stage on their mortgage in the 1980s. I've seen the statements from the building society.

If you have to devalue your currency you are probably mismanaging your economy. The Euro had taught us a bit of fiscal discipline.

6541

https://countrysquire.co.uk/2017/08/10/get-stuffed-eire/

jm08

blanch152 wrote: »

That completely ignores reality. Joining the Euro and opening our markets towards the continent have had a much bigger positive effect than the border with the North.

And which would also have happened with a lot of American corporations investing into Ireland to get access to the EU. You wouldn't have them investing into ROI with such conflict on the island. And it was the removal of the conflict caused by the border that was the issue, not the actual border.

jm08

murphaph wrote: »

??

When did interest rates shoot up under the Euro?

My parents were paying over 17% APR at one stage on their mortgage in the 1980s. I've seen the statements from the building society.

If you have to devalue your currency you are probably mismanaging your economy. The Euro had taught us a bit of fiscal discipline.

I personally know all about the interest rates in the 80s! They went up for the first time in a long time just after we entered the Euro (just about 1pc or so). It was a major shock at the time as interest rates had been going down for the previous decade.

blanch152

jm08 wrote: »

And which would also have happened with a lot of American corporations investing into Ireland to get access to the EU. You wouldn't have them investing into ROI with such conflict on the island. And it was the removal of the conflict caused by the border that was the issue, not the actual border.

The conflict isn't returning, society has moved beyond the ideas of the 1960s and 1970s. Sure we still have DUP dinosaurs wishing they could ban homosexuality but we also have republican dinsoaurs wishing for glorious uprisings. Neither is going to happen, that time has passed.

It wasn't until July 1997 that we had the final ceasefire in Northern Ireland. Ireland was already growing strongly in the early 1990s thanks to the corrective measures imposed by Ray MacSharry. It is revisionist to claim that the credit for Ireland's growth should go to the IRA ceasefire/surrender/victory, whichever way you want to describe it.

knipex

jm08 wrote: »

I personally know all about the interest rates in the 80s! They went up for the first time in a long time just after we entered the Euro (just about 1pc or so). It was a major shock at the time as interest rates had been going down for the previous decade.

They had been going down because were joining the Euro. We had no choice but to try and merge our interest rates with the European average.

I don't remember them increasing after we joined the Euro but a quick search found the below as the average mortgage interest rates from 1975 to 2013.

It does show a 0.2% increase around the time we joined the euro..

source http://www.moneyguideireland.com/history-of-mortgage-rates-in-ireland.html



1975 11.25%
1976 12.5%
1977 13.95%
1978 14.15%
1979 14.15%
1980 14.15%
1981 16.25%
1982 16.25%
1983 13.0%
1984 11.75%
1985 13%
1986 12.5%
1987 12.5%
1988 9.25%
1989 11.4%
1990 12.37%
1991 11.95%
1992 13.99%
1993 13.99%
1994 7.49%
1995 7.00%
1996 6.75%
1997 6.90%
1998 5.85%
1999 5.60%
2000 6.09%
2001 6.09%
2002 4.70%
2003 4.20%
2004 3.49%
2005 3.65%
2006 4.86%
2007 5.46%
2008 5.86%
2009 4.16%
2010 4.02%
2011 4.42%
2012 4.33%
2013 4.38%

Jim2007

jm08 wrote: »

As pointed out elsewhere, the punt we used to devalue the punt to remain competitive back then. It was quite a shock to the system when that option wasn't avail and interest rates went shooting up.

This is total nonsense, because the central bank does not have even remotely close to the amount of reserves necessary to defend a currency against the Euro. For example, in recent years Switzerland tried to at least peg the Franc to the Euro for the exact same reason. In the process it acquired Euro bonds equal to the deficit of the seven biggest Euro Group economies before it decided to abandon the effort. Now the SNB's resources dwarfs the CBI resources by a factor of about 5000 and it could not do it, so good luck with that kind of BS.

Jim2007

First Up wrote: »

You think the Euro is a weaker currency than the old punt?

The past is not relevant, as Ireland has been a net exporter for decades and as with all other states in the position a new punt would be a strong currency. Private research reports from Credit Suisse conclude that a new Punt or DM would be very strong currencies.

The recent experience in Switzerland of trying to peg the Franc to the Euro shows that it is a very expensive exercise and even with their resources it became too expensive. Both German and Ireland benefit big time from the Euro, since they get to trade in what to them is an under valued currency at very little expense to their exchequers.

oscarBravo

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/if-uk-leaves-customs-union-a-customs-border-is-inevitable-1.3180460

A lot of discussion around “special status” has suggested that the North should remain within the Customs Union, which would allow free movement of goods on this island, with the customs border lying between the island of Ireland and Britain.

Apart from its political unacceptability to the unionist community, locating the customs barrier in the Irish Sea takes no account of the reality of the economy of Northern Ireland, whose import and export sectors are heavily integrated with Britain, to a far greater extent than any links with the Republic.

Though British chains, like Tesco and Debenhams, have a strong presence in the Republic, almost the entire retail and distribution sector in the North is integrated with Britain.

The Northern Ireland economy relies heavily on imported goods, three-quarters of these coming from Britain. The result is that there would be far more dislocation to the North’s internal economy from a customs border between Britain and the North than from one between the North and the Republic, as the Republic is a minority supplier to the North.

There are no happy outcomes to this Brexit debacle.

Chips Lovell

If the UK were to pursue the nuclear option and leave both the single market and customs union, resulting in the creation of a hard border; and if assorted Provo types started blowing up border posts, there would be a certain black irony in the fact that both would be offering the same excuses: that they aren't responsible for their own actions and that it's all someone else's fault.

It could be the beginning of a beautiful new friendship.

blanch152

oscarBravo wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/if-uk-leaves-customs-union-a-customs-border-is-inevitable-1.3180460



There are no happy outcomes to this Brexit debacle.

That is one of the better articles I have read on the Brexit/border issue. Quite simply, on economic grounds, it is far more important for the North to have free trade with the rest of the UK than with the rest of this island. Neither solution is good for the North, but a trade barrier on the Irish Sea is worse. Them's the numbers.

knipex

oscarBravo wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/if-uk-leaves-customs-union-a-customs-border-is-inevitable-1.3180460



There are no happy outcomes to this Brexit debacle.

Someone actually writes the truth instead of fantasy..

Chips Lovell

blanch152 wrote: »

That is one of the better articles I have read on the Brexit/border issue. Quite simply, on economic grounds, it is far more important for the North to have free trade with the rest of the UK than with the rest of this island. Neither solution is good for the North, but a trade barrier on the Irish Sea is worse. Them's the numbers.

And, cross border the trade isn't the main issue for Ireland. It's what's coming from the rest of Britain and via Britain that's a much bigger issue:

While it would bring some economic benefits for the Republic, these would be relatively small. Most of our trade is with Britain rather than the North. In addition, the transit trade through the UK, involving much of our trade with outside world, means that wherever customs barriers are erected they are going to have serious negative consequences for Ireland.

jm08

knipex wrote: »

They had been going down because were joining the Euro. We had no choice but to try and merge our interest rates with the European average.

I don't remember them increasing after we joined the Euro but a quick search found the below as the average mortgage interest rates from 1975 to 2013.

It does show a 0.2% increase around the time we joined the euro..

source http://www.moneyguideireland.com/history-of-mortgage-rates-in-ireland.html



1975 11.25%
1976 12.5%
1977 13.95%
1978 14.15%
1979 14.15%
1980 14.15%
1981 16.25%
1982 16.25%
1983 13.0%
1984 11.75%
1985 13%
1986 12.5%
1987 12.5%
1988 9.25%
1989 11.4%
1990 12.37%
1991 11.95%
1992 13.99%
1993 13.99%
1994 7.49%
1995 7.00%
1996 6.75%
1997 6.90%
1998 5.85%
1999 5.60%
2000 6.09%
2001 6.09%
2002 4.70%
2003 4.20%
2004 3.49%
2005 3.65%
2006 4.86%
2007 5.46%
2008 5.86%
2009 4.16%
2010 4.02%
2011 4.42%
2012 4.33%
2013 4.38%

It may seem small, but I do recall that mortgage repayments went up by about an average of 100 a month. Mine only went up by about 30.

jm08

Jim2007 wrote: »

This is total nonsense, because the central bank does not have even remotely close to the amount of reserves necessary to defend a currency against the Euro. For example, in recent years Switzerland tried to at least peg the Franc to the Euro for the exact same reason. In the process it acquired Euro bonds equal to the deficit of the seven biggest Euro Group economies before it decided to abandon the effort. Now the SNB's resources dwarfs the CBI resources by a factor of about 5000 and it could not do it, so good luck with that kind of BS.

We're talking about the punt here, not the Euro.


Here is reference to punt being devalued.

Irish punt joins ERM casualties


THE IRISH punt was devalued by 10 per cent yesterday within the European exchange rate mechanism after Dublin called an emergency meeting of senior EC finance officials in Brussels, writes Alan Murdoch.The devaluation - the fourth reshuffling of the ERM in five months - came after the Irish government gave up its long fight to defend the currency against speculators. Similar attacks forced sterling and the Italian lira out of the ERM last autumn, although last night the Employment Minister, Ruairi Quinn, said the punt would remain within it.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/irish-punt-joins-erm-casualties-1481861.html

blanch152

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

And, cross border the trade isn't the main issue for Ireland. It's what's coming from the rest of Britain and via Britain that's a much bigger issue:

I saw that as well.

What is clear is that a hard border is bad news economically (certainly in the short term), but a hard border on the Irish Sea would be worse for this island than a hard border between the North and South, because of the serious effects on the North.

In the longer term, it will all depend on how quickly our economy adjusts. If all the new office building in Dublin is filled with financial services workers, then we could recover quickly. Sadly, the North will suffer no matter what.

It is interesting also to consider the effects on retail here. Would the likes of Lidl, Aldi and Zara get a bigger boost while Debenhams, Tesco and M&S suffer?

First Up

blanch152 wrote:

What is clear is that a hard border is bad news economically (certainly in the short term), but a hard border on the Irish Sea would be worse for this island than a hard border between the North and South, because of the serious effects on the North.

A hard border on the Irish Sea would also mean a hard border between us and the Continental EU. Not acceptable.

Chips Lovell

blanch152 wrote: »

It is interesting also to consider the effects on retail here. Would the likes of Lidl, Aldi and Zara get a bigger boost while Debenhams, Tesco and M&S suffer?

I don't know enough about transport and supply chains to get a feel for it. But if I had to guess, I'd imagine we'd see an awful lot more shipping between Ireland and France rather than stuff being driven from the Continent, across Britain and then on to Ireland.

Chips Lovell

Another issue is, and I think it was mentioned earlier in the thread, is that if there is to be a hard border, there is a good possibility that it would be temporary, given that chance that the UK may reapply to join the EU or single market a few years down the line once the implications for it become apparent

knipex

First Up wrote: »

A hard border on the Irish Sea would also mean a hard border between us and the Continental EU. Not acceptable.

Yes, for all goods transported via the UK. Not for goods shipped direct.

As for this not being acceptable !!! Unless you can get the UK to change its mind re leaving the customs union then....

Lots of things are not like and we woudl love to change or stop, dieing, getting old, taxes etc but there is nothing we can do about it..

solodeogloria

knipex wrote: »

Yes, for all goods transported via the UK. Not for goods shipped direct.

As for this not being acceptable !!! Unless you can get the UK to change its mind re leaving the customs union then....

Lots of things are not like and we woudl love to change or stop, dieing, getting old, taxes etc but there is nothing we can do about it..

Good afternoon!

Or, alternatively the EU and the UK could discuss an alternative customs arrangement. This is still up for discussion in the negotiations. The reason why the UK opposes membership of the EU Customs Union is because it restricts the UK coming up with its own free trade agreements.

It needs to be stressed again. It isn't accurate to stress that the outcome of the Brexit negotiations are purely down to the UK's stance. They are also down to the EU's response to what Britain is seeking.

That is the type of balance that is missing from this thread so far. The reason it is missing is because posters are unwilling to subject the EU to any accountability.

It is in the EU's interest to campaign for the interests of it's member states. Including Ireland.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

knipex

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

Or, alternatively the EU and the UK could discuss an alternative customs arrangement. This is still up for discussion in the negotiations. The reason why the UK opposes membership of the EU Customs Union is because it restricts the UK coming up with its own free trade agreements.

It needs to be stressed again. It isn't accurate to stress that the outcome of the Brexit negotiations are purely down to the UK's stance. They are also down to the EU's response to what Britain is seeking.

That is the type of balance that is missing from this thread so far. The reason it is missing is because posters are unwilling to subject the EU to any accountability.

It is in the EU's interest to campaign for the interests of it's member states. Including Ireland.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Seriously ???

Lets leave aside the ECJ and the free movement issue just for a second.

You want to be in a customs union but you want to be able to import stuff to your market from where ever you want. Stuff that does not meet EU guidelines of safety or quality. Then you don't want a border so all that stuff you imported can now come across into the rest of the EU and be sold bypassing all the EU quality safety regulations ? All their customs and excise regulation?

Just because the UK wants ??

Do you not see the issue ??

Did you not listen to anyone before the referendum who tried to explain it to you ?

First Up

knipex wrote:

Yes, for all goods transported via the UK. Not for goods shipped direct.

You miss my point. If goods from the UK cross the Irish border without restriction, they can be transported elsewhere in the EU via an Irish port.

These could be goods of UK origin, or goods imported from elsewhere under whatever trade terms the UK agrees with third countries. They can be brought into ROI and then re-packed and re-loaded before being shipped to elsewhere in the Single Market.

If Ireland is not policing its EU border, then others will do it for us.

solodeogloria

knipex wrote: »

Seriously ???

Lets leave aside the ECJ and the free movement issue just for a second.

You want to be in a customs union but you want to be able to import stuff to your market from where ever you want. Stuff that does not meet EU guidelines of safety or quality. Then you don't want a border so all that stuff you imported can now come across into the rest of the EU and be sold bypassing all the EU quality safety regulations ? All their customs and excise regulation?

Just because the UK wants ??

Do you not see the issue ??

Did you not listen to anyone before the referendum who tried to explain it to you ?

Good afternoon!

I voted remain in the referendum. I'm now supportive of implementing Brexit and getting on with the best outcome possible.

There was obviously no realistic prospect of the UK remaining subject to the European Court of Justice. The UK have proposed two good solutions in the talks before such as an impartial ombudsman or a court of joint arbitration to deal with disputes.

I'm happy with "rules of origin" rules to be applied to the UK after Brexit for items that have originated outside of the UK. There are flexible ways by which you can enforce these rules though. I'm hoping for a good discussion on them. The EU also have implied that there are ways to get goods from Ireland into continental Europe through fast track customs because it originated in the single market. There's every possibility for this, or for Irish registered vehicles to progress through Calais with ease. Border frontiers like these should be discussed. I'd argue the same arrangement should exist at Dover and at Folkestone. Such flexibility will require compromises on both sides.

My basic point is that the UK may not get everything it wants, that's a given. Negotiations involve concessions at some point. Irrespective, of what the EU may or may not give to the UK, the EU has an obligation to Ireland as its member state. If what the EU suggests harms Ireland, then there is good ground for Irish people being able to say that the EU hasn't acted in its interests.

I see that there are challenges. But I don't accept the position that the EU cannot be flexible in any way. Indeed, as an Irish person I would say it must in the interests of Ireland as its member state.

The bottom line is that from Ireland's point of view, we need to be willing to work with the UK for a good outcome. It's a bit disappointing for me as an Irish person who has a strong connection with the UK to see that the Irish people are really only fair weather friends of the UK despite the strides that have been made in recent years.

We should be rooting for the best deal in Ireland's interests and holding both parties in the discussion to account.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

knipex

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

I voted remain in the referendum. I'm now supportive of implementing Brexit and getting on with the best outcome possible.

There was obviously no realistic prospect of the UK remaining subject to the European Court of Justice. The UK have proposed two good solutions in the talks before such as an impartial ombudsman or a court of joint arbitration to deal with disputes.

I'm happy with "rules of origin" rules to be applied to the UK after Brexit for items that have originated outside of the UK. There are flexible ways by which you can enforce these rules though. I'm hoping for a good discussion on them. The EU also have implied that there are ways to get goods from Ireland into continental Europe through fast track customs because it originated in the single market. There's every possibility for this, or for Irish registered vehicles to progress through Calais with ease. Border frontiers like these should be discussed. I'd argue the same arrangement should exist at Dover and at Folkestone. Such flexibility will require compromises on both sides.

My basic point is that the UK may not get everything it wants, that's a given. Negotiations involve concessions at some point. Irrespective, of what the EU may or may not give to the UK, the EU has an obligation to Ireland as its member state. If what the EU suggests harms Ireland, then there is good ground for Irish people being able to say that the EU hasn't acted in its interests.

I see that there are challenges. But I don't accept the position that the EU cannot be flexible in any way. Indeed, as an Irish person I would say it must in the interests of Ireland as its member state.

The bottom line is that from Ireland's point of view, we need to be willing to work with the UK for a good outcome. It's a bit disappointing for me as an Irish person who has a strong connection with the UK to see that the Irish people are really only fair weather friends of the UK despite the strides that have been made in recent years.

We should be rooting for the best deal in Ireland's interests and holding both parties in the discussion to account.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

I can assure you were are giving as much if not more consideration to the UK as the UK did to Ireland when it voted out..

J Mysterio

knipex wrote: »

I can assure you were are giving as much if not more consideration to the UK as the UK did to Ireland when it voted out..

Well said.

murphaph

First Up wrote: »

You miss my point. If goods from the UK cross the Irish border without restriction, they can be transported elsewhere in the EU via an Irish port.

These could be goods of UK origin, or goods imported from elsewhere under whatever trade terms the UK agrees with third countries. They can be brought into ROI and then re-packed and re-loaded before being shipped to elsewhere in the Single Market.

If Ireland is not policing its EU border, then others will do it for us.

Yep and rightly so. I Poland decided to turn a blind eye to food coming across its external border I'm quite sure Germany and the Czech Republic would impose these checks too.

solodeogloria

knipex wrote: »

I can assure you were are giving as much if not more consideration to the UK as the UK did to Ireland when it voted out..

Good afternoon!

I have some selfish reasons to care about the UK in these negotiations. I make my bread and butter here, and I live here. Many close friends live here. So yes, I'm looking for the very best deal for the UK.

My point still stands about scrutinising both sides, and looking for accommodation from the European Union in respect to Ireland's interests including that of the Irish land border and trade in goods that require transport through the UK. It isn't acceptable to suggest that the EU can apply consequences that affect Ireland in a hugely negative way just because the UK has made a decision.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

swampgas

Solo seems to view the UK - EU negotations as if they were a bilateral discussion between two neighbouring countries, like (say) France - Germany before the EC / EU came along, where there would be lots of scope for compromise.

The EU is a union of 28 countries, one of which wants out. The EU is much more about the remaining 27 and the trade deals they have with the wider world than it is about pandering to the UK's desire for a bizarre special deal that will dig them out of a hole entirely of their own making.

The relationship between the remaining 27 is going to be very much the same after Brexit. The way the EU-27 deals with third countries is already established and unlikely to change much either, except to improve, for example with the trade deal with Japan. The experiences of Switzerland and Norway show that the EU countries are extremely unlikely to want to rebuild the EU just to accommodate an awkward member who wants to leave.

Hard Brexit will cause a hard border with the EU, and that means a hard border with NI. Any fudge to get around this would require fundamental changes to the way the EU operates, and frankly this is one case where the tail should not be wagging the dog.

The UK started this, they are pushing ahead with it, they can own it too and accept that it is they, and not the EU, that are the instigators of the problems that will arise in Ireland as a result.

.

Chips Lovell

I think it goes without saying that the EU has a responsibility to act in its own member states' best interests, including Ireland's. Why wouldn't it? The member states are, after all, the EU.

Even if, for some bizarre reason, it decided to act in Britain's best interests instead, it couldn't, since the what exactly the British want is in no way clear.

solodeogloria

swampgas wrote: »

Solo seems to view the UK - EU negotations as if they were a bilateral discussion between two neighbouring countries, like (say) France - Germany before the EC / EU came along, where there would be lots of scope for compromise.

The EU is a union of 28 countries, one of which wants out. The EU is much more about the remaining 27 and the trade deals they have with the wider world than it is about pandering to the UK's desire for a bizarre special deal that will dig them out of a hole entirely of their own making.

The relationship between the remaining 27 is going to be very much the same after Brexit. The way the EU-27 deals with third countries is already established and unlikely to change much either, except to improve, for example with the trade deal with Japan. The experiences of Switzerland and Norway show that the EU countries are extremely unlikley to want to rebuild the EU just to accommodate an awkward member who wants to leave.

Hard Brexit will cause a hard border with the EU, and that means a hard border with NI. Any fudge to get around this would require fundamental changes to the way the EU operates, and frankly this is one case where the tail should not be wagging the dog.

The UK started this, they are pushing ahead with it, they can own it too and accept that it is they, and not the EU, that are the instigators of the problems that will arise in Ireland as a result.

Good afternoon!

I've not got much to reply to this apart from a question about the bolded section. The outlook on this thread is admittedly very bizarre. It seems to suggest that the EU can do whatever it wants to Ireland in order to give the UK a good telling off. Or indeed that the EU can have no part in the "creative solutions" that it itself calls for.

If the EU considers Ireland as collateral damage in the Brexit negotiations, what does that say about how the EU views Ireland?

That is a reasonable question and it's one that demands an answer.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

knipex

First Up wrote: »

You miss my point. If goods from the UK cross the Irish border without restriction, they can be transported elsewhere in the EU via an Irish port.

These could be goods of UK origin, or goods imported from elsewhere under whatever trade terms the UK agrees with third countries. They can be brought into ROI and then re-packed and re-loaded before being shipped to elsewhere in the Single Market.

If Ireland is not policing its EU border, then others will do it for us.

Not if the border was on the Irish sea. This would mean NI remains in the EU..

Chips Lovell

I think if you continue to see a.) the EU as some sort of charitable organization that ought to be nice to the UK but is instead being unaccountably mean to it and b.) Ireland as somehow separate to rather than part of EU decision making, then you will continue to find the general consensus bizarre.

Ireland is the EU as much as any other member state is.

knipex

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

I've not got much to reply to this apart from a question about the bolded section. The outlook on this thread is admittedly very bizarre. It seems to suggest that the EU can do whatever it wants to Ireland in order to give the UK a good telling off. Or indeed that the EU can have no part in the "creative solutions" that it itself calls for.

If the EU considers Ireland as collateral damage in the Brexit negotiations, what does that say about how the EU views Ireland?

That is a reasonable question and it's one that demands an answer.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

This has been explained to you over and over and over and over and over.

The UK voted out,. The UK wants out the UK has to live with that and accept all the consequences.

Unfortunately others (including Ireland) also have to live with the consequences.

The EU cannot and will not rewrite the rules for the UK or Ireland or anyone..

That was plain when the UK wanted out but they chose to ignore that (much the same as you are choosing to do now)

You can moan and shout all you want but it will have as much impact as when my 5 years old daughter screams and moans about going to bed when its bed time....

Hint she just annoys everyone else..

(Which when you think about it is kind of like the UK at the moment..)

murphaph

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

I've not got much to reply to this apart from a question about the bolded section. The outlook on this thread is admittedly very bizarre. It seems to suggest that the EU can do whatever it wants to Ireland in order to give the UK a good telling off. Or indeed that the EU can have no part in the "creative solutions" that it itself calls for.

If the EU considers Ireland as collateral damage in the Brexit negotiations, what does that say about how the EU views Ireland?

That is a reasonable question and it's one that demands an answer.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

The EU is us, the member states.

The EU isn't "doing anything" to Ireland here. The rules are all agreed, including the rules about the external frontier. These are rules all EU citizens rely on when eating anything that came across that frontier!

We just didn't expect to have an external (land) frontier in Ireland, but we will have one and we, as a mature country (not like our immediate neighbours) will have to deal with that as best we can, hopefully with assistance from our EU partners.

The UK knew the rules and exactly where leaving would place the RoI, but said "sod it, we're off" anyway.

solodeogloria

knipex wrote: »

This has been explained to you over and over and over and over and over.

The UK voted out,. The UK wants out the UK has to live with that and accept all the consequences.

Unfortunately others (including Ireland) also have to live with the consequences.

The EU cannot and will not rewrite the rules for the UK or Ireland or anyone..

That was plain when the UK wanted out but they chose to ignore that (much the same as you are choosing to do now)

You can moan and shout all you want but it will have as much impact as when my 5 years old daughter screams and moans about going to bed when its bed time....

Hint she just annoys everyone else..

(Which when you think about it is kind of like the UK at the moment..)

Good afternoon!

There's a number of assumptions in your post.

The UK voted out, but it is negotiating a new deal, to bring about a new relationship. Notice the difference in language. It's positive. Will things be exactly the same? No, but that's the point.

As for Ireland accepting the "consequences", the European Union as a whole should act in Ireland's best interests as a member state. I don't see it as a given that Ireland should tolerate "consequences" for what another country has decided to do and how the rest of the European Union has decided how it should respond to it.

You claim that the EU cannot rethink things for Ireland. I don't see why this is true or rather necessarily true. It's an assumption that you've made. Again, if the European Union really considers the interests of its member states then the possibility of coming up with an arrangement that works well for Ireland has to be on the table. If it isn't one could draw the conclusion that it is collateral damage.

The question I asked remains unanswered. The resigned stoicism about the fabled impossibility of EU intransigence, and a carte blanche to give "consequences" that are harmful to Ireland as a member state is remarkable! Perhaps this is why I fall into the Eurosceptic camp.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

First Up

murphaph wrote:

Yep and rightly so. I Poland decided to turn a blind eye to food coming across its external border I'm quite sure Germany and the Czech Republic would impose these checks too.

Which is why whatever arrangements are agreed for the island of Ireland, they will not be allowed result in our membership if the Single Market being diminished.