Brexit discussion thread III

flaneur

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

It definitely looks like Ireland are in a weaker position than on Monday. The DUP have got what they wanted - no customs border on the Irish sea.

The fact that the Irish gov have negotiated to have a voice in phase 2 of the talks shows that there is still a lot to be fought for.

There are huge issues here. If a Northern Irish citizen has EU rights how can they be stopped from exporting goods to the EU.

The only way out of this (if the UK insist on being out of the single market) is checks at Irish ports and airports. Perhaps that is the price to pay for no hard border.

Maybe those checks will be electronic in some way but hard to avoid some physical random checks.

Citizenship doesn't make any difference on trade.

For example, I'm an Irish citizen and if I were resident in the USA, it wouldn't make any difference to my ability to import/export goods or services to/from Ireland/EU.

A customs border applies to the goods, services and capital, not the people. Two separate issues.

Blowfish

blanch152 wrote: »

The key point about number 2 is that they are only limited to those SM and CU rules supporting North-South co-operation. That doesn't mean there will be definitively an open border.

I think the biggest blow to North/South relations is that the text also includes 'future' cooperation.

This means that it's actually going to be far more difficult now to expand N/S cooperation to new areas as it'll require 'regulatory alignment' across the entire UK and give them less scope when negotiating trade deals with anyone other than the EU.

flaneur

Regulatory alignment is also undefined and may ultimately be unacceptable to the EU if it isn't very close alignment. Even within the EU, the UK has a bad track record on this.

Peregrinus

Blowfish wrote: »

I think the biggest blow to North/South relations is that the text also includes 'future' cooperation.

This means that it's actually going to be far more difficult now to expand N/S cooperation to new areas as it'll require 'regulatory alignment' across the entire UK and give them less scope when negotiating trade deals with anyone other than the EU.

No. The text accommodates special arrangement for NI with the agreement of the NI institutions.

What this means is that if, in the future, we wanted to agree some new alignment with NI, we'd need to get buy-in from the NI authorities.

But, politically, that would have been the case anyway. It's hard to see Westminster imposing some new deal with RoI in NI against the wishes of the NI assembly.

Peregrinus

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Weeeelll, I still think Davis is lying through his teeth about that stuff.

He either lied to parliament when he said they were preparing 58 studies in excruciating detail, or he was lying last week when he said they never did.

And since we heard from boardsie Ambro25 at the time that they did do at least one of those 58, we know he is lying now.

And he had good reason to tell the truth back then, and good reason to lie now, so it makes sense that they are a lot more prepared for Phase 2 than they are letting on.

No cite, but I recall reading in (I think) the Guardian that when Davis said "nope, this is all we've done" anonymous sources in the UK public sector confirmed that, on this occasion, he was telling the truth. They haven't modelled the impact of Brexit.

And the likely reason for this is that they fear the information would embarrass them - i.e. they expect the models would show that Brexit will have bad outcomes for Britain. Since they are commited to Brexit for reasons of political advantage, this is knowledge with which they would rather not be burdened.

blanch152

Peregrinus wrote: »

No. The text accommodates special arrangement for NI with the agreement of the NI institutions.

What this means is that if, in the future, we wanted to agree some new alignment with NI, we'd need to get buy-in from the NI authorities.

But, politically, that would have been the case anyway. It's hard to see Westminster imposing some new deal with RoI in NI against the wishes of the NI assembly.

Given the current political set-up in the North, this gives an effective veto on future North-South co-operation to the DUP, doesn't it?

LeinsterDub

blanch152 wrote: »

Given the current political set-up in the North, this gives an effective veto on future North-South co-operation to the DUP, doesn't it?

Not really the second largest party still have a massive say. Thus the current Irish language act crisis

Peregrinus

blanch152 wrote: »

Given the current political set-up in the North, this gives an effective veto on future North-South co-operation to the DUP, doesn't it?

Yes, as long as they remain the dominant unionist party. But that's the case anyway, as a matter of political reality. It's not as though we're giving up any huge opportunities here.

Gerry T

Enzokk wrote:

That is what the DUP fought for, they fought for the whole of the UK to follow EU rules, not just themselves.

I think they fought to stay fully aligned with the UK. That was their only real goal

blanch152

Peregrinus wrote: »

Yes, as long as they remain the dominant unionist party. But that's the case anyway, as a matter of political reality. It's not as though we're giving up any huge opportunities here.

This week has worked out really well for them, considering where they were on Monday, then. They can argue that not only did they get a better deal for Northern Ireland, but that they got a better deal for the South, and they preserved their veto on future North-South co-operation.

Enzokk

I would guess a poll like this would scare the DUP witless.

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/938825404542078976


I think the motivation for a soft Brexit or even a reversal of Brexit would be in the conversation for the DUP. Just too bad that they saddled the wrong horse in the race, where they may have won but it means that they possibly lose at the end of the day.

Zubeneschamali

Peregrinus wrote: »

No cite, but I recall reading in (I think) the Guardian that when Davis said "nope, this is all we've done" anonymous sources in the UK public sector confirmed that, on this occasion, he was telling the truth.

But we know from boardsie Ambro25's comments at the time about the research he personally contributed to that they did consider the impact of various Brexit scenarios on his sector.

If they did not include that research into anything they published, that is a different story.

But Davis is definitely lying when he says they did not do the work.

blanch152

Enzokk wrote: »

I would guess a poll like this would scare the DUP witless.

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/938825404542078976


I think the motivation for a soft Brexit or even a reversal of Brexit would be in the conversation for the DUP. Just too bad that they saddled the wrong horse in the race, where they may have won but it means that they possibly lose at the end of the day.

That is a completely loaded question.

It says "In the context of a hard Brexit and Northern Ireland leaving the EU with no deal on the Border, the Good Friday Agreement, or citizen's rights".. and then linking the border question to staying in the EU. If that question only barely gets a majority, then there is absolutely no chance that a real border poll has a chance of getting more than around 35%.

Look at what has changed since that question. Soft brexit now likely. GFA protected in the agreement and citizen's rights also protected. Only question is what kind of border which depends on the trade deal.

The actions of the DUP this week have completely changed the parameters of that poll making the numbers meaningless but also reducing significantly the chances of a border poll.

demfad

Based on CETA a UK deal will take 7 years to negotiate. That means 2026.
So the UK has to keep North South and East West regulatory alignment in any deal.

Based on this the UK would probably have to keep its transition arrangements until the deal is completed in 2026 (ish).

phater phagan

Were we just side-swiped by the EU in the negotiations?
Whatever happened to not moving on to the next step until the Irish border issue is settled?

flatty

Deleted User wrote: »

A serious outcome for any rational UK residents.

A very problematic set of guarantees for the hung ho brexiteers though

How so emmet?
As a person currently resident in the UK, I'd be genuinely interested.

LeinsterDub

phater phagan wrote: »

Were we just side-swiped by the EU in the negotiations?
Whatever happened to not moving on to the next step until the Irish border issue is settled?

That was never the agreement . We can't settle the Irish border until trade is settled . What we have got was agreement that there will not be a hard border ,we've got the UK to put it on paper and give a feasible way of achieving it

brickster69

Got a feeling we will be back to the Irish border at some point. Have the EU guaranteed there will be no hard border also, or just the UK ? If it is the UK, how can they possibly do that if there is no freedom of trade, which is a big possibility still.

LeinsterDub

brickster69 wrote: »

Got a feeling we will be back to the Irish border at some point. Have the EU guaranteed there will be no hard border also, or just the UK ? If it is the UK, how can they possibly do that if there is no freedom of trade, which is a big possibility still.

EU == Ireland
Ireland == EU.

In the absence of agreed solutions, the United Kingdom will maintain full alignment with those rules of the internal market and the customs union which, now or in the future, support north-south cooperation, the all-island economy and the protection of the 1998 agreement ...

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/dec/08/sufficient-progress-in-brexit-talks-announced-after-mays-dash-to-brussels

phater phagan

If the DUP are happy with this arrangement then you can be sure that we have been royally screwed. I remember hearing over and over again that it would not continue to the trade talks until the border issue was satisfactory to the Republic.
This now leaves it open for the Brits to introduce a border no matter what Varadkar says. If NI or the UK are not in the customs union how can there not be a border?

Water John

A few here seem to think that for the Irish Govn't to have won. they should have whipped the DUP and humiliated May a bit more.
I don't care how the Tories or British Press square out where they were standing with where they are now and we all know, that's a very different place.
Similarily, we know their is a significant division within the DUP, esp Dodds and Foster. How anyone sells the deal to their own, doesn't worry me. the thing has been signed.
Good weeks work, Barnier/Tusk and the Irish Govn't.

The reality will be that, UK will mirror SM and CU in their own laws. Their law might word it differently but mean the same thing. They'll feel better.

Professor Moriarty

phater phagan wrote: »

If the DUP are happy with this arrangement then you can be sure that we have been royally screwed. I remember hearing over and over again that it would not continue to the trade talks until the border issue was satisfactory to the Republic.
This now leaves it open for the Brits to introduce a border no matter what Varadkar says. If NI or the UK are not in the customs union how can there not be a border?

There must be a border in that case. So maybe they will be staying in the CU but are unwilling to say so yet for fear of the Brexiteers.

LeinsterDub

Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief negotiator, warned that the next phase of Brexit talks, on the future, would be harder than the divorce. “Not everyone has yet well understood that there are points that are non-negotiable for the EU,” he said reiterating there would be no watering down or of the EU’s four freedoms (goods, services, people and capital) or decision-making autonomy.

The commission had studied Theresa May’s red lines, he said, and concluded that the only option for the UK was a free-trade agreement modelled on the deal the EU struck with Canada in 2016, an arrangement that would mark a major retreat from the current level of economic integration.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2017/dec/08/brexit-border-eu-theresa-may-juncker-tusk-markets-live

Essentially for TM to maintain her Irish promise her other red lines will need to go.

blanch152

blanch152 wrote: »

That is a completely loaded question.

It says "In the context of a hard Brexit and Northern Ireland leaving the EU with no deal on the Border, the Good Friday Agreement, or citizen's rights".. and then linking the border question to staying in the EU. If that question only barely gets a majority, then there is absolutely no chance that a real border poll has a chance of getting more than around 35%.

Look at what has changed since that question. Soft brexit now likely. GFA protected in the agreement and citizen's rights also protected. Only question is what kind of border which depends on the trade deal.

The actions of the DUP this week have completely changed the parameters of that poll making the numbers meaningless but also reducing significantly the chances of a border poll.

And this is the most important question yet to be resolved. While today's developments are welcome, I wouldn't be popping the champagne corks just yet tbh.... As I pointed out earlier, TM referred to the 'unique circumstances' of NI. How is this to be eventually squared with the DUP wish for a UK where all regions should get equal treatment?

LeinsterDub

phater phagan wrote: »

If the DUP are happy with this arrangement then you can be sure that we have been royally screwed. I remember hearing over and over again that it would not continue to the trade talks until the border issue was satisfactory to the Republic.
This now leaves it open for the Brits to introduce a border no matter what Varadkar says. If NI or the UK are not in the customs union how can there not be a border?

Instead of outrage can you point out exactly how we've been screwed. Also it's not the EU/Irish government's fault you were and are misinformed.

phater phagan

I have unpeaceful, uneasy feeling about this, who knows if they won't let us down (with all due respects to the Eagles).

farmchoice

brickster69 wrote: »

Got a feeling we will be back to the Irish border at some point. Have the EU guaranteed there will be no hard border also, or just the UK ? If it is the UK, how can they possibly do that if there is no freedom of trade, which is a big possibility still.

what the uk have now agreed to, among other things, is that in the event of a ''no deal'' they will continue to enforce a regulatory regime that is inline with EU regulations to ensure that there is no need for border in Ireland.
this will apply across all the uk.

so in effect a no deal means that the UK have to keep all their regulations and standards the same as the EU's. rules that will be decided by the EU.

FrancieBrady

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Instead of outrage can you point out exactly how we've been screwed. Also it's not the EU/Irish government's fault you were and are misinformed.

We are in the same place a week later. The only difference is a re-arrangement of the wording and a bit of 'themuns' ammo for the DUP.

Round 2 is where and was always going to be the real gamechanger.

LeinsterDub

FrancieBrady wrote: »

We are in the same place a week later. The only difference is a re-arrangement of the wording and a bit of 'themuns' ammo for the DUP.

Round 2 is where and was always going to be the real gamechanger.

We've more or less gotten 100% of what we wanted out of phase 1, yet some think we've been screwed.

kowtow

farmchoice wrote:

so in effect a no deal means that the UK have to keep all their regulations and standards the same as the EU's. rules that will be decided by the EU.

In the existing cross border cooperation
areas covered by the good Friday agreement.

And providing that another solution has not been agreed.

And in the context of a final withdrawal agreement (nothing is agreed until everything etc...)

farmchoice

kowtow wrote: »

In the existing cross border cooperation
areas covered by the good Friday agreement.

And providing that another solution has not been agreed.

And in the context of a final withdrawal agreement (nothing is agreed until everything etc...)

yes, although and i dont have the text in front of me i think its sames something to the effect of '' the all ireland economy'' which covers just about everything from a trade point of view.

Enzokk

blanch152 wrote: »

That is a completely loaded question.

It says "In the context of a hard Brexit and Northern Ireland leaving the EU with no deal on the Border, the Good Friday Agreement, or citizen's rights".. and then linking the border question to staying in the EU. If that question only barely gets a majority, then there is absolutely no chance that a real border poll has a chance of getting more than around 35%.

Look at what has changed since that question. Soft brexit now likely. GFA protected in the agreement and citizen's rights also protected. Only question is what kind of border which depends on the trade deal.

The actions of the DUP this week have completely changed the parameters of that poll making the numbers meaningless but also reducing significantly the chances of a border poll.

Before the effects of Brexit has been felt people are almost at 48% favouring leaving the UK and joining Ireland. That will only change to a bigger majority if there is a hard Brexit and the economic effects are being felt.

What this should do is spur on the DUP to ensure there is no back out from the UK to a hard Brexit.

blanch152

brickster69 wrote: »

Got a feeling we will be back to the Irish border at some point. Have the EU guaranteed there will be no hard border also, or just the UK ? If it is the UK, how can they possibly do that if there is no freedom of trade, which is a big possibility still.

There hasn't been a guarantee of no border. That is how the deal is being portrayed, both by Varadkar and May. However, the devil is in the detail:

"The United Kingdom also recalls its commitment to the avoidance of a hard border, including any physical infrastructure or related checks and controls."

So the UK is committed to avoiding a hard border, but that isn't a guarantee. Neither does it say that the EU is committed to this. Can you hear a future British PM? "Made our best efforts, remain committed to future solutions, but unfortunately, couldn't make good at this point in time on our commitment to avoid a hard border"

Here is more:

"The United Kingdom remains committed to protecting and supporting continued North-South and East-West cooperation across the full range of political, economic, security, societal and agricultural contexts and frameworks of cooperation, including the continued operation of the North-South implementation bodies."

Yep, still committed, but still not guaranteeing. This paragraph is the hardest to analyse:

"The United Kingdom remains committed to protecting North-South cooperation and to its guarantee of avoiding a hard border. Any future arrangements must be compatible with these overarching requirements. The United Kingdom's intention is to achieve these objectives through the overall EU-UK relationship. Should this not be possible, the United Kingdom will propose specific solutions to address the unique circumstances of the island of Ireland. In the absence of agreed solutions, the United Kingdom will maintain full alignment with those rules of the Internal Market and the Customs Union which, now or in the future, support North-South cooperation, the all-island economy and the protection of the 1998 Agreement"

The guarantee is mentioned, and the commitment to that guarantee remains. Furthermore, it says that future arrangements must be compatible with these overarching requirements. However, unlike other parts of the text, this is a unilateral commitment. The EU isn't bound by this.

Large parts of the text contain phrases like "both parties agree" or "both parties recognise" or "both parties affirm", however all of the sections from 45 to 50 which deal with the Irish border only contain British commitments. Commitments are not always delivered upon, and there is certainly a question as to whether they are legally binding.

Contrast the language with the later paragraphs on citizenship.

"Both Parties therefore agree that the Withdrawal Agreement should respect and be without prejudice to the rights, opportunities and identity that come with European Union citizenship for such people and, in the next phase of negotiations, will examine arrangements required to give effect to the ongoing exercise of, and access to, their EU rights, opportunities and benefits."

So both parties agree that EU citizens living in Northern Ireland will have their rights protected, but only the UK is committed (and only committed, not promising, not agreeing) to avoiding a hard border.

Now, don't take any of the above as criticism of the Agreement or criticism of the Irish government. Rather, it is a cautious note on the scale of the spin around this. It is now much more likely that a soft Brexit with no hard borders is on the cards, but there is a long way to go before we get there.

Tigerandahalf

Looking increasingly like the EU wanted to move onto phase 2 and the border issue has been dismissed for now.

Let us say there is a hard brexit - what is in place for a hard border not to happen?

Does the GF Agreement prevent one from taking place?

If so a border at ports/airports would have to come into force as EU will have to ensure customs/migration issues are taken care of.

If there is a hard brexit and britain stops the flow of people into Britain then the EU will have to respond in some way.

Otherwise won't there have to be agreement to extend the brexit deadline?

First Up

Farage is fuming so things are obviously going well.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

There hasn't been a guarantee of no border. That is how the deal is being portrayed, both by Varadkar and May. However, the devil is in the detail:



Now, don't take any of the above as criticism of the Agreement or criticism of the Irish government. Rather, it is a cautious note on the scale of the spin around this. It is now much more likely that a soft Brexit with no hard borders is on the cards, but there is a long way to go before we get there.

It was never going to be any other way. Spinning that it could have been, is disingenuous.

blanch152

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

Looking increasingly like the EU wanted to move onto phase 2 and the border issue has been dismissed for now.

Let us say there is a hard brexit - what is in place for a hard border not to happen?

Does the GF Agreement prevent one from taking place?

If so a border at ports/airports would have to come into force as EU will have to ensure customs/migration issues are taken care of.

If there is a hard brexit and britain stops the flow of people into Britain then the EU will have to respond in some way.

Otherwise won't there have to be agreement to extend the brexit deadline?

The things is, while it isn't written in stone a soft Brexit is by far the most likely outcome now that the agreement has been signed.

Tell me how

First Up wrote: »

Farage is fuming so things are obviously going well.

Equally, Arelene Foster saying that they ran out of time on some things and that ultimately it was down to Theresa May might actually mean that the 6 counties of NI are coming back next week!

I'm proud of Ireland politics (in this instance! (for now!)). There was no posturing or dramatic statements which could have been taken up by DUP, Brexiteers or UK media which made us look amateurish.

Credit where it's due (for now).

demfad

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

Looking increasingly like the EU wanted to move onto phase 2 and the border issue has been dismissed for now.

Let us say there is a hard brexit - what is in place for a hard border not to happen?

Does the GF Agreement prevent one from taking place?

If so a border at ports/airports would have to come into force as EU will have to ensure customs/migration issues are taken care of.

If there is a hard brexit and britain stops the flow of people into Britain then the EU will have to respond in some way.

Otherwise won't there have to be agreement to extend the brexit deadline?

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/joint_report.pdf

In the absence of agreed solutions, the United
Kingdom will maintain full alignment with those rules of the Internal Market and the Customs Union which, now or in the future, support North-South cooperation, the allisland economy and the protection of the 1998 Agreement.

Without a deal CU and SM or a simulation of them remain. As NI can't diverge from GB this applies to the whole of the UK.
Ireland has a Veto on any trade deal.

solodeogloria

Good afternoon!

I don't know why some people are phrasing this as a failure for either the UK or Ireland.

Let's think about the results of Phase 1:

• Estimated settlement is between £35 and £39bn according to the Guardian - falls into the reasonable limit I personally held to of £36bn net. This will only be paid if a wider agreement is settled.
• British courts will settle British laws. British courts will have a temporary period where they can refer cases to the ECJ for 8 years. This isn't binding on the UK. (This is a big win for the UK)
• Both sides have agreed that there is a need to collaborate on nuclear and police and security issues.
• Both sides have committed to keep the Irish border open.

I don't see anything here as a "climbdown". There will be hard battles to fight in phase 2, keeping the UK out of the single market and the customs union is the big one.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

brickster69

demfad wrote: »

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

Looking increasingly like the EU wanted to move onto phase 2 and the border issue has been dismissed for now.

Let us say there is a hard brexit - what is in place for a hard border not to happen?

Does the GF Agreement prevent one from taking place?

If so a border at ports/airports would have to come into force as EU will have to ensure customs/migration issues are taken care of.

If there is a hard brexit and britain stops the flow of people into Britain then the EU will have to respond in some way.

Otherwise won't there have to be agreement to extend the brexit deadline?

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/joint_report.pdf

In the absence of agreed solutions, the United
Kingdom will maintain full alignment with those rules of the Internal Market and the Customs Union which, now or in the future, support North-South cooperation, the allisland economy and the protection of the 1998 Agreement.

Without a deal CU and SM or a simulation of them remain. As NI can't diverge from GB this applies to the whole of the UK.
Ireland has a Veto on any trade deal.

Do only Ireland have that ?:)

BlitzKrieg

I'm going to have someone check this for me because reading these two sections:

In the absence of agreed solutions, the United Kingdom will maintain full alignment with those rules of the Internal Market and the Customs Union which, now or in the future, support North-South cooperation, the all island economy and the protection of the 1998 Agreement.

In the absence of agreed solutions, as set out in the previous paragraph, the United Kingdom will ensure that no new regulatory barriers develop between Northern Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom, unless, consistent with the 1998 Agreement, the Northern Ireland Executive and Assembly agree that distinct arrangements are appropriate for Northern Ireland. In all circumstances, the United Kingdom will continue to ensure the same unfettered access for Northern Ireland's businesses to the whole of the United Kingdom internal market.

Reads like the UK completely backing away from a hard brexit under any circumstances?

I mean you cant pick and mix the common market or customs union, the only way you can achieve that is with a trade deal.

But the above is saying if they completely balls up a trade deal they'll fall back to being in full alignment with the CM and CU as far as good friday agreement. But as I already said you cant pick and mix it so you have to take the whole thing. The point of a trade deal is to be able to pick and mix it. No trade deal no halfway CM and CU and with no unfettered access to the North for the rest of the UK the same deal has to reach across.

So it sounds like the UK agreeing that if they cant get a trade deal they'll stay in the CM and CU. No hard brexit.


But that also means the EU has all the power in this negotiation now (it mostly did anyway to begin with). If they just stonewall the UK they still get everything they want because the UK has Guaranteed it will keep the North in and also agreed the rest of the UK will keep unfettered access to the North.


This is such around in circles hodge podge. The only way the EU will go for a trade deal now is if the UK offers them something more then what they get out of member states.

Enzokk

blanch152 wrote: »

This paragraph is the hardest to analyse:

"The United Kingdom remains committed to protecting North-South cooperation and to its guarantee of avoiding a hard border. Any future arrangements must be compatible with these overarching requirements. The United Kingdom's intention is to achieve these objectives through the overall EU-UK relationship. Should this not be possible, the United Kingdom will propose specific solutions to address the unique circumstances of the island of Ireland. In the absence of agreed solutions, the United Kingdom will maintain full alignment with those rules of the Internal Market and the Customs Union which, now or in the future, support North-South cooperation, the all-island economy and the protection of the 1998 Agreement"

The guarantee is mentioned, and the commitment to that guarantee remains. Furthermore, it says that future arrangements must be compatible with these overarching requirements. However, unlike other parts of the text, this is a unilateral commitment. The EU isn't bound by this.

Large parts of the text contain phrases like "both parties agree" or "both parties recognise" or "both parties affirm", however all of the sections from 45 to 50 which deal with the Irish border only contain British commitments. Commitments are not always delivered upon, and there is certainly a question as to whether they are legally binding.

I don't know what you find hard on this paragraph. As per the bold bit, the UK is committed to to guaranteeing there will be no hard border. The objective is to do this with the deal that will hopefully be negotiated in phase 2.

If they cannot negotiate a deal during phase 2 the UK will propose NI specific solution to ensure there is no hard border. The bolded part is in relation to the trade deal the UK has insisted will solve the border issue.

"Should this not be possible, the United Kingdom will propose specific solutions to address the unique circumstances of the island of Ireland."

And failing a specific solution from the UK if trade deals fail and they cannot propose a NI specific solution to avoid a hard border, then the UK will stay in the customs union and single market to ensure there is no hard border.

This isn't hard to understand. The UK will ensure there is no hard border. They will do this either by the trade deal, if not that a NI specific deal (read sea border or something to that effect) or they will stay in the CU and SM until such a deal is forthcoming.

The UK has agreed to this because the UK is the one talking about leaving the EU and everything that entails. Why the EU needs to guarantee an open border when that is what it wants makes no sense.

Tigerandahalf

demfad wrote: »

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/joint_report.pdf



Without a deal CU and SM or a simulation of them remain. As NI can't diverge from GB this applies to the whole of the UK.
Ireland has a Veto on any trade deal.

But that only refers to NI. It doesn't say the rest of the uk will remain in cu or sm.

The EU are adamant that remaining in cu means free movement of people. Something I can't see Tories agreeing to.

blanch152

demfad wrote: »

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/joint_report.pdf



Without a deal CU and SM or a simulation of them remain. As NI can't diverge from GB this applies to the whole of the UK.
Ireland has a Veto on any trade deal.

Only "those rules of the Internal Market and the Customs Union which, now or in the future, support North-South cooperation, the allisland economy and the protection of the 1998 Agreement."

Who decides which are they? Who decides are they sufficient to maintain an open border?

Christy42

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

I don't know why some people are phrasing this as a failure for either the UK or Ireland.

Let's think about the results of Phase 1:

• Estimated settlement is between £35 and £39bn according to the Guardian - falls into the reasonable limit I personally held to of £36bn net. This will only be paid if a wider agreement is settled.
• British courts will settle British laws. British courts will have a temporary period where they can refer cases to the ECJ for 8 years. This isn't binding on the UK. (This is a big win for the UK)
• Both sides have agreed that there is a need to collaborate on nuclear and police and security issues.
• Both sides have committed to keep the Irish border open.

I don't see anything here as a "climbdown". There will be hard battles to fight in phase 2, keeping the UK out of the single market and the customs union is the big one.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Interesting that you leave off the following EU regulations off of the results from phase 1.

I suspect that the wording staying away from the customs unions points is so the UK and EU can diverge on issued that are not traded across borders physically. So stuff like hotels, do what you like or taxis or financial products. This will be a requirement for the UK to get away from the freedom of movement issue. Obviously stuff like the financial products will be important for the financial passport.

Honestly right now if Ireland could keep free trade with the UK and an open border and knock out the UK's financial passport we could easily benefit more than we lose from Brexit which is something I had not thought possible before.

Tell me how

The GFA agreement means that People in Northern Ireland have the right to consider themselves, Irish, British, or both.
This phase agreement has said to uphold that.

Solicitors in the north must be wetting their lips at the opportunities to go to court over this once Brexit goes through.

Water John

In plain language, the fall back/no agreement position is no border north/south and no border east/west.
The UK hope in Phase 2 negotiations to supersede that, with a better arrangement.
And some here are asking, where's the catch???

Enzokk

solodeogloria wrote: »

I don't know why some people are phrasing this as a failure for either the UK or Ireland.

Let's think about the results of Phase 1:

• Estimated settlement is between £35 and £39bn according to the Guardian - falls into the reasonable limit I personally held to of £36bn net. This will only be paid if a wider agreement is settled.
• British courts will settle British laws. British courts will have a temporary period where they can refer cases to the ECJ for 8 years. This isn't binding on the UK. (This is a big win for the UK)
• Both sides have agreed that there is a need to collaborate on nuclear and police and security issues.
• Both sides have committed to keep the Irish border open.

I don't see anything here as a "climbdown". There will be hard battles to fight in phase 2, keeping the UK out of the single market and the customs union is the big one.

Weren't you saying the bill should be around 20B euro? This is almost double that amount and this is without any future payments the UK will need to make if they are to keep on participating in EU institutions while they spend more money to set up their own.

solodeogloria

Enzokk wrote: »

Weren't you saying the bill should be around 20B euro? This is almost double that amount and this is without any future payments the UK will need to make if they are to keep on participating in EU institutions while they spend more money to set up their own.

Good afternoon!

No. I didn't. If you want to find the post - please go ahead.

Leroy42 pulled out a post where I said I was happy to go to £36bn net, but where I doubted Theresa May would go beyond €20bn at that particular time. I was wrong about the Prime Minister, but I still hold to the £36bn net figure as the correct ball park.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria