Brexit discussion thread III

whatstherush

This is what Irish sovereignty in a European context has always meant to me, pooling sovereignty to achieve a better outcome than alone #WhoDaBoss
https://twitter.com/Arron_banks/status/939057837791211520?s=17

kowtow

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

They've committed to paying that bill regardless according to a statement by Hammond two days ago. Also, if you deduct, say, 20 bn then that leaves 20bn for which they will essentially be getting nothing apart from the privilege of leaving an FTA with their biggest market.

I think he said "he can't imagine the circumstances in which..." .. but in any case he was slapped down with a clarification from Downing St. within hours.

In practice I would be really surprised if they did not end up paying. Bear in mind that - to a degree - it is "pay as you go" and they will be using it up in the period to 2021 (implementation).

It's possible that more will end up being paid for the right trade deal. But there is also an implicit acknowledgement that the money is offered rather than being paid on the basis of a legal obligation.

They are paying - no question about it, but they are already paying anyway, and we are kidding ourselves if we think Brexit is a two year, five year, or even ten year thing, it is potentially a big change of direction for us all in Europe. There are enough potholes and bear traps ahead for Ireland in whatever New Europe emerges over the coming years, it would be a pity to fall into them because we are busy looking over our shoulder at the UK.

In any event - as a country our aims should now be very much in parallel with those of the UK. We want the best deal possible for them, with maximum trade at minimum friction and preferably without tariffs. As far as possible we should step away from the EU27 big boy friends in the playground politics and simply try to make sure that Brexit hurts us as little as possible. The border aside, it is time to look to our own venal instincts.

Our interests, in this as in other things, are not identical to those of France, or Germany, or the EU core no matter how much we may agree with them politically. As a nation there is nothing to be gained - for us - in trying to prove the British electorate wrong in the decision they have made.

Vronsky

First Up wrote: »

They have already sacrificed those pawns by taking the SM and CU off the table.


Well they have been relying on a divide and conquer approach with everything so far and you can see how far it has got them.



They are hopelessly mis-matched against an experienced, well resourced and well prepared EU team, while the UK admits it has done no impact studies.

And they have no Plan B.

I don't believe that the UK has not done impact studies, I just think they don't want to release them - and you can't release what don't exist.

kowtow

Vronsky wrote: »

I don't believe that the UK has not done impact studies, I just think they don't want to release them - and you can't release what don't exist.

No question about it, that was all pure Yes Minister stuff.

Sierra Oscar

I'm surprised at the amount of jubilation doing the rounds on our side. I'd urge caution, the hard work is only starting now.

Don't get me wrong - the Government have done a fantastic job here. Realistically it's the best they could have achieved. However people are foolish if they think the threat of a hard border is now off the table entirely. It simply isn't.

The British Government were desperate to move on to Phase 2 of the talks. Ultimately they would have done or said anything to achieve this. People should pay attention to what senior British Government Minister's are saying time and time again today - i.e. "Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed". The British will renege on what has been agreed should the Phase 2 talks collapse. That is almost a certainty.

Just think about what Theresa May has tentatively signed up to today. They are committing to achieving 'regulatory alignment' for the entire UK, this is to satisfy the DUP demand that the entirety of the UK leaves under the same conditions. This is impossible for Theresa May to achieve. Her own hard-Brexiteers will ensure that it does not come to pass. It's an aspiration Theresa May is willing to peddle to progress the talks to Stage 2.

To satisfy the Irish Government and our EU partners, the British Government have committed to allowing special arrangements between North and South should the Phase 2 talks fail and 'regulatory alignment' cannot be achieved UK-wide. However, and this is the crucial bit, the Northern Assembly will have to sanction these arrangements. This mean the DUP has a complete veto over the arrangements.

We already know that the DUP simply will not tolerate a situation whereby Northern Ireland exits the EU under differing circumstances to the rest of the UK. Therefore they will certainly veto the special arrangements.

This will lead to a situation whereby a hard border is inevitable. The British Government will not implement one - it'll likely fall to Ireland to maintain the integrity of the Customs Union. The British will turn around and say 'we don't want a border, you're the ones implementing one' even though they are effectively creating the conditions necessary for a hard border.

As far as I can see, the only way this can be avoided is if the Phase 2 talks are actually a success. I don't see how they can be considering Theresa May has just made a commitment for 'regulatory alignment' which will not even please the hard-Brexiteers in her own cabinet.

This is a good day for Ireland in the sense that we've got a commitment from the British in principal for no hard border, but it's ultimately meaningless should the Phase 2 talks fail. Keep in mind we don't have a veto for Phase 2. I hope our EU partners don't shaft us.

Vronsky

kowtow wrote: »

I think he said "he can't imagine the circumstances in which..." .. but in any case he was slapped down with a clarification from Downing St. within hours.

In practice I would be really surprised if they did not end up paying. Bear in mind that - to a degree - it is "pay as you go" and they will be using it up in the period to 2021 (implementation).

It's possible that more will end up being paid for the right trade deal. But there is also an implicit acknowledgement that the money is offered rather than being paid on the basis of a legal obligation.

They are paying - no question about it, but they are already paying anyway, and we are kidding ourselves if we think Brexit is a two year, five year, or even ten year thing, it is potentially a big change of direction.

In any event - as a country our aims should now be very much in parallel with those of the UK. We want the best deal possible for them, with maximum trade at minimum friction and preferably without tariffs. As far as possible we should step away from the EU27 big boy friends in the playground stuff and simply try to make sure that Brexit hurts us as little as possible. The border aside, it is time to look to our own venal instincts.

Our interests, in this as in other things, are not identical to those of France, or Germany, or the EU core no matter how much we may agree with them politically. As a nation there is nothing to be gained - for us - in trying to prove the British electorate wrong in the decision they have made.

Stepping away from the EU 26 to conduct our own negotiation with the UK would end in disaster. The only reason the UK caved on the NI border was because of the 26 big boy friends. As history has shown, the UK would have pulled our pants down and stolen out lunch money had we tried to go it alone.

Ireland should look out for it's own interests sure, but there is no way to achieve them standing alone. Indeed, there is no way for small or medium sized nations to achieve their goals standing alone (as the UK will find out)

flaneur

This sounds like someone heading for a bare scrape or a pass degree, trying bluff their way through a 1st year university project due to having been out on tear all year.

It’s shocking to see a government of what used to be a sensible country doing this!

First Up

Vronsky wrote:

I don't believe that the UK has not done impact studies, I just think they don't want to release them - and you can't release what don't exist.

Its reasonable to suspect that they did some studies and found them so depressing that they had to bury them.

But they are well buried because even the industries concerned don't know about them.

kowtow

Vronsky wrote: »

Stepping away from the EU 26 to conduct our own negotiation with the UK would end in disaster.

I'm not suggesting that for a moment. I'm suggesting being the best friend of the UK at the negotiating table - vocally supporting the deal that maximizes trade for them (and therefore us).

Surely pooled sovereignty doesn't imply simply doing what the biggest nations in the bloc say?

Tell me how

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

I'm surprised at the amount of jubilation doing the rounds on our side. I'd urge caution, the hard work is only starting now.

This is a good day for Ireland in the sense that we've got a commitment from the British in principal for no hard border, but it's ultimately meaningless should the Phase 2 talks fail.

Agree, have a drink to celebrate today and get down to work tomorrow in preparation of next phase.

I hope some upstarts in Dail Eireann (on any side) don't think we might as well have a ruccus and then a general election now before Phase 2 gets too serious.

This last week might be a high point in Irish politics of everyone pulling in the same direction.

Leroy42

kowtow wrote: »

In any event - as a country our aims should now be very much in parallel with those of the UK. We want the best deal possible for them, with maximum trade at minimum friction and preferably without tariffs. As far as possible we should step away from the EU27 big boy friends in the playground politics and simply try to make sure that Brexit hurts us as little as possible. The border aside, it is time to look to our own venal instincts.

Our interests, in this as in other things, are not identical to those of France, or Germany, or the EU core no matter how much we may agree with them politically. As a nation there is nothing to be gained - for us - in trying to prove the British electorate wrong in the decision they have made.

I take a different look. The UK are clearly looking to become more inward looking, to remove themselves from cooperation etc. To align ourselves with a country that has literally just voted that it wants to only look after itself is not a good strategy.

We can use this episode to make a change for ourselves. We are aligned to the UK through history and up until 2019 we were basically the same. But from that point on we diverge.

If we are brave and bold we can start to take advantage of the UK desire to turn inward at a time when the world in becoming more global. The IDA has been very successful at selling Ireland as a destination to mainly US companies, but the removal of the UK from Europe means that our advantages will soon increase massively.

Giving the best deal to the UK, particularly if it is at the expense of any advantage to us is the old way of doing things. we will continue to trade with the UK no matter what. But just like the UK feel that they can overcome any costs of Brexit through better international deals, we should be doing the exact same.

We are not cutting ourselves off from 450 millions potential customers like the UK.

Water John

This is an interesting insight in the 'live' feed on The Guardian.



15:14
Anushka Asthana Anushka Asthana
Some interesting thoughts from a Westminster source with good knowledge of northern Ireland and questions relating to the border.

They argue:

The Irish government never wanted any east-west/sea border between which would have been disastrous for its own economy, but has cleverly used the issue and the DUP to completely outmanoeuvre the UK government.

In particular they claim the Irish government has achieved:

full alignment with the single market and customs union on the island of Ireland even if that means the entire UK adhering;
EU rights, entitlements and benefits for all citizens born in Northern Ireland guaranteed, because everyone born there is entitled to Irish citizenship;
complete compliance with EU equality and human rights frameworks;
all underpinned by the “1998 Agreement” which the DUP opposed, as did Michael Gove and other senior Tories and indeed which caused Arlene Foster to leave the Ulster Unionist Party and join the DUP; and
the icing on the cake for the Irish is the reference to single market and customs union rules applying to future - ie more expansive - north-south co-operation.

realdanbreen

Water John wrote: »

Listening to Sammy Wilson nonsense would really, do your head. So Varadkar, (which he can't pronounce) and Coveney are the Green bogeymen?

You can be sure the bill will run very far North of €40Bn.

Why are we hearing that arch bigot Wilson and his fellow bigots on our media?
Despite what the Taoiseach felt he had to say this morning to assure them very few people down hear want to see or hear from them.
Once the tory's have sorted themselves out then the DUP will be jettisoned and the real players, EU & UK will cut a deal although none of us will see a significant difference for 10 to 15 years.

Zubeneschamali

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

The British will renege on what has been agreed should the Phase 2 talks collapse.

Being realistic, any Phase 1 agreement is only as good as the word of the people making it, and this agreement is a good one from our point of view - better even than last Mondays.

Of course we need eyes on the process through Phase 2, but Varadkar & co. are well aware of that and called it out.

blanch152

Leroy42 wrote: »

I take a different look. The UK are clearly looking to become more inward looking, to remove themselves from cooperation etc. To align ourselves with a country that has literally just voted that it wants to only look after itself is not a good strategy.

We can use this episode to make a change for ourselves. We are aligned to the UK through history and up until 2019 we were basically the same. But from that point on we diverge.

If we are brave and bold we can start to take advantage of the UK desire to turn inward at a time when the world in becoming more global. The IDA has been very successful at selling Ireland as a destination to mainly US companies, but the removal of the UK from Europe means that our advantages will soon increase massively.

Giving the best deal to the UK, particularly if it is at the expense of any advantage to us is the old way of doing things. we will continue to trade with the UK no matter what. But just like the UK feel that they can overcome any costs of Brexit through better international deals, we should be doing the exact same.

We are not cutting ourselves off from 450 millions potential customers like the UK.

We actually need a middle path.

We need to keep trade with the UK open in areas such as food where we export to them (and import from them) but we also need to cut off their access to the EU in areas such as financial services where we can benefit from relocation.

Vronsky

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

I'm surprised at the amount of jubilation doing the rounds on our side. I'd urge caution, the hard work is only starting now.

Don't get me wrong - the Government have done a fantastic job here. Realistically it's the best they could have achieved. However people are foolish if they think the threat of a hard border is now off the table entirely. It simply isn't.

The British Government were desperate to move on to Phase 2 of the talks. Ultimately they would have done or said anything to achieve this. People should pay attention to what senior British Government Minister's are saying time and time again today - i.e. "Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed". The British will renege on what has been agreed should the Phase 2 talks collapse. That is almost a certainty.

Just think about what Theresa May has tentatively signed up to today. They are committing to achieving 'regulatory alignment' for the entire UK, this is to satisfy the DUP demand that the entirety of the UK leaves under the same conditions. This is impossible for Theresa May to achieve. Her own hard-Brexiteers will ensure that it does not come to pass. It's an aspiration Theresa May is willing to peddle to progress the talks to Stage 2.

To satisfy the Irish Government and our EU partners, the British Government have committed to allowing special arrangements between North and South should the Phase 2 talks fail and 'regulatory alignment' cannot be achieved UK-wide. However, and this is the crucial bit, the Northern Assembly will have to sanction these arrangements. This mean the DUP has a complete veto over the arrangements.

We already know that the DUP simply will not tolerate a situation whereby Northern Ireland exits the EU under differing circumstances to the rest of the UK. Therefore they will certainly veto the special arrangements.

This will lead to a situation whereby a hard border is inevitable. The British Government will not implement one - it'll likely fall to Ireland to maintain the integrity of the Customs Union. The British will turn around and say 'we don't want a border, you're the ones implementing one' even though they are effectively creating the conditions necessary for a hard border.

As far as I can see, the only way this can be avoided is if the Phase 2 talks are actually a success. I don't see how they can be considering Theresa May has just made a commitment for 'regulatory alignment' which will not even please the hard-Brexiteers in her own cabinet.

This is a good day for Ireland in the sense that we've got a commitment from the British in principal for no hard border, but it's ultimately meaningless should the Phase 2 talks fail. Keep in mind we don't have a veto for Phase 2. I hope our EU partners don't shaft us.

All good points, but on the sea border: A time will come where the DUP won't hold the balance of power and at that point all the text in the document relating to the internal arrangements become unenforceable. Ireland won't stand in the way of the UK decided to shaft the DUP nor will the EU and erect a sea border.

Sierra Oscar

Tell me how wrote: »

Agree, have a drink to celebrate today and get down to work tomorrow in preparation of next phase.

I hope some upstarts in Dail Eireann (on any side) don't think we might as well have a ruccus and then a general election now before Phase 2 gets too serious.

This last week might be a high point in Irish politics of everyone pulling in the same direction.

If I was Leo Varadkar I'd probably call a snap election in the first three months of 2018. The Phase 2 talks will be underway, but it will be behind the scenes work until next summer. The political decisions will not have to be made until later in the year.

He will go to the country asking people to strengthen his hand for the Brexit negotiations and to provide a stable Government for five years to see us through the storm.

People will say that Theresa May did this and it backfired. I don't think its comparable. Firstly, there was Civil War in her own party. This isn't the case in FG and the wounds of the leadership battle have seemingly healed - Varadkar and Coveney have made a good team during these negotiations. Secondly, Theresa May made the disastrous mistake of having a long campaign. Never do that for a snap election. Leo would go with a three week campaign.

Realistically the next few months is the last time Leo Varadkar will have the opportunity to call an election on his terms. The Phase 2 negotiations are due to conclude in October 2018, so we can't have an election from next Autumn until May 2019 as the Government will have to see the deal through to completion.

The Confidence and Supply Arrangement only lasts until January 2019, when the third budget is fully passed.

blanch152

Vronsky wrote: »

All good points, but on the sea border: A time will come where the DUP won't hold the balance of power and at that point all the text in the document relating to the internal arrangements become unenforceable. Ireland won't stand in the way of the UK decided to shaft the DUP nor will the EU and erect a sea border.

But the DUP have forestalled that option by ensuring a veto for the Northern Ireland Assembly. It doesn't matter if the UK wants to shaft them, they can stay.

People also forget that the GFA works both ways. When the UK and Ireland agreed to respect the wishes of the people of Northern Ireland when it comes to constitutional status, that includes respecting if they stay within the UK.

Tell me how

blanch152 wrote: »

We actually need a middle path.

We need to keep trade with the UK open in areas such as food where we export to them (and import from them) but we also need to cut off their access to the EU in areas such as financial services where we can benefit from relocation.

Ultimately we want a good relationship with them. I wouldn't go so far as saying we want to cut off their access to EU in areas so we can benefit from the relocation.
The wheel is always turning, we will rely on them again in the not too distant future, even if it is only (hopefully) as a large market for us.

I would say though that the EU will look for their pound of flesh in some form from Ireland over this. They will point to their support of us at this time (even though they wanted very much the same thing) and ask that we remember that?

Could see it being mentioned in future corporation tax approach matters.

Sierra Oscar

Vronsky wrote: »

All good points, but on the sea border: A time will come where the DUP won't hold the balance of power and at that point all the text in the document relating to the internal arrangements become unenforceable. Ireland won't stand in the way of the UK decided to shaft the DUP nor will the EU and erect a sea border.

The unionists will always have a veto under the Petition of Concern mechanism built into the Northern Ireland Assembly as per the terms of the Good Friday Agreement.

They will not hesitate to use it to protect their attachment to the United Kingdom.

Tell me how

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

If I was Leo Varadkar I'd probably call a snap election in the first three months of 2018. The Phase 2 talks will be underway, but it will be behind the scenes work until next summer. The political decisions will not have to be made until later in the year.

He will go to the country asking people to strengthen his hand for the Brexit negotiations and to provide a stable Government for five years to see us through the storm.

People will say that Theresa May did this and it backfired. I don't think its comparable. Firstly, there was Civil War in her own party. This isn't the case in FG and the wounds of the leadership battle have seemingly healed - Varadkar and Coveney have made a good team during these negotiations. Secondly, Theresa May made the disastrous mistake of having a long campaign. Never do that for a snap election. Leo would go with a three week campaign.

Realistically the next few months is the last time Leo Varadkar will have the opportunity to call an election on his terms. The Phase 2 negotiations are due to conclude in October 2018, so we can't have an election from next Autumn until May 2019 as the Government will have to see the deal through to completion.

The Confidence and Supply Arrangement only lasts until January 2019, when the third budget is fully passed.

That's exactly the thing I do not want to happen. And nothing to do with him being successful in an election or not.
It's playing politics at a time when there is a need for consistent focus on Brexit.

flutered

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Being realistic, any Phase 1 agreement is only as good as the word of the people making it, and this agreement is a good one from our point of view - better even than last Mondays.

Of course we need eyes on the process through Phase 2, but Varadkar & co. are well aware of that and called it out.

given the better and proven skilled negotiators on the eu side, negotiators who do this for a living as regards a once in a lifetime occasion, the eu27 are surely in a better place than the uk, i read somewherE of wilson saying that once it came to 3am the uk side became tired and weary, then just wanted sleep

Call me Al

kowtow wrote: »

I think he said "he can't imagine the circumstances in which..." .. but in any case he was slapped down with a clarification from Downing St. within hours.

In practice I would be really surprised if they did not end up paying. Bear in mind that - to a degree - it is "pay as you go" and they will be using it up in the period to 2021 (implementation).

It's possible that more will end up being paid for the right trade deal. But there is also an implicit acknowledgement that the money is offered rather than being paid on the basis of a legal obligation.

They are paying - no question about it, but they are already paying anyway, and we are kidding ourselves if we think Brexit is a two year, five year, or even ten year thing, it is potentially a big change of direction for us all in Europe. There are enough potholes and bear traps ahead for Ireland in whatever New Europe emerges over the coming years, it would be a pity to fall into them because we are busy looking over our shoulder at the UK.

In any event - as a country our aims should now be very much in parallel with those of the UK. We want the best deal possible for them, with maximum trade at minimum friction and preferably without tariffs. As far as possible we should step away from the EU27 big boy friends in the playground politics and simply try to make sure that Brexit hurts us as little as possible. The border aside, it is time to look to our own venal instincts.

Our interests, in this as in other things, are not identical to those of France, or Germany, or the EU core no matter how much we may agree with them politically. As a nation there is nothing to be gained - for us - in trying to prove the British electorate wrong in the decision they have made.

Irrespective of our own country's interests ultimately for the good of the EU, through which we get most of our competitive advantage, the UK has to be worse off outside than in.
Otherwise all bets are off as to what EU country will be lining up next to leave.
This reality has nothing to do with proving the UK electorate wrong and everything to do with preservation of the union of which we are a member. That should similarly be on all of our radars when it comes to our own venal interests.

Junkyard Tom

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

We already know that the DUP simply will not tolerate a situation whereby Northern Ireland exits the EU under differing circumstances to the rest of the UK. Therefore they will certainly veto the special arrangements.

blanch152 wrote: »

But the DUP have forestalled that option by ensuring a veto for the Northern Ireland Assembly.

What veto is this exactly?

brickster69

kowtow wrote: »

In any event - as a country our aims should now be very much in parallel with those of the UK. We want the best deal possible for them, with maximum trade at minimum friction and preferably without tariffs. As far as possible we should step away from the EU27 big boy friends in the playground politics and simply try to make sure that Brexit hurts us as little as possible. The border aside, it is time to look to our own venal instincts.

Our interests, in this as in other things, are not identical to those of France, or Germany, or the EU core no matter how much we may agree with them politically. As a nation there is nothing to be gained - for us - in trying to prove the British electorate wrong in the decision they have made.

Too late now to do that now my friend.

flutered

Vronsky wrote: »

The document doesn't have a legal standing anyway, it's merely a gentleman's agreement.

did not the irish goverment claim earlier it was a cast iron agreement

LeinsterDub

The deal secured by Ireland does not necessarily force the UK to stay in the customs union and single market. It just forces it to act as if it has stayed in - a distinction without a difference. Call it what you like - if it acts like a customs union, moves like a customs union and is fully aligned like a customs union, it is a customs union

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/fintan-o-toole-ireland-has-just-saved-the-uk-from-the-madness-of-a-hard-brexit-1.3320096

Good read here. As I said previously in the CU granny flat.

flutered

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

To use another metaphor, May is trying to herd cats. And another, the square peg will meet the round hole soon again. This from her spokesman just this morning:

"We are leaving the single market and the customs union in March 2019 - I will write it on a sign if you like."

This means a border. No ifs, buts or maybe.

the wto will have the final say, regardless of what the uk decides upon

First Up

flutered wrote:

given the better and proven skilled negotiators on the eu side, negotiators who do this for a living as regards a once in a lifetime occasion, the eu27 are surely in a better place than the uk, i read somewherE of wilson saying that once it came to 3am the uk side became tired and weary, then just wanted sleep

It isn't even just skills. The EU has been negotiating trade agreements for over 50 years and has assembled a formidable database on every industry in every EU country. They can run a proposed tariff or quota through a computer and produce a detailed impact analysis in seconds.

This sort of thing is meat and drink to all major trading nations (and blocs). The UK is starting from scratch without the personnel - or the database.

First Up

flutered wrote:

the wto will have the final say, regardless of what the uk decides upon

Final say on what?

Sierra Oscar

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

What veto is this exactly?

This is in the deal itself:

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 allisland 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.

Read that excerpt in full. The bold highlights the veto in particular. The Northern Ireland Assembly has to sanction the special arrangements, meaning the unionists have an effective veto.

We already know the DUP will not tolerate any divergence in rules between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK.

It's effectively impossible for Theresa May to have 'regulatory alignment' for the entire UK, the conservative hard-Brexiteers will not tolerate it.

Hence divergence is a certainty - something which the DUP have said they will veto. You're back to square one hard border territory in that case.

An Ciarraioch

As things stand, it seems Gibraltar would drop out of the SM and CU on D-Day, even if the UK remains inside during the transition period:


https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2017/dec/08/brexit-border-eu-theresa-may-juncker-tusk-markets-live?page=with:block-5a2aa2e324e47405c4d71785#block-5a2aa2e324e47405c4d71785

kowtow

blanch152 wrote: »

We actually need a middle path.

We need to keep trade with the UK open in areas such as food where we export to them (and import from them) but we also need to cut off their access to the EU in areas such as financial services where we can benefit from relocation.

We need to have our cake and eat it ?

I get that logic completely, I just wonder how long it will stand up to economic and political reality.

For the EU to actively exclude UK trade would surely be counterproductive, not because of the punishment thing, but because the EU itself wants access to outside capital, technology, etc. etc. and global trade? It would have to tread a very political line to single out the UK in today's economy.

And in any event, the closer the integration of the EU - the greater the tax pressure on Ireland - the EU won't be content for all those high paying tech and Finance jobs to sit in Dublin with us collecting all the tax and benefits as we have to date. There will be a re-balancing.

Not to mention the fact that the UK, by definition, excluded from the EU enjoys the freedom to set it's own taxes (& regulation, and incentives) to maximise FDI while Ireland faces pressure in the opposite direction.

Unless the EU is able to legislate to seriously close it's borders to global companies (which in itself would damage Ireland) it won't be able to stop global operators maximizing the advantages of London. Google, Deutsche Bank, and Goldman are all pressing ahead with new headquarters projects in the UK and Brexit hasn't exactly been a secret.

Financial Services - in fact - is the easiest area for the EU to 'control' in this way because of the heavy regulatory burden, but even there the pressure for an FTT and other factors will limit the damage to London - and the spoils will still have to be shared out across more cities than Dublin.

A tricky path, I think, although an attractive one.

blanch152

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

What veto is this exactly?

Here:


"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."

This part of the agreement conflicts with the previous paragraph that says:

"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 only way that these two paragraphs make sense when read together is that the regulatory alignment with the rules of the Internal Market etc. are limited and a hard border can be put in place for other issues if required.

All of the above doesn't matter if there is an agreed EU/UK Trade Agreement.

Professor Moriarty

Verhofstadt damping down the hubris. In order for the EP to sanction trade talks, the following matters must be dealt with:

1 Allowing EU nationals living in the UK to bring their future spouses and partners to the EU. Under the agreement only existing family members, rather than the future Ms or Mr Right fall under the agreement. Future children are covered by the agreement.
2 Ensuring “light-touch” and free procedures for citizens to register in the UK, placing the burden of proof on the UK authorities. MEPs want a single application form for families
3 The parliament is not satisfied with the language on the European court and will seek further guarantees that the ECJ’s writ will be binding.
4 Securing free movement rights for British nationals in the EU, allowing, for example, a Briton in Spain to move anywhere else in the EU, rather than being tied to Spain.
5 More detail on how to avoid a hard border on Ireland.

I wish him luck in getting detail on how a hard border will be avoided.

Leroy42

kowtow wrote: »

We need to have our cake and eat it ?

I get that logic completely, I just wonder how long it will stand up to economic and political reality.

For the EU to actively exclude UK trade would surely be counterproductive, not because of the punishment thing, but because the EU itself wants access to outside capital, technology, etc. etc. and global trade? It would have to tread a very political line to single out the UK in today's economy.

And in any event, the closer the integration of the EU - the greater the tax pressure on Ireland - the EU won't be content for all those high paying tech and Finance jobs to sit in Dublin with us collecting all the tax and benefits as we have to date. There will be a re-balancing.

Not to mention the fact that the UK, by definition, excluded from the EU enjoys the freedom to set it's own taxes (& regulation, and incentives) to maximise FDI while Ireland faces pressure in the opposite direction.

Unless the EU is able to legislate to seriously close it's borders to global companies (which in itself would damage Ireland) it won't be able to stop global operators maximizing the advantages of London. Google, Deutsche Bank, and Goldman are all pressing ahead with new headquarters projects in the UK and Brexit hasn't exactly been a secret.

Financial Services - in fact - is the easiest area for the EU to 'control' in this way because of the heavy regulatory burden, but even there the pressure for an FTT and other factors will limit the damage to London - and the spoils will still have to be shared out across more cities than Dublin.

A tricky path, I think, although an attractive one.

It depends on how you look at the UK after they leave. You seem to take the view that the UK should still be seen as a partner when in actuality they become a competitor.

The UK have already stated that they will look to trade deals and even moving their tax regulations to make up any business they lose due to Brexit and that will come directly from the EU and in some cases directly from Ireland.

You seem to want to believe that the current relationship can simply continue. But the UK, through the ref vote, have signalled the exact opposite. They have attempted to reduce that by using fluffy language about ongoing friendships etc but they will do whatever is in their interests first and foremost.

So Ireland needs to decide if its future lies with the EU of the UK because, unfortunately, we can no longer have both.

kowtow

Call me Al wrote: »

Irrespective of our own country's interests ultimately for the good of the EU, through which we get most of our competitive advantage

I don't dispute that the EU offers us some competitive advantage, but I think it is wrong that we always seem to attribute all our success to them.

I can think of African countries and Indian cities who have completely turned their agricultural economies around through tech outsourcing - all without the benefit of the EU. They did it because they had highly educated, hard working, young people and the Internet suddenly made it possible. To hand all the credit for our tech industries to EU membership is a gross disservice to the young (mainly) people who work in it.

And no serious commentator would dispute that one of Ireland's biggest competitive strengths is our tax code, a regime which is so pro-FDI that it has proved very controversial internationally. I will stop short of calling us a tax haven, but there are plenty who would not agree with me. Our tax arrangements are under threat both from Europe, on a number of fronts, and of course potentially from the US. In any event, it would not be fair to credit the EU for the competitive advantages of a tax system they wish to abolish.

So yes - the EU is part of the picture, and a big one - but to attribute all of our success and development to it is to talk ourselves down in a wholly unjustified way.

Junkyard Tom

I'm still not seeing a veto and definitely not a DUP or even unionist veto. Unionists are now a minority in the assembly.

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

We already know the DUP will not tolerate any divergence in rules between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK.

Hence divergence is a certainty - something which the DUP have said they will veto. You're back to square one hard border territory in that case.

What am I missing?

Sierra Oscar

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

I'm still not seeing a veto and definitely not a DUP or even unionist veto. Unionists are now a minority in the assembly.



What am I missing?

A Petition of Concern can be used to block any legislative proposals. You only need 30 MLA's to force the triggering of such a petition, it's not 50% +1. There are 40 unionist MLA's by my count.

The Northern Ireland Executive and Assembly have to agree that distinct arrangements are appropriate for Northern Ireland.

any vote taken by the Assembly can be made dependent on cross-community support if a petition of concern is presented to the Speaker. A petition of concern may be brought by 30 or more MLAs.[28] In such cases, a vote on proposed legislation will only pass if supported by a weighted majority (60%) of members voting, including at least 40% of each of the nationalist and unionist designations present and voting. Effectively this means that, provided enough MLAs from a given community agree, that community (or a sufficiently large party in that community) can exercise a veto over the Assembly's decisions. The purpose is to protect each community from legislation that would favour the other community.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Ireland_Assembly

solodeogloria

LeinsterDub wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/fintan-o-toole-ireland-has-just-saved-the-uk-from-the-madness-of-a-hard-brexit-1.3320096

Good read here. As I said previously in the CU granny flat.

Good afternoon!

With all due respect - this is just premature speculation from Fintan O'Toole in an opinion piece. There is still a whole lot to be discussed before we can get to any robust idea about what the final agreement is. If there are transitional terms on the table by early January the UK will be doing well, and then after that the additional period will be used to discuss the future relationship.

Something interesting about phase 2 to keep our eyes sharp on what to look out for in the months ahead:
The Financial Times have put forward an annotated version of the EU's guidelines. They are interesting both in respect to the phase 1 issues, and the fact that it is relatively silent on the outcome of the phase 2 relationship. The onus is on the UK to define what they want.

Something interesting about the DUP and the Cabinet on phase 1:
The Guardian have offered an account of last nights events, where it says that the DUP did not give full approval to the Prime Minister before she went to Brussels. Nor did the cabinet. She took executive authority and both bowed into line. This is interesting because it implies she has more authority than she makes out, or because both the DUP and some members of the cabinet were bluffing.

Foster said on Thursday morning that the call had not ended in complete agreement, but May had informed her she intended to press on with the offer they had discussed.

“We cautioned the prime minister about proceeding with this agreement in its present form, given the issues which still need to be resolved and the views expressed to us by many of her own party colleagues,” Foster said.

“However, it was ultimately a matter for the prime minister to decide how she chose to proceed.”

[...]

The cabinet did not get sign-off either. May flew to Brussels without explicitly seeking their nod, No 10 said. “In times like this there is some leeway for the prime minister. She has the authority to act in the best interests of the country,” her spokesman said. “You can see the response from cabinet colleagues on social media and elsewhere has been supportive.”

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

First Up

Junkyard Tom wrote:

I'm still not seeing a veto and definitely not a DUP or even unionist veto. Unionists are now a minority in the assembly.

I think the "veto" is their support for May's government. It isn't a veto as such; they can bring the government down but only by bringing themselves down with it.

Junkyard Tom

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

A Petition of Concern can be used to block any legislative proposals. You only need 30 MLA's to force the triggering of such a petition, it's not 50% +1. There are 39 unionist MLA's by my count.

That's presuming all unionists will be on the same page, that the PoC remains in place (there was talk of it being done away with), and there being an assembly in place.

That's a fairy rickety veto if it could even be described as a veto.

sink

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

This will lead to a situation whereby a hard border is inevitable. The British Government will not implement one - it'll likely fall to Ireland to maintain the integrity of the Customs Union. The British will turn around and say 'we don't want a border, you're the ones implementing one' even though they are effectively creating the conditions necessary for a hard border.

The issue with this strategy is it contravenes WTO MFN rules. They can only drop all border custom controls unilaterally for Ireland if they also do so for every other WTO member. Same goes for the EU custom controls with the UK, which is why Ireland would have no choice but to enforce customs.

This of course creates a problem for their domestic economy by effectively wiping out existing agriculture and manufacturing industry which would have to compete against Brazil & China on cost.

It also creates a problem of negotiating free trade deals with other WTO members; why would any country drop trade tariffs for the UK imports when they already have tariff free access for their exports into the UK market. There would be simply nothing to gain other than regulatory harmonisation and we already know how hard brexiteers feel about that.

Professor Moriarty

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

A Petition of Concern can be used to block any legislative proposals. You only need 30 MLA's to force the triggering of such a petition, it's not 50% +1. There are 40 unionist MLA's by my count.

The Northern Ireland Executive and Assembly have to agree that distinct arrangements are appropriate for Northern Ireland.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Ireland_Assembly

That presupposes that the Assembly is operating (which hasn't been the case for 11 months) or that it even exists...

sink

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

I'm still not seeing a veto and definitely not a DUP or even unionist veto. Unionists are now a minority in the assembly.



What am I missing?

By the rules of the power sharing executive in Stormont a majority of both Unionist MLA's and Nationalist MLA's are required to pass legislation. This gives the DUP a defacto veto as they have the majority of Unionists MLA's.

Edit:- a more accurate description of what I'm talking about. DUP currently has 36 seats.

any vote taken by the Assembly can be made dependent on cross-community support if a petition of concern is presented to the Speaker. A petition of concern may be brought by 30 or more MLAs.[28] In such cases, a vote on proposed legislation will only pass if supported by a weighted majority (60%) of members voting, including at least 40% of each of the nationalist and unionist designations present and voting. Effectively this means that, provided enough MLAs from a given community agree, that community (or a sufficiently large party in that community) can exercise a veto over the Assembly's decisions. The purpose is to protect each community from legislation that would favour the other community.

Source

Sierra Oscar

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

That's presuming all unionists will be on the same page, that the PoC remains in place (there was talk of it being done away with), and there being an assembly in place.

That's a fairy rickety veto if it could even be described as a veto.

All unionists are on the same page when it comes to maintaining their relationship with the UK. They're called unionists for a reason afterall.

Read the agreement again.

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.

The Assembly and Executive must consent to special arrangements.

If the Assembly remains collapsed then it won't be able to even sanction the special arrangements in the first place. The DUP won't even need to use their veto.

It's fairly black and white lads.

jm08

flutered wrote: »

given the better and proven skilled negotiators on the eu side, negotiators who do this for a living as regards a once in a lifetime occasion, the eu27 are surely in a better place than the uk, i read somewherE of wilson saying that once it came to 3am the uk side became tired and weary, then just wanted sleep

I think that was a ploy they used when discussing Good Friday Agreement - keep them late and don't feed them!

ancapailldorcha

I honestly expected May to have called an election by now. She's succeeded in kicking the NI border can down the road but unless she can remove the DUP yoke round her neck there's nothing she can do except crash out with no deal.

Professor Moriarty

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

All unionists are on the same page when it comes to maintain their relationship with the UK. They're called unionists for a reason afterall.

Read the agreement again.



The Assembly and Executive must consent to special arrangements.

If the Assembly remains collapsed then it won't be able to even sanction the special arrangements in the first place. The DUP won't even need to use their veto.

It's fairly black and white lads.

Do you really think that, in the absence of an assembly and in the context of DUP intransigence, Westminster will endanger Brexit by adhering to this?

jm08

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

All unionists are on the same page when it comes to maintaining their relationship with the UK. They're called unionists for a reason afterall.

DUP have only a majority of 1 I think in Assembly. Highly likely that the Alliance and UUP would have a different take on it than the DUP - for instance, Sylvia Hermon Ind. Unionist wants NI to remain in the EU.