Brexit discussion thread III

First Up

charlie14 wrote: »

First Up wrote: »

I offered Connelly's presentation to illustrate the strength of the Irish position and therefore why talk of a veto is missing the point (which you seem to be still doing.)

Only in the sense that regardless of what our EU partners were saying publicly, we never had any.

From Connelly`s presentation it is clear the EU negotiators had decided long before the Phase 1 December 2017 talks where the border would be situated and the terms would be in line with the 1998 Agreement.

So it seems the border is your preoccupation. That's grand but it isn't mine.

The UK will end up wherever its dysfunctional politics and pig ignorant electorate takes it. We can't influence that.
Our priority should be (and is) how we solidify our position in the EU, which is critical to our future. The border situation will be an outcome of all this but it isn't critical to our future.

The UK is well capable of messing it up to the extent that a hard border comes back and if so, no waving of previous agreements or vague assurances will make any difference. Whatever the outcome of that, we'll fix it best with and within the EU.

charlie14

First Up wrote: »

So it seems the border is your preoccupation. That's grand but it isn't mine.

The UK will end up wherever its dysfunctional politics and pig ignorant electorate takes it. We can't influence that.
Our priority should be (and is) how we solidify our position in the EU, which is critical to our future. The border situation will be an outcome of all this but it isn't critical to our future.

The UK is well capable of messing it up to the extent that a hard border comes back and if so, no waving of previous agreements or vague assurances will make any difference. Whatever the outcome of that, we'll fix it best with and within the EU.

Normally it would not concern me in the slightest where a bunch of privileged Hurrah Henry`s and Henrietta`s wish to take their sheep. When that entails the creation of a border that will have adverse economic impact on this country, for me that is not just some preoccupation, it`s a genuine concern.
A concern that merits much more than some "sure won`t it be alright, haven`t we friends that will look after that."

Where that has taken us to date is this narrative that with the backing of these friends, when it came to crunch time we pulled of some great achievement on the issue which in reality amounts to nothing other that a kicking a can down the road fudge.

Enzokk

charlie14 wrote: »

Normally it would not concern me in the slightest where a bunch of privileged Hurrah Henry`s and Henrietta`s wish to take their sheep. When that entails the creation of a border that will have adverse economic impact on this country, for me that is not just some preoccupation, it`s a genuine concern.
A concern that merits much more than some "sure won`t it be alright, haven`t we friends that will look after that."

Where that has taken us to date is this narrative that with the backing of these friends, when it came to crunch time we pulled of some great achievement on the issue which in reality amounts to nothing other that a kicking a can down the road fudge.

But what were the options open to Ireland? Should we have gotten a cast iron guarantee that the UK will not put up a border? I think you will find the likes of Michale Gove, Boris Johnson, Jacob Rees Mogg and Suella Fernandes would kick up a fuss about it and force a resignation of Theresa May. Then you would have one of those in charge and they will go for a hard Brexit with a border and economic hardship for the UK and us.

The other option is for the fudge to try and let time pass and make those that want to leave the EU warts and all to see the damage just talking about it is causing. Some will listen, some won't but we are at the hands of the UK politicians on what they want. They are leaving the EU and they need to say what border they want. What we have gotten so far is the best we could have gotten at this stage, whether you like it or not. There are a lot of powerful rich people out there that will make a lot of money with a hard Brexit and you can bet they are pushing their friends in politics hard to make it happen.

First Up

charlie14 wrote: »

First Up wrote: »

So it seems the border is your preoccupation. That's grand but it isn't mine.

The UK will end up wherever its dysfunctional politics and pig ignorant electorate takes it. We can't influence that.
Our priority should be (and is) how we solidify our position in the EU, which is critical to our future. The border situation will be an outcome of all this but it isn't critical to our future.

The UK is well capable of messing it up to the extent that a hard border comes back and if so, no waving of previous agreements or vague assurances will make any difference. Whatever the outcome of that, we'll fix it best with and within the EU.

Normally it would not concern me in the slightest where a bunch of privileged Hurrah Henry`s and Henrietta`s wish to take their sheep. When that entails the creation of a border that will have adverse economic impact on this country, for me that is not just some preoccupation, it`s a genuine concern.
A concern that merits much more than some "sure won`t it be alright, haven`t we friends that will look after that."

Where that has taken us to date is this narrative that with the backing of these friends, when it came to crunch time we pulled of some great achievement on the issue which in reality amounts to nothing other that a kicking a can down the road fudge.

The UK will do what it does, whether we like it or not. A hard border will be an inconvenience but the damage will be more social and political then economic. Keeping our trade links with the EU open is more important to our overall economy and we will gain some advantages from the UK shooting itself in both feet.

charlie14

Enzokk wrote: »

But what were the options open to Ireland? Should we have gotten a cast iron guarantee that the UK will not put up a border? I think you will find the likes of Michale Gove, Boris Johnson, Jacob Rees Mogg and Suella Fernandes would kick up a fuss about it and force a resignation of Theresa May. Then you would have one of those in charge and they will go for a hard Brexit with a border and economic hardship for the UK and us.

The other option is for the fudge to try and let time pass and make those that want to leave the EU warts and all to see the damage just talking about it is causing. Some will listen, some won't but we are at the hands of the UK politicians on what they want. They are leaving the EU and they need to say what border they want. What we have gotten so far is the best we could have gotten at this stage, whether you like it or not. There are a lot of powerful rich people out there that will make a lot of money with a hard Brexit and you can bet they are pushing their friends in politics hard to make it happen.

What we will get is what we were always going to get no matter how long it takes, and that is not all down to the British.

The EU is not some charitable society. It is a hard nosed political and economic block governed by those that have the economic clout.
All the rest are simply cogs.
I am neither judging that as good or bad. It is simply the reality of today`s world.

What gets me is this whole narrative that there was some great achievement on the border issue during Phase 1 and when questioning what that achievement was the fall-back off "never mind all that our friends will see us right"

I am not necessarily blaming our own government for claiming an achievement. Politicians do what politicians do and from the outset as members of the EU our hands were tied anyway.
I would have given the a lot of credit though if they had stated that we want the border in the Irish Sea.
Not that it was ever going to get us anywhere, but for no other reason than the consternation it would have caused of our EU friends who had pledged their backing on our wishes.

The border issue has been decided by the EU a long way back.
It will be North/South in conjunction with an endless "he said she said" on the 1998 Agreement.
How hard that border is will, as you say, on the UK side will be decided by those with deep pockets, and while I would never be that averse to giving the Brits a kick up the transom just for old times sake, I feel it`s really the area we should be keeping an eye on now.
The EU to discourage that lovely word we learned so much about with the banking crises, contagion, will be eager to give them a bit of a kicking too.

With the UK or largest trading partner, we should be very mindful that kicking is not going to adversely damage us as a side effect.

charlie14

First Up wrote: »

The UK will do what it does, whether we like it or not. A hard border will be an inconvenience but the damage will be more social and political then economic. Keeping our trade links with the EU open is more important to our overall economy and we will gain some advantages from the UK shooting itself in both feet.

All well and good if the UK was not by far our largest trading partner.

murphaph

charlie14 wrote: »

All well and good if the UK was not by far our largest trading partner.

It's not though.

First Up

charlie14 wrote: »

All well and good if the UK was not by far our largest trading partner.

Not as big as it used to be. 13% of our exports and 24% of our imports (9% from N.I.) Yes agri-business and other indigenous sectors are more exposed but major drivers of our economy (net capital inflow, FDI, technology, employment, tax revenue) depend far more on EU markets than the UK. And we will benefit from the UK's weakened position.

I'm not saying Brexit won't damage us - of course it will. But we're not going to get anywhere by stamping our feet and threatening vetoes.

Nate--IRL--

charlie14 wrote: »

All well and good if the UK was not by far our largest trading partner.

That would be Belgium, then the UK, believe it or not.

Nate

First Up

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

That would be Belgium, then the UK, believe it or not.

Nate

The US is much bigger than either, but not in the EU of course.

Really Interested

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

That would be Belgium, then the UK, believe it or not.

Nate

https://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/irl/

2016 figures

The top export destinations of Ireland are the United States ($33.4B), the United Kingdom ($16.5B), Belgium ($16.2B), Germany ($8.67B) and Switzerland ($6.99B). The top import origins are the United Kingdom ($22.9B), the United States ($9.6B), Germany ($6.53B), the Netherlands ($3.7B) and France ($3.18B).

The interesting thing to me is what we export

The top exports of Ireland are Packaged Medicaments ($19.7B), Nitrogen Heterocyclic Compounds ($14.4B), Human or Animal Blood ($10.7B), Scented Mixtures ($8.04B) and Integrated Circuits ($6.16B), using the 1992 revision of the HS (Harmonized System) classification. Its top imports are Planes, Helicopters, and/or Spacecraft ($12.9B), Packaged Medicaments ($2.81B), Cars ($2.76B), Computers ($2.53B) and Human or Animal Blood ($2.04B).

“Human or Animal Blood ($10.7B)” that’s a lot of blood

Also interesting “Ireland is the 27th largest export economy in the world. In 2016,“

Nate--IRL--

I stand corrected... I swear I saw Belgium ahead of the UK somewhere.

Nate

charlie14

First Up wrote: »

Not as big as it used to be. 13% of our exports and 24% of our imports (9% from N.I.) Yes agri-business and other indigenous sectors are more exposed but major drivers of our economy (net capital inflow, FDI, technology, employment, tax revenue) depend far more on EU markets than the UK. And we will benefit from the UK's weakened position.

I'm not saying Brexit won't damage us - of course it will. But we're not going to get anywhere by stamping our feet and threatening vetoes.

Largest in the present EU and 13% of our exports is not to be sneezed at.
Especially in light of the present administration in the U.S. and the potential damage to our economy.

Regardless of all the claims that we had the support of our EU friends in only accepting a border deal that we were happy with, (a veto) like the claim of our achievement it is a myth. As will be our power of veto come the final draft.

A, you have said the UK will do what it will do. As we have seen in the past so will "our friends," will do what suits them best.
We will just be required to suck it up.


Do not fool yourself that we carry some influence in the EU above or weight.
We are a small cog in a hard nosed block where the big boys decide what is best.
Any advantages that may accrue from a UK weakened position are being aggressively pursued by "friends" who have potentially a lot less to lose than us.

Nody

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

I stand corrected... I swear I saw Belgium ahead of the UK somewhere.

Nate

It is if you exclude NI as separate country which CSO does (14.9 with NI included vs. 14.7 for Belgium). However a lot of the NI export is artificial due to plant locations and hence Belgium would in practice be a bigger export country.

charlie14

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

I stand corrected... I swear I saw Belgium ahead of the UK somewhere.

Nate

In fairness, not a lot between them.

charlie14

Really Interested wrote: »

https://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/irl/

2016 figures

“Human or Animal Blood ($10.7B)” that’s a lot of blood

That is pretty weird.

Looks like we are being being sucked dry.

Really Interested

charlie14 wrote: »

That is pretty weird.

Looks like we are being being sucked dry.

At least there are no figures for seamen.

murphaph

charlie14 wrote: »

Largest in the present EU and 13% of our exports is not to be sneezed at.
Especially in light of the present administration in the U.S. and the potential damage to our economy.

Regardless of all the claims that we had the support of our EU friends in only accepting a border deal that we were happy with, (a veto) like the claim of our achievement it is a myth. As will be our power of veto come the final draft.

A, you have said the UK will do what it will do. As we have seen in the past so will "our friends," will do what suits them best.
We will just be required to suck it up.


Do not fool yourself that we carry some influence in the EU above or weight.
We are a small cog in a hard nosed block where the big boys decide what is best.
Any advantages that may accrue from a UK weakened position are being aggressively pursued by "friends" who have potentially a lot less to lose than us.

I believe we do punch above our weight in the EU and internationally generally.

That we don't punch with the same weight as Germany should be obvious.

We couldn't have played a better game diplomatically.

charlie14

murphaph wrote: »

I believe we do punch above our weight in the EU and internationally generally.

That we don't punch with the same weight as Germany should be obvious.

We couldn't have played a better game diplomatically.

Not just Germany. There are quite a few heavier hitter than us in there.
As I said, no different than any political and economic bloc.

The issue was decided long before our diplomats had any say, and our politicians, as politicians do, talked up the outcome.
Or in this case, lack of outcome.

Nate--IRL--

charlie14 wrote: »

The issue was decided long before our diplomats had any say,

Interesting, is there any evidence to support this?

Nate

charlie14

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

Interesting, is there any evidence to support this?

Nate

That we will have a North/South border in alignment with an ambiguous 1990 Agreement unless you can see another outcome ?

CelticRambler

charlie14 wrote: »

Or in this case, lack of outcome.

So are you saying that the UK's committment to regulatory alignment between NI and the RoI wasn't an "outcome" or that it was decided by the EU "long before" anyone else got involved - including the Brits?

Or do actually you know what you're arguing about .... because I haven't clue any more.

Can you not just be happy that the Republic of Ireland and the EU did get a committment in writing from the UK that effectively keeps the North-South border invisible for the foreseeable future, Brexit or no Brexit.

And then move onto some other topic! :rolleyes:

Nate--IRL--

charlie14 wrote: »

That we will have a North/South border in alignment with an ambiguous 1990 Agreement unless you can see another outcome ?

So no evidence to show then that "The issue was decided long before our diplomats had any say"

OK then.

Nate

Zubeneschamali

CelticRambler wrote: »

So are you saying that the UK's committment to regulatory alignment between NI and the RoI wasn't an "outcome"

It was the best outcome we could expect.

But we all know the Brits will ignore it in the event of a Hard Brexit - there is no point whatsoever in leaving Hard and keeping every regulation aligned - it can't last.

Skedaddle

We export significantly more to the EU-26 than we do to the UK on its own. You also have to remember that some of these huge export partners are simply ports-of-entry into the wider EU single market. Belgium for example, is not really where Irish goods are necessarily ending up. They're just going in via ports like Antwerp or major logistics hubs.

That's also the case with the UK in some cases too. There are a huge amount of EU imports routed through UK airports in particular, especially electronics from Asia.

The real calculations of the UK import market are actually more complicated than you'd think when you have to exclude things that aren't specifically categorised.

There are a lot of distorted figures being used, both accidentally and deliberately.

There's also a lot of oddities with transfer pricing and various other distortions that impact Ireland, but the UK too when you look at what are real exports vs what's just making more efficient use of tax regimes and so on.

First Up

Skedaddle wrote: »

We export significantly more to the EU-26 than we do to the UK on its own. You also have to remember that some of these huge export partners are simply ports-of-entry into the wider EU single market. Belgium for example, is not really where Irish goods are necessarily ending up. They're just going in via ports like Antwerp or major logistics hubs.

That's also the case with the UK in some cases too. There are a huge amount of EU imports routed through UK airports in particular, especially electronics from Asia.

The real calculations of the UK import market are actually more complicated than you'd think when you have to exclude things that aren't specifically categorised.

There are a lot of distorted figures being used, both accidentally and deliberately.

There's also a lot of oddities with transfer pricing and various other distortions that impact Ireland, but the UK too when you look at what are real exports vs what's just making more efficient use of tax regimes and so on.

All correct and it underlines the disruption to complex logistics and supply chains by any border admin between the UK and EU. So much of what is taken for granted in a Single Market is going to be up for review. I expect to see major re-routing of freight that currently uses the UK landbridge and ports like Holyhead and Fishguard face a bleak future.

charlie14

CelticRambler wrote: »

So are you saying that the UK's committment to regulatory alignment between NI and the RoI wasn't an "outcome" or that it was decided by the EU "long before" anyone else got involved - including the Brits?

Or do actually you know what you're arguing about .... because I haven't clue any more.

Can you not just be happy that the Republic of Ireland and the EU did get a committment in writing from the UK that effectively keeps the North-South border invisible for the foreseeable future, Brexit or no Brexit.

And then move onto some other topic! :rolleyes:

Rather confused myself by that.

Are you saying that you believe the Good Friday Agreement is somehow a new agreement from Dec 2017 ?

The committment the Republic of Ireland and the EU got was no border anywhere.
Do you seriously see that being accepted by the EU as an external border ?

charlie14

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

So no evidence to show then that "The issue was decided long before our diplomats had any say"

OK then.

Nate

So you cannot see another outcome.

Fair enough

Skedaddle

I think in the event of a 'Hard Brexit' one could possibly take the Good Friday Agreement to be akin to being part of NI Constitutional Law. I don't think the DUP really are in a position to argue against Northern Ireland going for a special status that respects both sides' points of view. Ultimately that should be a decision for the people of Northern Ireland and all of its parties, not for one narrowly-focused party, exclusively representing one point-of-view (and a very narrow subsection of that community at best)

The fact that there's no assembly up there at the moment and that the DUP is in a very bizarre position propping up a minority Tory government is creating a very strange situation. In normal circumstances, I think the Brexiteers would be quite happy for NI to be solved with some kind of different solution to the rest of the UK.

I don't think a border poll would be a good idea right now and it would be highly divisive in the North. However, I do think you could have a poll on a special arrangement for Northern Ireland that would retain EU status while staying within the UK for citizenship and national identity purposes.

As it stands at the moment, the DUP are probably, ironically, going to be the ones who derail Brexit by refusing to allow any kind of compromise in NI.

If they'd any sense, they'd just collapse the UK government on some point of principle about welfare or something and go back to focusing on NI Domestic politics, as this deal process is heading for a complete disaster for NI. Poverty isn't going to distinguish between your unionist or nationalist politics if it does turn out as badly as being predicted.

Also I don't think anyone in their right mind wants to see Northern Ireland become unstable and violent again, which is distinct possibility if the economic situation were to turn very sour and if there's a whole load of messing around with trying to enforce land borders.

Capt'n Midnight

Nody wrote: »

It is if you exclude NI as separate country which CSO does (14.9 with NI included vs. 14.7 for Belgium). However a lot of the NI export is artificial due to plant locations and hence Belgium would in practice be a bigger export country.

Also a lot of shipments for the continent would go via Belgium or Holland

But there's more ferries than there used to be
https://afloat.ie/port-news/dublin-port/item/34922-german-vehicle-carrier-operator-launches-new-ireland-belgium-service

the Luxembourg based operator had served its routes out of Rosslare Europort. The Wexford port however were to lose out given the newly redeveloped setup up in the capital port which is only a few hours passage time along the the east coast.

Rosslare "Europort." the problem with Rosslare are the roads. (Public transport also sucks.) If you are coming from the continent Dublin , Waterford and Cork aren't that much further.

We'd need to improve infrastructure.

It's the same problem in Holyhead. Except they'd need to provide more parking area for those waiting for customs. In Dover its worse since there's less available land.

And as for the pipe dream of the DUP to build bridge to Scotland ?
The shortest sea route means you need more roads and long bridges or you'll spend all day driving. The direct route goes through the place where all the WWII surplus munitions and poison gas was dumped, and IIRC there's probably some glow-in-the-dark there too.

I did like the comment about Boris' bridge and how it's totally about people not talking about him for 5 minutes and him wanting to be the centre of attention.

Capt'n Midnight

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/bridge-between-northern-ireland-and-scotland-could-create-celtic-powerhouse-36519186.html

Professor Alan Dunlop from Liverpool University said a road and rail crossing from Larne to Dumfries and Galloway would boost the Irish and Scottish economies, and help ease border pressures after Brexit.
...
Estimating a possible cost for an Irish-Scottish bridge, Prof Dunlop said it could be completed for between £15bn to £20bn.

A bridge/tunnel between Sardinia and Corsica makes as much sense given NI's population.


Then again if there was a United Ireland and Scotland remained in the EU then it might be worthwhile for EU politics.


A bridge/tunnel from Sakhalin to Russia as a loss leader to convince the Japanese to build a link to Sakhalin makes more sense.


And another ferry in the offing.
https://afloat.ie/port-news/ferry-news/item/38236-new-irish-ferries-cruise-ferry-w-b-yeats-named-at-launch-event-in-germany

The €150 million, 54,985 gross tonnes cruise ferry will arrive into Dublin next July when it will enter year-round service on Ireland – France and Dublin – Holyhead routes.
...
Set to be the largest and most luxurious ferry ever to sail on the Irish Sea, the W. B. Yeats will have space for 1,885 passengers and crew, 435 cabins including luxury suites with their own private balconies, and almost 3km of car deck space.

ancapailldorcha

charlie14 wrote: »

So you cannot see another outcome.

Fair enough

Enough of this. It's up to you to substantiate your claims. Snide digs are not an acceptable substitute.

ambro25

Theresa May's reckoning, and crunch time for the Tories, is looming close this week:

Theresa May is under growing pressure from both wings of her own party to offer more clarity in public about what Brexit deal Britain wants, or face the mounting risk of a no-confidence vote.

Downing Street sources have confirmed that rather than setting out a fresh vision of Brexit in the spring, as some colleagues had hoped, May will make a more limited speech focusing on security cooperation at a conference in Munich next month.

With pro-Brexit MPs in open revolt, senior Conservatives are warning that unless the prime minister exerts firmer leadership over the issue she could be deposed.

I guess we're about to find out what Brexit really means (-to Theresa May), before the week is out.

But if she gets binned, then it's Reese-Mogg, Davis, Bojo - or Corbyn next in No.10. The opening of Pandora's box of extreme politics beckons.

Leroy42

One would hope that May has undertaken whatever analysis work and can actually come out with a position based on facts. Be that Hard or Soft Brexit, or even a stop on the whole thing.

It is now time for May to take a stand, to show some leadership. Sometimes the 'people' are not right, or didn't make the decision with all the facts. Even last week Davies told a committee that his stated position in Sep 16 ( the UK should get a direct trade deal with Germany as the 1st course of business) was a "that was then this is now" thing. So he has changed his view based on the facts he wasn't aware of.

Why is a minister allowed to change (for clarity I am not saying they shouldn't be) but the people should be locked in regardless of new information (well new in that it wasn't paid attention to).

This line that putting out our position will hamper the negotiations has been shown up as nonsense, the EU are well aware of the positions available and have stuck to their process regardless of the machinations in the UK side.

If May is uncomfortable with a hard brexit, then she should come out and make the case against it. Show all the areas that will be negatively affected. Explain why a transitional period if needed and what it entails. Explain the short and medium term effects and what the government are going to do about it.

This continued insistence of saying nothing more that wish-list and hopeful thinking (future trade deals, this will pay off in the long term etc) is tiresome and is failing everyone.

The UK need a strong leader at the moment, not one that doesn't appear to even know their position, never mind take the rest of the country with her. If she can't even get her own party to go along with her, why would she think she can persuade either the EU or other countries to go along with it.

Nody

ambro25 wrote: »

But if she gets binned, then it's Reese-Mogg, Davis, Bojo - or Corbyn next in No.10. The opening of Pandora's box of extreme politics beckons.

For pure comedy and reaping what you sow effect I'd love Bojo or Davis to become the new PM. Not that I think either is even as competent as May (which is a very low bar to go above) but simply there is no better way to show the sham of the Brexiteers than to put them fully in charge of this slow moving disaster.

On a separate note 20 Tory politicians have been identified who're directly profiting on the Brexit chaos by consulting and offer access to ministers.

Leroy42

Nody wrote: »

For pure comedy and reaping what you sow effect I'd love Bojo or Davis to become the new PM. Not that I think either is even as competent as May (which is a very low bar to go above) but simply there is no better way to show the sham of the Brexiteers than to put them fully in charge of this slow moving disaster.

I'm not sure about that. If the recent displays from Davies haven't hammered home to all and sundry that the government haven't a rashers what they are doing then I doubt it will change.

The die is cast. The EU are big meanies for not simply giving up everything they spent the last 60 years working towards so Britain to get back to whatever it currently deems important.

Whatever happens will be the fault of the EU.

Harika

UK wants a longer transition period and this seems to be dead on arrival already
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/911061/Brexit-News-European-Union-EU-UK-latest-deal-vote-Jacob-Rees-Mogg-transition

With a quick twitter review here:
https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/957896038702034950

Basically Brexiters and Remainers are already against it, or see the legal implications against that already.

Skedaddle

I think they're confusing EU treaty law with the UK's fluffy constitution. It's impossible for the EU to just amend a treaty. There's a long and complex process and 28 national parliaments and democratic processes to go through first.

Nody

Skedaddle wrote: »

I think they're confusing EU treaty law with the UK's fluffy constitution. It's impossible for the EU to just amend a treaty. There's a long and complex process and 28 national parliaments and democratic processes to go through first.

Not only that but there's another problem brought up on a certain blog which is FTAs. The existing FTA are signed by EU and when UK leaves in March 2019 they are no longer part of EU and by definition should no longer be included under those FTAs (what EU and UK does is our own business basically); I could easily see certain countries raise issues on the topic in the WTO (in preparation for future trade deals if nothing else) once UK tries to export under them.

demfad

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Also a lot of shipments for the continent would go via Belgium or Holland

But there's more ferries than there used to be
https://afloat.ie/port-news/dublin-port/item/34922-german-vehicle-carrier-operator-launches-new-ireland-belgium-service
Rosslare "Europort." the problem with Rosslare are the roads. (Public transport also sucks.) If you are coming from the continent Dublin , Waterford and Cork aren't that much further.

We'd need to improve infrastructure.

It's the same problem in Holyhead. Except they'd need to provide more parking area for those waiting for customs. In Dover its worse since there's less available land.

And as for the pipe dream of the DUP to build bridge to Scotland ?
The shortest sea route means you need more roads and long bridges or you'll spend all day driving. The direct route goes through the place where all the WWII surplus munitions and poison gas was dumped, and IIRC there's probably some glow-in-the-dark there too.

I did like the comment about Boris' bridge and how it's totally about people not talking about him for 5 minutes and him wanting to be the centre of attention.

Long term the most economic sea route is the shortest. That would be Cork-Brest.

LuckyLloyd

Telegraph opinion piece titles this morning:

1) "Theresa May is a classic middle manager without the vision to seize Brexit opportunities" - Janet Daley
2) "I fear that the juicy fruit of Brexit will remain tantalizingly out of reach" - Dia Chakravarty
3) "We need a Brexit cabinet, not this one with Remainers dooming us to failure" - Marcus Fysh
4) "The Government needs to settle its Brexit position once and for all to end this instability" - Telegraph View
5) "The Tories don't know what kind of Brexit they want. They aren't showing real leadership" - Telegraph View

Presumably Boris or Jacob will offer the substance they crave and see the "opportunities" Brexit presents, rather than focusing on the problems.

I took a brief look at the Daily Express and it has mad headlines about HEADACHES for Brussels in EU breakup SHOCKER. :rolleyes: The general point is that the media atmosphere that produced this abomination is as toxic as it ever was.

joeysoap

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I took a brief look at the Daily Express and it has mad headlines about HEADACHES for Brussels in EU breakup SHOCKER. :rolleyes: The general point is that the media atmosphere that produced this abomination is as toxic as it ever was.

more so than ever.

Harika

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I took a brief look at the Daily Express and it has mad headlines about HEADACHES for Brussels in EU breakup SHOCKER. :rolleyes: The general point is that the media atmosphere that produced this abomination is as toxic as it ever was.

Seems like Daily Express is pushing the "Czech will leave the EU" agenda. I googled and the majority if hits is from the Daily Express, going back to 2016!
As netto beneficiary of EU transfer payments I highly doubt they actually will want to leave. That is political suicide.

Nody

Harika wrote: »

Seems like Daily Express is pushing the "Czech will leave the EU" agenda. I googled and the majority if hits is from the Daily Express, going back to 2016!
As netto beneficiary of EU transfer payments I highly doubt they actually will want to leave. That is political suicide.

I'd put Hungary higher up and then due to the government wanting to protect their money grabbing scheme and EU simply being to annoying to deal with (and even that is highly unlikely due to the number of factories in Hungary dependent on EU access).

strandroad

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Telegraph opinion piece titles this morning:

1) "Theresa May is a classic middle manager without the vision to seize Brexit opportunities" - Janet Daley
2) "I fear that the juicy fruit of Brexit will remain tantalizingly out of reach" - Dia Chakravarty
3) "We need a Brexit cabinet, not this one with Remainers dooming us to failure" - Marcus Fysh
4) "The Government needs to settle its Brexit position once and for all to end this instability" - Telegraph View
5) "The Tories don't know what kind of Brexit they want. They aren't showing real leadership" - Telegraph View

Presumably Boris or Jacob will offer the substance they crave and see the "opportunities" Brexit presents, rather than focusing on the problems.

I honestly wish Theresa May resigned; her presence only adds another layer of confusion. I would let Boris or Jacob take the wheel and try to deliver the Brexit they promised. Not out of spite at all, just in the interest of clarity.

The blame would still be pushed onto the EU obviously, but at least there would be no internal British scapegoats.

Nody

strandroad wrote: »

I honestly wish Theresa May resigned; her presence only adds another layer of confusion. I would let Boris or Jacob take the wheel and try to deliver the Brexit they promised. Not out of spite at all, just in the interest of clarity.

The blame would still be pushed onto the EU obviously, but at least there would be no internal British scapegoats.

I don't think Davis or Boris would give any more clarity than May; they would be doing sound bites and talking platitudes but have no idea of what can or should be done. In the end you'd end up with May 2.0 with weaker position and same problem and in an even worse position with the Remain side (as both would be seen as Leavers).

Jacob do have a vision but I'd wonder how much he'd throw on a break once all his corporate sponsors pull him in the ear and tell him exactly what they will do if he follows through on his plan to crash out; esp. when they would make the newspapers headlines blaming him.

Look, I despise May and find her a useless leader who's flapping like a flag in the wind when it comes to having her own opinion who can't do more than spout sound bites while being in to weak position to actually act as a PM. However there is no one else in the Tory party that would do a better job (and actually get the PM job) currently coming to mind simply because the Tories are for all intent and purposes a wounded two party slammed to one grouping. And there needs to be a hell of a leader to bring those two halves back together and not end up shedding a significant number of votes and MPs in the process.

strandroad

Nody wrote: »

I don't think Davis or Boris would give any more clarity than May; they would be doing sound bites and talking platitudes but have no idea of what can or should be done. In the end you'd end up with May 2.0 with weaker position and same problem and in an even worse position with the Remain side (as both would be seen as Leavers).

I mean clarity as in May and her perceived "Remainer cabinet" could not be blamed as they currently are, if you look at the headings above. Brexit problems could not be seen as May problems anymore.

Harika

Nody wrote: »

I don't think Davis or Boris would give any more clarity than May; they would be doing sound bites and talking platitudes but have no idea of what can or should be done. In the end you'd end up with May 2.0 with weaker position and same problem and in an even worse position with the Remain side (as both would be seen as Leavers).

.

I think both will play one of the two options

A:
May delivers Brexit
Davis/BJ state, that was weak, let us do it better and push TM out
They are PM

B:
May delivers Brexit
Conservatives get smashed at elections
Labour gets in power and has problems selling the Brexit impact
Davis/BJ are now the Con Leaders
Next election, Conservatives get back in power
They are PM

First Up

demfad wrote: »

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Also a lot of shipments for the continent would go via Belgium or Holland

But there's more ferries than there used to be
https://afloat.ie/port-news/dublin-port/item/34922-german-vehicle-carrier-operator-launches-new-ireland-belgium-service
Rosslare "Europort." the problem with Rosslare are the roads. (Public transport also sucks.) If you are coming from the continent Dublin , Waterford and Cork aren't that much further.

We'd need to improve infrastructure.

It's the same problem in Holyhead. Except they'd need to provide more parking area for those waiting for customs. In Dover its worse since there's less available land.

And as for the pipe dream of the DUP to build bridge to Scotland ?
The shortest sea route means you need more roads and long bridges or you'll spend all day driving. The direct route goes through the place where all the WWII surplus munitions and poison gas was dumped, and IIRC there's probably some glow-in-the-dark there too.

I did like the comment about Boris' bridge and how it's totally about people not talking about him for 5 minutes and him wanting to be the centre of attention.

Long term the most economic sea route is the shortest. That would be Cork-Brest.

Yes but that leaves you in Brest which is handy for nowhere. Cherbourg or Le Havre are much better positioned for onward traffic.

Enzokk

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Telegraph opinion piece titles this morning:

1) "Theresa May is a classic middle manager without the vision to seize Brexit opportunities" - Janet Daley
2) "I fear that the juicy fruit of Brexit will remain tantalizingly out of reach" - Dia Chakravarty
3) "We need a Brexit cabinet, not this one with Remainers dooming us to failure" - Marcus Fysh
4) "The Government needs to settle its Brexit position once and for all to end this instability" - Telegraph View
5) "The Tories don't know what kind of Brexit they want. They aren't showing real leadership" - Telegraph View

Presumably Boris or Jacob will offer the substance they crave and see the "opportunities" Brexit presents, rather than focusing on the problems.

I took a brief look at the Daily Express and it has mad headlines about HEADACHES for Brussels in EU breakup SHOCKER. :rolleyes: The general point is that the media atmosphere that produced this abomination is as toxic as it ever was.

Nothing has changed at the leadership of those newspapers. They are still run by the same editors, still owned by the same owners who have their own agendas that are sold as being for the common man but their interests run in the complete opposite of what their readership actually needs. Its the biggest con job out there and people keep falling for it.