Brexit discussion thread III

Zubeneschamali

Really Interested wrote: »

The question raised is will there be a EU frontier between ROI and rest of EU?

No. We would have 10 borders between ROI and NI before having one with the EU.

Really Interested

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I'm a lawyer - I don't profess to be an EU law expert, but I would definitely know more than your average corner solicitor doing wills and probate.

Any customs border between Ireland and the EU would be unlawful and impossible. It's also not realistic to suggest that the UK could be out of a customs union and there could be still a seamless border between the UK and the EU (whether that's Ireland or Spain).

I too am a lawyer not EU except EAW and international protection. I too think it will be impossible to have such a border between ROI and EU. If there is a full border between NI and ROI then ROI as a member within the EU will have to police the EU frontier.

Really Interested

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

No. We would have 10 borders between ROI and NI before having one with the EU.

That is the point I was making.

Really Interested

First Up wrote: »

I'm saying that there has to be (and will be) an effective border between the EU and non-EU. A lot is being made of the sanctity of free movement across the Irish border. If that is decided to be more important than anything else (and in the absence of checks between Britain and NI), the EU will agree but will then require that trade between the island of Ireland and the rest of the EU is subject to customs procedures.

That will be to ensure that both goods of UK origin and goods of third country (non- EU) origin imported to the UK under terms different than the EU's terms with those countries are not able to enter the EU via an Irish back door.

All members of the single market are required to police the EU's external border. If they cannot be trusted on that, the EU will take whatever measures are necessary.

But Ireland as a member of EU can not say our relationship with a third country is more important than our membership. What ever the relationship is between UK and EU ROI will just have to deal with the fall out. If that means border checks like USA and Mexico so be it.

First Up

Really Interested wrote: »

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I'm a lawyer - I don't profess to be an EU law expert, but I would definitely know more than your average corner solicitor doing wills and probate.

Any customs border between Ireland and the EU would be unlawful and impossible. It's also not realistic to suggest that the UK could be out of a customs union and there could be still a seamless border between the UK and the EU (whether that's Ireland or Spain).

I too am a lawyer not EU except EAW and international protection. I too think it will be impossible to have such a border between ROI and EU. If there is a full border between NI and ROI then ROI as a member within the EU will have to police the EU frontier.

There already is a border between Ireland and the rest of the (post Brexit) EU. Its called the sea.

If Ireland does not meet its responsibilities to police the EU's external border, EU countries are entitled - obligated - to ensure that they do. That would include checking that all good entering meet EU standards.

FreudianSlippers

First Up wrote: »

All members of the single market are required to police the EU's external border. If they cannot be trusted on that, the EU will take whatever measures are necessary.

If Ireland failed in its duties to patrol and control an external border, we would be back to where we were 3-4 years ago with the EU attempting to create an EU border police force and coast guard. They'd patrol the border themselves.

IIRC the only real reason that proposal failed in the first place was that Hungary (the biggest problem country) got their act together and started to actually patrol their border.

Long story short: EU is more likely to take over border protection on this island than to put an internal border in place.

FreudianSlippers

First Up wrote: »

There already is a border between Ireland and the rest of the (post Brexit) EU. Its called the sea.

If Ireland does not meet its responsibilities to police the EU's external border, EU countries are entitled - obligated - to ensure that they do. That would include checking that all good entering meet EU standards.

That makes no sense in reality though. It would mean all air/sea transport into any one of 26 other countries would need to do full border, immigration and customs, checks for all traffic from Ireland. They'd just force Ireland to actually patrol its border.

Really Interested

First Up wrote: »

There already is a border between Ireland and the rest of the (post Brexit) EU. Its called the sea.

If Ireland does not meet its responsibilities to police the EU's external border, EU countries are entitled - obligated - to ensure that they do. That would include checking that all good entering meet EU standards.

I have been clear in all posts that I am not talking physical borders, but customs etc.

The problem with your claim is that in effect you say 1 if Ireland does not police the EU border to that satisfaction of the EU then the EU will treat ROI as a third country and impose customs checks? While that is not the way the EU deals with members refusing to follow the rules I ask again for any evidence to back up your claim. The Treaties, EU border proposals post Brexit.

If you are going to claim there is a possibility that ROI will be for some cross trade issues be a third country outside EU then back it up.

Really Interested

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

That makes no sense in reality though. It would mean all air/sea transport into any one of 26 other countries would need to do full border, immigration and customs, checks for all traffic from Ireland. They'd just force Ireland to actually patrol its border.

As Ireland is and will be obliged to do. What do people thinks happens to a Boat from America with goods that comes to a Irish port?

Ireland already mans a external EU boarder with the EU with quite a lot of coast line and a number of international airports with direct connections to many outside the EU.

First Up

Really Interested wrote: »

I have been clear in all posts that I am not talking physical borders, but customs etc.

The problem with your claim is that in effect you say 1 if Ireland does not police the EU border to that satisfaction of the EU then the EU will treat ROI as a third country and impose customs checks? While that is not the way the EU deals with members refusing to follow the rules I ask again for any evidence to back up your claim. The Treaties, EU border proposals post Brexit.

If you are going to claim there is a possibility that ROI will be for some cross trade issues be a third country outside EU then back it up.

I am also talking about customs etc.

Brexit is a unique situation because of the political desire to maintain an all-Ireland economy. That is incompatible with the UK leaving the SM and CU, and with the UK striking trade deals with non EU countries that don't mirror the EU's deals with those countries.

If the UK leaves the SM and CU, there are only 3 possible solutions:

Customs checks in Ireland, NI staying in the SM/CU (and checks between the Britain and NI) or checks between Ireland and the rest of the EU.

Take your pick; they are all possible but all mean an end to current arrangements.

Zubeneschamali

First Up wrote: »

If the UK leaves the SM and CU, there are only 3 possible solutions:

Customs checks in Ireland, NI staying in the SM/CU (and checks between the Britain and NI) or checks between Ireland and the rest of the EU.

Take your pick; they are all possible but all mean an end to current arrangements.

The third one is technically possible in the sense that it doesn't break the laws of physics, but it is not happening. The UK can drag NI out of the CU and SM, but they are not taking us with them.

FreudianSlippers

Really Interested wrote: »

As Ireland is and will be obliged to do. What do people thinks happens to a Boat from America with goods that comes to a Irish port?

Ireland already mans a external EU boarder with the EU with quite a lot of coast line and a number of international airports with direct connections to many outside the EU.

Yeah I know... I'm just pointing out the absurdity of the idea that the EU would implement a massive and fundamental change to its core in order to fix one hypothetical problem that actually isn't even a problem.

Let's just patrol the border right?

Really Interested

First Up wrote: »

I am also talking about customs etc.

Brexit is a unique situation because of the political desire to maintain an all-Ireland economy. That is incompatible with the UK leaving the SM and CU, and with the UK striking trade deals with non EU countries that don't mirror the EU's deals with those countries.

If the UK leaves the SM and CU, there are only 3 possible solutions:

Customs checks in Ireland, NI staying in the SM/CU (and checks between the Britain and NI) or checks between Ireland and the rest of the EU.

Take your pick; they are all possible but all mean an end to current arrangements.

But in my opinion one of the 3 options is illegal under EU law. NI staying or being part of CU is OK a customs border between NI and ROI ok but any thing that has the effect of ROI having a customs trade border with EU is not legally sound and would need either ROI out of EU or treaty change.

If there are 3 options and one is legally impossible then there are 2 options. Both difficult but legal.

FreudianSlippers

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

The third one is technically possible in the sense that it doesn't break the laws of physics, but it is not happening. The UK can drag NI out of the CU and SM, but they are not taking us with them.

...but it does break a fundamental rule of the EU. It's therefore not only not possible, but would be the most convoluted and ridiculous solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

Ireland is either in the EU or not. If there is no deal done between the UK and the EU (of which Ireland is a member) then there is no "all-Ireland" economy.

Skedaddle

Well since the UK says it doesn't intend to patrol or enforce the border, I guess we can just dump anything we like into the UK from the EU then?
Yay!

Really Interested

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Yeah I know... I'm just pointing out the absurdity of the idea that the EU would implement a massive and fundamental change to its core in order to fix one hypothetical problem that actually isn't even a problem.

Let's just patrol the border right?

Exactly and if ROI can’t then they ask EU for sheds of money to at least try. Lol.

FreudianSlippers

Really Interested wrote: »

Exactly and if ROZi can’t then they ask EU for sheds of money to at least try. Lol.

Well no matter what happens, if Ireland aren't asking for sheds of money to deal with Brexit issues, then we're doing it wrong.

Really Interested

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Well no matter what happens, if Ireland aren't asking for sheds of money to deal with Brexit issues, then we're doing it wrong.

If we play Brexit right we move back to being net beneficiaries.

Really Interested

Skedaddle wrote: »

Well since the UK says it doesn't intend to patrol or enforce the border, I guess we can just dump anything we like into the UK from the EU then?
Yay!

There are so many things (people) on my list.

First Up

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Yeah I know... I'm just pointing out the absurdity of the idea that the EU would implement a massive and fundamental change to its core in order to fix one hypothetical problem that actually isn't even a problem.

Let's just patrol the border right?

No fundamental change. All EU countries trade with countries outside the EU and have procedures in place at airports, sea or land crossings. Irish stuff would just go into a different channel - and join the queue.

Much easier to manage than patrolling the Irish border.

Really Interested

First Up wrote: »

No fundamental change. All EU countries trade with countries outside the EU and have procedures in place at airports, sea or land crossings. Irish stuff would just go into a different channel - and join the queue.

Much easier to manage than patrolling the Irish border.

But that would be in breach of EU law. By your own words Ireland becomes a country outside the EU. Under current treaties directives and regulations that would be illegal. In effect you are saying it would be lawful for Cork to impose a customs border on limerick as we not sure Limerick port and Shannon doing their job!

It is this simple what you propose would be illegal and Ireland would take it straight to European Court of Justice even if Ireland would not because of some shady deal then a long line of companies would take the case.

I again ask you to show what you say may happen is legal under EU law please reference Treaty or regulation directive of decision of European Court of justice.

First Up

Really Interested wrote: »

First Up wrote: »

No fundamental change. All EU countries trade with countries outside the EU and have procedures in place at airports, sea or land crossings. Irish stuff would just go into a different channel - and join the queue.

Much easier to manage than patrolling the Irish border.

But that would be in breach of EU law. By your own words Ireland becomes a country outside the EU. Under current treaties directives and regulations that would be illegal. In effect you are saying it would be lawful for Cork to impose a customs border on limerick as we not sure Limerick port and Shannon doing their job!

It is this simple what you propose would be illegal and Ireland would take it straight to European Court of Justice even if Ireland would not because of some shady deal then a long line of companies would take the case.

I again ask you to show what you say may happen is legal under EU law please reference Treaty or regulation directive of decision of European Court of justice.

Failing to protect the EU's external border is also in breach of EU law.

Skedaddle

Really Interested wrote: »

If we play Brexit right we move back to being net beneficiaries.

I'd say the simplest solution will be a series of large balancing payments which will be rolled into the divorce bill for damage caused to border areas and extra costs incurred by impacted member states.

Ireland's the most directly impacted but I think quite a few countries should he preparing invoices.

Effectively, the UK is just ripping up a very long standing trade and customs agreement without much warning and seems to think it can walk away with zero bills.

This directly impacts quite a few countries, most notably Ireland but also France and quite a few others who will now have to implement all sorts of expensive and cumbersome customs arrangements.

Ireland has unique issues in the sense that there's actually cross border and shared infrastructure. The EU would really want to look at clawing back money the UK has used on TEN (trans European networks) projects for example that will no longer be of any benefit to the EU as we can't use them from 2019.

There are loads of examples of NI infrastructure that was invested in by the EU or the Irish government because it was going to be used by both jurisdictions and interlinked two EU regions.

Why exactly should the UK just keep this stuff without any kind of refund payment?
Also the Republic now has to duplicate investments into road and other infrastructure that had been planned with no border in mind. This has huge implications for the Northwest in particular.

You can't just divorce and decide you're keeping mutually paid for assets and providing no reasonable compensation for them.

Really Interested

First Up wrote: »

Failing to protect the EU's external border is also in breach of EU law.

Yes and the EU had to deal with that in the past. Are ROI in breach currently? Have you evidence that ROI will be in breach post Brexit?

Sam Russell

Really Interested wrote: »

If we play Brexit right we move back to being net beneficiaries.

That may happen anyway if we suffer a GDP loss of any magnitude.

Really Interested

Skedaddle wrote: »

I'd say the simplest solution will be a series of large balancing payments which will be rolled into the divorce bill for damage caused to border areas and extra costs incurred by impacted member states.

Ireland's the most directly impacted but I think quite a few countries should he preparing invoices.

Effectively, the UK is just ripping up a very long standing trade and customs agreement without much warning and seems to think it can walk away with zero bills.

This directly impacts quite a few countries, most notably Ireland but also France and quite a few others who will now have to implement all sorts of expensive and cumbersome customs arrangements.

Ireland has unique issues in the sense that there's actually cross border and shared infrastructure. The EU would really want to look at clawing back money the UK has used on TEN (trans European networks) projects for example that will no longer be of any benefit to the EU as we can't use them from 2019.

Very interesting points questions and solutions. I can only assume from past year EU and members actively dealing with these issues the problem with the UK the still seem to be fighting the Brexit campaign have they not got it they won they invoked A50 they have passed legislation why are people pro Brexit still fighting the referendum? General question not aimed at poster I am quoting.

Skedaddle

Really Interested wrote: »

Yes and the EU had to deal with that in the past. Are ROI in breach currently? Have you evidence that ROI will be in breach post Brexit?

It would be if it were to refuse to implement the EU customs border.

Ireland's not part of the Schengen area for passportless travel, so movement of people is fairly uncomplicated if we maintain the CTA with the UK, but the customs border is basically inevitable if the UK leaves the customs union. There's no way around it realistically.

Really Interested

Skedaddle wrote: »

It would be if it were to refuse to implement the EU customs border.

Ireland's not part of the Schengen area for passportless travel, so movement of people is fairly uncomplicated if we maintain the CTA with the UK, but the customs border is basically inevitable if the UK leaves the customs union. There's no way around it realistically.

There are ways the EU can deal with any refusal of ROI to police the Customs Union, in effect throwing Ireland out of the club not one of them.

Skedaddle

Really Interested wrote: »

Very interesting points questions and solutions. I can only assume from past year EU and members actively dealing with these issues the problem with the UK the still seem to be fighting the Brexit campaign have they not got it they won they invoked A50 they have passed legislation why are people pro Brexit still fighting the referendum? General question not aimed at poster I am quoting.

Well, the UK is still basically fighting with itself in the tabloids and making unilateral declarations about things it has absolutely no agreements on.

I suspect it'll just stumble along to the deadline and be presented with a final ultimatum and then will have a total political nervous breakdown sometime in 2019.

Skedaddle

Really Interested wrote: »

There are ways the EU can deal with any refusal of ROI to police the Customs Union, in effect throwing Ireland out of the club not one of them.

Well for example, the UK is being fined €2 billion for failing to police customs rules and allegedly allowing a large amount of non compliant and counterfeit goods into the EU via British ports and airports.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/08/uk-faces-2bn-fine-over-chinese-imports-scam-say-eu-anti-fraud-investigators

If Ireland were to do similar, those are the kind of consequences we would face.

Really Interested

Skedaddle wrote: »

Well, the UK is still basically fighting with itself in the tabloids and making unilateral declarations about things it has absolutely no agreements on.

I suspect it'll just stumble along to the deadline and be presented with a final ultimatum and then will have a total political nervous breakdown sometime in 2019.

I have to agree with you but I wish it goes another way. The UK get it’s act together does a good deal or best deal possible and then fvcks off.

Really Interested

Skedaddle wrote: »

Well for example, the UK is being fined €2 billion for failing to police customs rules and allegedly allowing a large amount of non compliant and counterfeit goods into the EU via British ports and airports.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/08/uk-faces-2bn-fine-over-chinese-imports-scam-say-eu-anti-fraud-investigators

If Ireland were to do similar, those are the kind of consequences we would face.

Yup that is the way the EU law deals with it, not some defacto you are out.

ambro25

Really Interested wrote: »

Yup that is the way the EU law deals with it, not some defacto you are out.

I don't know where that notion ever arose in the discussion, but just to be clear: there is no legal mechanism under the TEU for kicking any Member State out. So it can't happen, period.

The legal foundation for 'how the EU deals with recalcitrant Member States' is Article 7 TEU and Article 354 TFEU, under which rights enjoyed by a non-compliant Member State under the TEU/TFEU are suspended (including the voting rights of the representative of the government of that Member State in the Council). That is in addition to any fine(s) incurred, and a non-trivial sanction.

listermint

Skedaddle wrote: »

Well for example, the UK is being fined €2 billion for failing to police customs rules and allegedly allowing a large amount of non compliant and counterfeit goods into the EU via British ports and airports.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/08/uk-faces-2bn-fine-over-chinese-imports-scam-say-eu-anti-fraud-investigators

If Ireland were to do similar, those are the kind of consequences we would face.

You mean the rules the UK was fully part in creating?

Ah. Those pesky rules

Really Interested

ambro25 wrote: »

I don't know where that notion ever arose in the discussion, but just to be clear: there is no legal mechanism under the TEU for kicking any Member State out. So it can't happen, period.

The legal foundation for 'how the EU deals with recalcitrant Member States' is Article 7 TEU and Article 354 TFEU, under which rights enjoyed by a non-compliant Member State under the TEU/TFEU are suspended (including the voting rights of the representative of the government of that Member State in the Council). That is in addition to any fine(s) incurred, and a non-trivial sanction.

Hence why I used the word de facto. To say to Ireland your goods are to line up with third country goods in effect is de facto removing Ireland from EU customs union.

De facto “existing in fact, although perhaps not intended, legal, or accepted:”

Interesting article re Norway and Sweden https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.politico.eu/article/brexit-ireland-border-customs-norway-sweden/amp/

CelticRambler

First Up wrote: »

A lot is being made of the sanctity of free movement across the Irish border.

It's not a question of the sanctity of free movement, it's the practicality of preventing unauthorised free movement in the event of a hard brexit (while maintaining the pledges of the GFA)

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

If Ireland failed in its duties to patrol and control an external border, we would be back to where we were 3-4 years ago with the EU attempting to create an EU border police force and coast guard. They'd patrol the border themselves.

And good luck to them, but the EU knows full well that the combined efforts of the Irish Gardaí and the RUC, backed up by the Irish and British Armies did not stop "free movement" in any meaningful way throughout the Troubles. Even today, there's more than enough smuggling across the border to make it worthwhile for organised crime.

First Up

CelticRambler wrote: »

It's not a question of the sanctity of free movement, it's the practicality of preventing unauthorised free movement in the event of a hard brexit (while maintaining the pledges of the GFA)



And good luck to them, but the EU knows full well that the combined efforts of the Irish Gardaí and the RUC, backed up by the Irish and British Armies did not stop "free movement" in any meaningful way throughout the Troubles. Even today, there's more than enough smuggling across the border to make it worthwhile for organised crime.

A bit of diesel or some cattle here or there isn't going to be the problem. That is for local consumption and realistically, borders everywhere have a bit of leakage.

The real problem would be allowing unregulated movement across the Irish border to the extent that commercial traffic can roll down the M1 from Larne to Dublin or Rosslare Ports and onto a cargo ship to France or Holland. We can't avoid our responsibilities.

Skedaddle

Just be careful here!

The old British tactic of divide and conquer is at play here. They will be trying to turn us against the EU and claim the lovely Tory party, DUP and UKIP didn't create a border, but that it's all the fault of some awful place called "Brussels" which we should join them in hating.

My view of it is that the Tories and DUP are inadvertently creating the circumstances for a united Ireland and we should just let them get on with it.

CelticRambler

First Up wrote: »

The real problem would be allowing unregulated movement across the Irish border to the extent that commercial traffic can roll down the M1 from Larne to Dublin or Rosslare Ports and onto a cargo ship to France or Holland. We can't avoid our responsibilities.

Yes, but that's exactly why the "Irish Border" is up there with EU citizens' rights and the divorce bill as things to be agreed. The fact that Brexiteers are so obsessed with illegal immigrants and the Empire Strikes Back that they're not paying any attention to the gaping hole on their western front doesn't make it go away as a huge problem of the UK's making.

The longer May and Davis and other carry on their merry please-everyone dance, the more likely it is that they'll be bounced into an eleventh-hour soft-Brexit transition deal, complete with regulatory alignment. That gives another year and a half, or thereabouts, for Westminster allegiances to shift and every likelihood that the DUP will be shafted.

Zubeneschamali

CelticRambler wrote: »

The longer May and Davis and other carry on their merry please-everyone dance, the more likely it is that they'll be bounced into an eleventh-hour soft-Brexit transition deal

It looks to me as if they are not really considering long term relations with the EU after Brexit, or the far end of the transition deal, or even March 2019.

They seem to be focused entirely on keeping it together until next week, and then the one after.

FreudianSlippers

I think the UK is actually more trying to fool their electorate than the EU negotiators... I think the UK is really pushing to take the Norway option and will figure out a way to sell this to the public.

It's like a major game of chicken with the electorate!

Zubeneschamali

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I think the UK is really pushing to take the Norway option and will figure out a way to sell this to the public.

Why would May signal out of Single market and Customs Union as red lines if she was aiming for Norway? If she had simply come out strongly for Norway from minute 1, it would be in the bag by now.

The EU would have had no issues, and the Brexiteers in parliament could have been seen off by the majority Remain/Soft Brexit MPs.

The only people unhappy would have been Boris (who doesn't care but has to be unhappy to further his career) and the Eurosceptic hardliners, who will not be satisfied by anything short of jumping off the cliff and trying to grow wings.

FreudianSlippers

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Why would May signal out of Single market and Customs Union as red lines if she was aiming for Norway? If she had simply come out strongly for Norway from minute 1, it would be in the bag by now.

I don't think she actually knows she wants Norway - I think that's the view of the broader negotiating team.

I think that, however, (1) they are using this hard brexit as a negotiating tactic, completely unaware that this won't work against the EU (2) they are afraid of having to deal with revolt within their parties if they admit they're aiming for Norway.

The EU would have had no issues, and the Brexiteers in parliament could have been seen off by the majority Remain/Soft Brexit MPs.

The only people unhappy would have been Boris (who doesn't care but has to be unhappy to further his career) and the Eurosceptic hardliners, who will not be satisfied by anything short of jumping off the cliff and trying to grow wings.

Totally agree, but this is May attempting to have her cake and eat it too. She's placating the hardliners to keep in power, knowing full well that they will all (Boris included) have to accept Norway if that's their only alternative to hard brexit and meltdown.



I'm not suggesting any of this is logical, it's just the way I've seen it and heard about it from some of my esteemed lobbying contacts.

interlocked

https://www.channel4.com/news/ros-altmann-on-brexit-some-people-in-tory-party-think-this-is-game-of-bluff

This is an interview, partly with Peter Bone, a prominent Tory Brexiteer MP, the level of delusion, ignorance and stupidity is jaw dropping, it's still the stance that the EU needs a deal more than we do, take a look especially from 04.30 onward, at his logic on the Irish border issue. These people are living in a parallel reality.

ambro25

Really Interested wrote: »

Hence why I used the word de facto. To say to Ireland your goods are to line up with third country goods in effect is de facto removing Ireland from EU customs union.

De facto “existing in fact, although perhaps not intended, legal, or accepted:”

I'm familiar enough with the de facto expression, and latin in general, thanks.

But I understood from earlier posts that you were fond of statutory references. So call it a professional courtesy, from a fellow (actual EU law-practicing...amongst others) practitioner

About a week left before our big (UK > EU27) move now.

UK house is sold subject to contract (quick, quick, get those £s out quiiiiick), one of the RHD cars was sold privately earlier this week & that cash is in bank, half of the house is in boxes, movers are programmed (and paid for by new employer), we've (finally!) secured international school admission for our daughter and a lease on a nice duplex (with a real log fire, yay!) so now we're counting down the days before I can put all this Brex5hit behind us for good

I'll spare a quick thought for the 48%. But more sympathy for the RoI.

Really Interested

ambro25 wrote: »

I'm familiar enough with the de facto expression, and latin in general, thanks.

But I understood from earlier posts that you were fond of statutory references. So call it a professional courtesy, from a fellow (actual EU law-practicing...amongst others) practitioner

About a week left before our big (UK > EU27) move now.

UK house is sold subject to contract (quick, quick, get those £s out quiiiiick), one of the RHD cars was sold privately earlier this week & that cash is in bank, half of the house is in boxes, movers are programmed (and paid for by new employer), we've (finally!) secured international school admission for our daughter and a lease on a nice duplex (with a real log fire, yay!) so now we're counting down the days before I can put all this Brex5hit behind us for good

I'll spare a quick thought for the 48%. But more sympathy for the RoI.

What is your point in relation to a claim by another poster that post Brexit there will be a customs border between ROI and EU?

I was and remain anti Brexit but the UK seems to be adamant and I believe it would be better when it’s over.

Did you intend to quote a statutory reference?

Skedaddle

Well, unless the UK changes its position very substantially between now and March 2019, there will be as there's no other alternative really possible as they have persistently ruled anything out that could allow it to work without a customs border.

The absolute lack of clarity and total la la land that the UK political world continues to operate in at the moment is starting to become very worrying. There's still no plan for anything from what I can see.

Meanwhile, I've actually had a sectoral briefing note from the EU about the impending consequences of Brexit on my own sector. This stuff is getting VERY real, yet over in London it's like "ah sure it's grand!"

Water John

TMs biggest worry is an open division in the Tory Party. All else is secondary, to her.

ambro25

Really Interested wrote: »

What is your point in relation to a claim by another poster that post Brexit there will be a customs border between ROI and EU?

Again, I don't know where that claim was made in the debate. But irrespective, as a direct answer: none, because that cannot happen unless the RoI exits the EU by triggering Article 50.

I was and remain anti Brexit but the UK seems to be adamant and I believe it would be better when it’s over.

Did you intend to quote a statutory reference?

Doesn't make any sense to me, sorry.

Skedaddle: our sectoral analysis (note the date). I posted the other side of the table's own analysis a couple of days ago (EUIPO's Q&A factsheet). Full and entire correlation, no adjustment required to account for any intervening developments. Because there haven't been any. Still.

Skedaddle

I work in a sector that's quite profoundly impacted by the regulatory environment and what's starting to really grind my gears is how the politicians in the UK seem to simply not give a flying flip what happens and are speaking about this stuff in abstract theory.

So far my sector has absolutely no idea whatsoever what the UK's plans are, whether we will have regulatory alignment that might allow on-going access on the same basis as we have now, or whether we are going to be hitting a brick wall and having to treat the UK market as being completely foreign.

It's now getting to the stage that we are actually already having to begin implementing contingencies as the whole thing is just getting too late, yet I see nothing from Westminster other than the same absolute nonsense and in-fighting. We are actively avoiding long-term contracts with UK companies and starting to look very actively at alternative markets and suppliers. This isn't something anyone really wants to be doing. It's hugely disruptive and potentially could cause plenty of businesses here and in the UK very dire consequences.

I saw some Tory pontificating about trade on the TV the other day in a the usual completely arrogant, wilfully blind to the facts and clueless way. It's like listening to someone with who only knows about interpretive dance trying to discuss nuclear physics. I'm at the stage that I find myself nearly shouting at the television. This stuff isn't some abstract theory - it's going to cost people their jobs, income, livelihoods, access to education and potentially even cause violence and deaths in Northern Ireland, yet they simply don't give a toss.

Sorry if this comes across as a bit of a rant, but I am just fed up listening to the circular arguments. If they're Brexiting, they need to be bloody well clear about what their plans are because businesses and those of us in the real world can't really just exist in regulatory limbo for the next 12+ months while the UK drifts into an iceberg with the captain being too busy having fights with deckchairs!