Brexit discussion thread III

flutered

it boils down to the fact that the eu has a structure, a structure which will not be messed with to oblige the uk

ancapailldorcha

First Up wrote: »

I'm not for a moment suggesting we do anything that jeapordises our membership of the Single Market and I'm puzzled how anyone could interpret anything I've said in that way. But any fudge on the border leaves us open to suspicion that not everything coming from Ireland is legit and EU compliant. That opens other risks - including in extreme circumstances checks on goods from Ireland arriving in other EU countries.

You might think I'm scaremongering but all we've seen on the border so far is fudge. Happily the EU (largely at our behest) is holding the UK's feet to the flame on it so we'll see if their dysfunctional and farcical Brexit can achieve a workable solution.

Ultimately, this is something that the EU is going to have to solve. If it doesn't trust goods from Ireland then that's a problem. However, given how well it has prioritised Irish interests on Brexit, I have no worries that a hard border will not affect Ireland-EU trade.

First Up

Really Interested wrote: »

First Up wrote: »

I'm not for a moment suggesting we do anything that jeapordises our membership of the Single Market and I'm puzzled how anyone could interpret anything I've said in that way. But any fudge on the border leaves us open to suspicion that not everything coming from Ireland is legit and EU compliant. That opens other risks - including in extreme circumstances checks on goods from Ireland arriving in other EU countries.

You might think I'm scaremongering but all we've seen on the border so far is fudge. Happily the EU (largely at our behest) is holding the UK's feet to the flame on it so we'll see if their dysfunctional and farcical Brexit can achieve a workable solution.

You are showing a complete lack of understanding how the EU works. By putting a customs border between ROI and EU Ireland is outside the SM it’s that simple. It can not happen if it does and I don’t mean to be melodramatic it will be the end of the EU as one of the four founding principles will be undermined and not by 1 member but the other 26.

I can assure you that I have very good understanding of how the EU works.

Really Interested

First Up wrote: »

I can assure you that I have very good understanding of how the EU works.

If you think the EU has the ability it has show from your understanding where it derives that power.

I have a reasonable understating as any citizen should. Just like I have a reasonable understating of the Irish Constitution.

It is simple the EU will not block trade with Customs checks from ROI, if a member state does then the EU through one of its institutions will get involved. But from what I do understand of the Tresties, regulations Directives and Judgements of the European Court of Justice it is not possible for a customs border to be put in place between ROI and EU due to a claim that ROI is not policing the NI ROI border.

If I am wrong please point out where in the above body of law you have found surport for your opinion that it is possible? I am happy to be corrected on any error I have made or lack of knowledge I have.

Skedaddle

The harsh reality is that without a major change to the status of Northern Ireland, such as it becoming an independent entity with its own customs arrangements and remaining in the European Customs Union, there will be a hard customs border.

There won't be a block on Irish and British nationals crossing the border and living / working, but there will be for EU nationals who aren't Irish or British passport holders..

You're back to pre-1993 style boarder but actually more like pre 1970s borders as they'll be ending all the EEC style 70s and 80s cooperation and harmonisation.

Realistically, Northern Ireland is going to have to decide what it wants in the coming years. It's the only part of the UK with a door open to it for instant EU membership post Brexit, but it means leaving the UK as it exists today, even if they come up with fudge to allow British citizenship for NI people.

The UK is creating an impossible situation where a border can't be avoided and they seem to just see it as acceptable collateral damage as they don't give a toss about Northern Ireland and would jettison it as an inconvenience in the morning, if they come politically get away with it, which they can't because of the DUP.

Creating an internal barrier within the EU, isolating the Republic of Ireland would be completely illegal and subject to potential legal action in the ECJ.

Also what benefit would that be to the Republic? We would he unable to trade freely with the UK and would be subject to whatever ad hoc, unstable nonsense the UK government might throw us and we would be unable to trade freely with the EU, despite being a full member?

You'd be casting us into limbo!

Really Interested

Skedaddle wrote: »

The harsh reality is that without a major change to the status of Northern Ireland, such as it becoming an independent entity with its own customs arrangements and remaining in the European Customs Union, there will be a hard customs border.

There won't be a block on Irish and British nationals crossing the border and living / working, but there will be for EU nationals who aren't Irish or British passport holders..

You're back to pre-1993 style boarder but actually more like pre 1970s borders as they'll be ending all the EEC style 70s and 80s cooperation and harmonisation.

Realistically, Northern Ireland is going to have to decide what it wants in the coming years. It's the only part of the UK with a door open to it for instant EU membership post Brexit, but it means leaving the UK as it exists today, even if they come up with fudge to allow British citizenship for NI people.

The UK is creating an impossible situation where a border can't be avoided and they seem to just see it as acceptable collateral damage as they don't give a toss about Northern Ireland and would jettison it as an inconvenience in the morning, if they come politically get away with it, which they can't because of the DUP.

sorry I do not understand “ even if they come up with fudge to allow British citizenship for NI people.”

Skedaddle

Really Interested wrote: »

sorry I do not understand “ even if they come up with fudge to allow British citizenship for NI people.”

Well the only solution that might work would be a change in status for NI where it becomes an independent entity and crown protectorate, or some new concept where it effectively would be British, but not in the UK, as we know it.

That might allow NI to remain in the customs union, while GB leaves. However, you'll always have someone discommoded.

The status quo within the EU was a perfect compromise that made the NI border irrelevant and allows both communities to keep their respective identity and nationality.

Outside the EU it's a mess again. There's no option that will satisfy both communities and it will inevitably risk reopening conflicts.

Also Northern Ireland's showing no ability to self govern, which also leaves a huge problem. How could you fully devolve power around customs, trade and immigration to a system that can even form a government and where one side isn't even talking to the other ?!

I think this mess suits the DUP agenda as they don't have to deal with the nationalist arguments at all but, in so doing, they're ignoring the concerns of the nationalist community and probably laying the foundation for a new conflict.

Really Interested

Skedaddle wrote: »

Well the only solution that might work would be a change in status for NI where it becomes an independent entity and crown protectorate, or some new concept where it effectively would be British, but not in the UK, as we know it.

That might allow NI to remain in the customs union, while GB leaves. However, you'll always have someone discommoded.

The status quo within the EU was a perfect compromise that made the NI border irrelevant and allows both communities to keep their respective identity and nationality.

Outside the EU it's a mess again. There's no option that will satisfy both communities and it will inevitably risk reopening conflicts.

You mean Lina like the Status of NI from 1920” to 1970’s? Last PM of NI was 1973.

Skedaddle

Really Interested wrote: »

You mean Lina like the Status of NI from 1920” to 1960’s?

Well, something like that with more inclusive and modern structures.
However, it seems to be entirely ruled out by the DUP.

The big, big issue is that NI seems incapable of forming a government and maintaining devolved power without the whole thing boiling down to being utterly dysfunctional. So I'm not sure how you could even do it.

If you removed the backstop of direct rule, how long before NI spun back into pre 1970s single party rule type mess?!

Really Interested

Skedaddle wrote: »

Well, something like that with more inclusive and modern structures.
However, it seems to be entirely ruled out by the DUP.

What have SF said?

First Up

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Ultimately, this is something that the EU is going to have to solve. If it doesn't trust goods from Ireland then that's a problem. However, given how well it has prioritised Irish interests on Brexit, I have no worries that a hard border will not affect Ireland-EU trade.

The point I have been trying to make (unsuccessfully it seems) is that depending on how the UK behaves, a hard border may be the only way to protect Ireland-EU trade.

Gerry T

Would this work. NI becomes a member of the commonwealth, Australia is a member of that and is working with the EU on a trade deal.
This leaves NI to self govern, the unionists have their tie to the UK through the common wealth and NI could look for CU membership, no border?
I really don't know what's involved in making all that happen, but is it even remotely possible?

Skedaddle

Really Interested wrote: »

What have SF said?

It doesn't really matter while the DUP have the Tories over a barrel. They're the only voice being heard.

ancapailldorcha

Skedaddle wrote: »

It doesn't really matter while the DUP have the Tories over a barrel. They're the only voice being heard.

Ironically, all they're doing is paving the way for Jeremy Corbyn to become PM. If they were willing to compromise on the border, I would say that Brexit would be a lot smoother.

Really Interested

First Up wrote: »

The point I have been trying to make (unsuccessfully it seems) is that depending on how the UK behaves, a hard border may be the only way to protect Ireland-EU trade.

If I misunderstood you I apologise, but yes a hard border between NI and ROI policed by the ROI and maybe with assistance of EU and from their side the UK is a distinct possibility.

Really Interested

Skedaddle wrote: »

It doesn't really matter while the DUP have the Tories over a barrel. They're the only voice being heard.

So do you think the opinion of the second party does not count for anything in the in possibility of the creation of a independent NI to remain within the EU?

Peregrinus

First Up wrote: »

The point I have been trying to make (unsuccessfully it seems) is that depending on how the UK behaves, a hard border may be the only way to protect Ireland-EU trade.

Yes. And the worry is, the British may behave that way.

But what will not happen in response is any kind of customs border between Ireland and the rest of the EU-26. You can't protect the integrity of the single market by destroying the integrity of the single market. It's like shagging for chastity or leaving the world's largest and deepest free trade area in order to increase your foreign trade. It's a contradiction in terms. Brexiters may think like this, but nobody else does.

BonnieSituation

Really Interested wrote: »

So do you think the opinion of the second party does not count for anything in the in possibility of the creation of a independent NI to remain within the EU?

An independent NI can do whatever it wants wrt CU membership when it achieves independence in whatever fantastic world you dream of.

And I hardly think SF would be really into that notion.

Hardly relevant to the discussion of the current UK is still in existence though.

Sam Russell

Really Interested wrote: »

If I misunderstood you I apologise, but yes a hard border between NI and ROI policed by the ROI and maybe with assistance of EU and from their side the UK is a distinct possibility.

I think everyone is ignoring the commitment made by the UK to move to phase II that there would be no hard border (or even soft border) between NI and the ROI.

Now we have the EU producing their hard ball - if the UK fails to maintain the transition agreement, the EU will immediately move to sanctions without waiting for the ECJ to rule. That will include grounding UK flights into the EU - quite a big stick.

I think it is make your mind up time for the Tories.

Skedaddle

Really Interested wrote: »

So do you think the opinion of the second party does not count for anything in the in possibility of the creation of a independent NI to remain within the EU?

No, I think in the current political situation the only side of NI being listened to by the UK Government is the DUP because it's effectively part of the UK Government in all but name due to the confidence and supply agreement.

Of course both sides in Ni should be part of any major changes, but due to circumstances, they're not being listened to.

Also I think if this were the UUP or even SF in the same position, they'd have a comprehension that a one sided solution isn't going to work and is extremely dangerous. The DUP are very unlikely to take the aspirations of the nationalist community on board and I think anyone with any sense of NI knows this. They most likely see this as a big win-win for them and their community and feel they've consolidated their own position.

An aspect of Tories are willing to do anything to get brexit over the line, even risk undermining NI's hard won and now established peace.

The UK hasn't come up with a solution for the NI border and I don't believe they have one. They're hoping the EU forgets about that and that continental business interests will sideline little old annoying Ireland. Or, that they'll be able to somehow bluster their way through or even try to take it off the table in lieu of a smooth trade deal. They're also vastly overestimating the strength of their hand with the EU.

However, and it's looking likely with the current trajectory, the only sanction the EU really has is to offer no deal and the UK spins into a crisis. That's also a potential disaster for Northern Ireland as it's an ultra hard Brexit. The EU can't compel the UK to do anything - if they're determined to leave without a deal, then that's their choice to make, even if the consequences are potentially dire.

The only real solution I can see is the Tory centre revolts, taking enough MPs with them to collapse the Government.

First Up

Really Interested wrote: »

If you think the EU has the ability it has show from your understanding where it derives that power.

I have a reasonable understating as any citizen should. Just like I have a reasonable understating of the Irish Constitution.

It is simple the EU will not block trade with Customs checks from ROI, if a member state does then the EU through one of its institutions will get involved. But from what I do understand of the Tresties, regulations Directives and Judgements of the European Court of Justice it is not possible for a customs border to be put in place between ROI and EU due to a claim that ROI is not policing the NI ROI border.

If I am wrong please point out where in the above body of law you have found surport for your opinion that it is possible? I am happy to be corrected on any error I have made or lack of knowledge I have.

I think perhaps it is you that is not familiar with how the EU "works". Maybe if
you had the opportunity to sit in on some of the informal discussions taking place in/around the EU institutions, you would appreciate just how wide ranging are the scenarios and options being explored - or at least tossed around.

Everyone in Brussels recognises that we are in uncharted territory and that whatever emerges post-Brexit will be a new situation that requires new arrangements. Yes, the Irish border is taken very seriously and every sympathy is with the Irish side in sorting it. But it is also recognised that the EU needs to adapt to a new situation that is not of its making.

Of course the preference is that the UK comes to its senses, at least to the extent of staying in the SM or CU - or coming up with whatever gymnastics it needs to achieve the same result within the chaos of UK politics. But that is no better than a 50/50 bet and there are people in Brussels looking at this from every political, legal and commercial angle and they are consulting widely with traders and transport companies as well as with each member state.

All contingencies are being considered but the single absolute and immovable certainty is that the integrity of the Single Market will not be compromised. the EU already monitors its external borders to achieve this and modifying existing arrangements to add an extra layer for Ireland is not considered to be either technically difficult or in breach of any treaty or EU law.

It might take the form of pre-shipment inspections rather than customs procedures on arrival but if UK goods are freely entering the ROI through a soft border, there will be measures to ensure they cannot travel on unhindered within the SM.

Of course that doesn't solve the problem of UK goods or UK imports that are not EU compliant (e.g chlorinated chicken) being imported and consumed in the ROI. There are those who think this is enough reason to have a hard border, which of course takes care of the "back door" problem as well.

So there is lots to discuss and think about and - guess what - it is being discussed and thought about. Nothing is off the table and nor should it be.

Skedaddle

First Up: the problem at present is that the UK is not behaving logically. It's willing to do huge self harm in the name of nationalism and very little else. So I'm not entirely convinced that European pragmatism and logic is going to work in a context where one side is approaching the negations from a position of dogma.

They don't seem to even know what they want and that's been the fundamental problem with even trying to negotiate anything at all. It's political bluster vs technocratic treaty law.

What's worrying me is that, as yet, and this is incredibly close to the point of no return, nobody has any notion of what the UK is likely to find politically acceptable. They seem to want business as usual while completely leaving and being openly hostile to the EU.

They'll be in for a rather rude awakening if they think they can approach a deal with the US unde "America First Trump" with this level of arrogance. It does not bode well - what are they going to do ? Demand tarrif free access to the United States, while ignoring all US regulations and trade laws and governing the entire deal in the English courts and possibly operating as a tax and regulatory haven?
That seems to be what they think is an acceptable deal with the EU..

First Up

Skedaddle wrote: »

First Up: the problem at present is that the UK is not behaving logically. It's willing to do huge self harm in the name of nationalism and very little else. So I'm not entirely convinced that European pragmatism and logic is going to work in a context where one side is approaching the negations from a position of dogma.

I'm not talking about the negotiations per se. I'm talking about contingency planning. The EU is working on the things within its control, which the farce of UK politics obviously isn't.

Leroy42

Sam Russell wrote: »

I think everyone is ignoring the commitment made by the UK to move to phase II that there would be no hard border (or even soft border) between NI and the ROI.

Now we have the EU producing their hard ball - if the UK fails to maintain the transition agreement, the EU will immediately move to sanctions without waiting for the ECJ to rule. That will include grounding UK flights into the EU - quite a big stick.

I think it is make your mind up time for the Tories.

Not everyone, just the UK.

Skedaddle

Leroy42 wrote: »

Not everyone, just the UK.

Actually nobody else is ignoring that and the EU is *still* awaiting those commitments in the form of a legally binding agreement. They simply haven't been forthcoming.

So again, UK government credibility is becoming weaker and weaker.

First Up

Skedaddle wrote: »

Leroy42 wrote: »

Not everyone, just the UK.

Actually nobody else is ignoring that and the EU is *still* awaiting those commitments in the form of a legally binding agreement. They simply haven't been forthcoming.

So again, UK government credibility is becoming weaker and weaker.

Because the government - like the country - is hopelessly divided. I dont think there is any prospect of an improvement because the divisions are as deep within parties as between them.

Skedaddle

Skedaddle wrote: »

No, I think in the current political situation the only side of NI being listened to by the UK Government is the DUP because it's effectively part of the UK Government in all but name due to the confidence and supply agreement.

The UK government would listen to Stormont, but until SF stop messing about, there is no Stormont government to listen to.

Skedaddle wrote: »

Actually nobody else is ignoring that and the EU is *still* awaiting those commitments in the form of a legally binding agreement. They simply haven't been forthcoming.

So again, UK government credibility is becoming weaker and weaker.

what do you mean by legally binding agreement? legal in what sense?

First Up

Aegir wrote: »

what do you mean by legally binding agreement? legal in what sense?

Enforceable might be a better word - i.e there will consequences if you don't.

Today's "leaked" document from Brussels is designed to illustrate it and is having the predictable and desired effect judging from the howls of outrage from the Brexit camp.

Really Interested

BonnieSituation wrote: »

An independent NI can do whatever it wants wrt CU membership when it achieves independence in whatever fantastic world you dream of.

And I hardly think SF would be really into that notion.

Hardly relevant to the discussion of the current UK is still in existence though.

I was responding to another poster, taking responses out of context is always going to lead to misunderstanding.

My point was I did not believe SF would be into the idea, but i was asking another poster did he have information i was unaware of.

Skedaddle

I mean a document that we can all read and accept that we have an agreement. Not a bunch of meaningless and vague waffle, which gets reinterpreted by every UK ministers' statement everytime they appear on TV.

As it stands that phase 1 "agreement" is a bizzare mess. They shouldn't have been allowed to move to Phase 2 without that being turned into a formal, signed agreement with enforcement possibilities.

Although I don't think the EU realised what a bunch of utter waffling, blustering types they are dealing with.

Really Interested

First Up wrote: »

I think perhaps it is you that is not familiar with how the EU "works". Maybe if
you had the opportunity to sit in on some of the informal discussions taking place in/around the EU institutions, you would appreciate just how wide ranging are the scenarios and options being explored - or at least tossed around.

Everyone in Brussels recognises that we are in uncharted territory and that whatever emerges post-Brexit will be a new situation that requires new arrangements. Yes, the Irish border is taken very seriously and every sympathy is with the Irish side in sorting it. But it is also recognised that the EU needs to adapt to a new situation that is not of its making.

Of course the preference is that the UK comes to its senses, at least to the extent of staying in the SM or CU - or coming up with whatever gymnastics it needs to achieve the same result within the chaos of UK politics. But that is no better than a 50/50 bet and there are people in Brussels looking at this from every political, legal and commercial angle and they are consulting widely with traders and transport companies as well as with each member state.

All contingencies are being considered but the single absolute and immovable certainty is that the integrity of the Single Market will not be compromised. the EU already monitors its external borders to achieve this and modifying existing arrangements to add an extra layer for Ireland is not considered to be either technically difficult or in breach of any treaty or EU law.

It might take the form of pre-shipment inspections rather than customs procedures on arrival but if UK goods are freely entering the ROI through a soft border, there will be measures to ensure they cannot travel on unhindered within the SM.

Of course that doesn't solve the problem of UK goods or UK imports that are not EU compliant (e.g chlorinated chicken) being imported and consumed in the ROI. There are those who think this is enough reason to have a hard border, which of course takes care of the "back door" problem as well.

So there is lots to discuss and think about and - guess what - it is being discussed and thought about. Nothing is off the table and nor should it be.

I am really lost to figure out what you are saying on the one hand you said that there would be a border between the ROI and the EU, then you said you did not say that then you again said it above you said and i quote "he Single Market will not be compromised." but go on to say " the EU already monitors its external borders to achieve this and modifying existing arrangements to add an extra layer for Ireland is not considered to be either technically difficult or in breach of any treaty or EU law.

It might take the form of pre-shipment inspections rather than customs procedures on arrival but if UK goods are freely entering the ROI through a soft border," am i missing something but having pre shipment inspections sounds very much like a barrier to trade even if those inspections take place in Ireland rather than France.

It is my belief that an extra layer only applying to Ireland sounds very much like Ireland being outside the Customs Area? What am I missing? it is my opinion that any such arrangement other than at the NI ROI border will be impossible. Please correct me point to any document that says the EU is proposing or even thinking what you say. I want to know if this is a real possibility. Anything to back up your statements is all i would like to see.

Who will have these pre shipment inspections, as the external borders are policed by the sate so are you saying France willl do pre shipment inspections of goods going to france, or some EU body, what body if it is that. These are genuine questions.

Skedaddle

Skedaddle wrote: »

I mean a document that we can all read and accept that we have an agreement. Not a bunch of meaningless and vague waffle, which gets reinterpreted by every UK ministers' statement everytime they appear on TV.

As it stands that phase 1 "agreement" is a bizzare mess. They shouldn't have been allowed to move to Phase 2 without that being turned into a formal, signed agreement with enforcement possibilities.

Although I don't think the EU realised what a bunch of utter waffling, blustering types they are dealing with.

Have you read this https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/joint_report.pdf

Ireland and Northern Ireland
42. Both Parties affirm that the achievements, benefits and commitments of the peace
process will remain of paramount importance to peace, stability and reconciliation.
They agree that the Good Friday or Belfast Agreement reached on 10 April 1998 by
the United Kingdom Government, the Irish Government and the other participants in
the multi-party negotiations (the '1998 Agreement') must be protected in all its parts,
and that this extends to the practical application of the 1998 Agreement on the island
of Ireland and to the totality of the relationships set out in the Agreement.
43. The United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union presents a significant
and unique challenge in relation to the island of Ireland. The United Kingdom recalls
its commitment to protecting the operation of the 1998 Agreement, including its
subsequent implementation agreements and arrangements, and to the effective
operation of each of the institutions and bodies established under them. The United
Kingdom also recalls its commitment to the avoidance of a hard border, including any
physical infrastructure or related checks and controls.
44. Both Parties recognise the need to respect the provisions of the 1998 Agreement
regarding the constitutional status of Northern Ireland and the principle of consent.
The commitments set out in this joint report are and must remain fully consistent with
these provisions. The United Kingdom continues to respect and support fully Northern
Ireland's position as an integral part of the United Kingdom, consistent with the
principle of consent.
45. The United Kingdom respects Ireland's ongoing membership of the European Union
and all of the corresponding rights and obligations that entails, in particular Ireland's
place in the Internal Market and the Customs Union. The United Kingdom also recalls
its commitment to preserving the integrity of its internal market and Northern Ireland's
place within it, as the United Kingdom leaves the European Union's Internal Market
and Customs Union.
46. The commitments and principles outlined in this joint report will not pre-determine the
outcome of wider discussions on the future relationship between the European Union
and the United Kingdom and are, as necessary, specific to the unique circumstances on
the island of Ireland. They are made and must be upheld in all circumstances,
irrespective of the nature of any future agreement between the European Union and
United Kingdom.
47. Cooperation between Ireland and Northern Ireland is a central part of the 1998
Agreement and is essential for achieving reconciliation and the normalisation of
relationships on the island of Ireland. In this regard, both Parties recall the roles,
functions and safeguards of the Northern Ireland Executive, the Northern Ireland
Assembly, and the North-South Ministerial Council (including its cross-community
provisions) as set out in the 1998 Agreement. The two Parties have carried out a
Page 8 of 15
mapping exercise, which shows that North-South cooperation relies to a significant
extent on a common European Union legal and policy framework. Therefore, the
United Kingdom’s departure from the European Union gives rise to substantial
challenges to the maintenance and development of North-South cooperation.
48. The United Kingdom remains committed to protecting and supporting continued
North-South and East-West cooperation across the full range of political, economic,
security, societal and agricultural contexts and frameworks of cooperation, including
the continued operation of the North-South implementation bodies.
49. 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.
50. 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.
51. Both Parties will establish mechanisms to ensure the implementation and oversight of
any specific arrangement to safeguard the integrity of the EU Internal Market and the
Customs Union.
52. Both Parties acknowledge that the 1998 Agreement recognises the birth right of all the
people of Northern Ireland to choose to be Irish or British or both and be accepted as
such. The people of Northern Ireland who are Irish citizens will continue to enjoy
rights as EU citizens, including where they reside in Northern Ireland. Both Parties
therefore agree that the Withdrawal Agreement should respect and be without
prejudice to the rights, opportunities and identity that come with European Union
citizenship for such people and, in the next phase of negotiations, will examine
arrangements required to give effect to the ongoing exercise of, and access to, their
EU rights, opportunities and benefits.
53. The 1998 Agreement also includes important provisions on Rights, Safeguards and
Equality of Opportunity for which EU law and practice has provided a supporting
framework in Northern Ireland and across the island of Ireland. The United Kingdom
commits to ensuring that no diminution of rights is caused by its departure from the
European Union, including in the area of protection against forms of discrimination
enshrined in EU law. The United Kingdom commits to facilitating the related work of
the institutions and bodies, established by the 1998 Agreement, in upholding human
rights and equality standards.
Page 9 of 15
54. Both Parties recognise that the United Kingdom and Ireland may continue to make
arrangements between themselves relating to the movement of persons between their
territories (Common Travel Area), while fully respecting the rights of natural persons
conferred by Union law. The United Kingdom confirms and accepts that the Common
Travel Area and associated rights and privileges can continue to operate without
affecting Ireland’s obligations under Union law, in particular with respect to free
movement for EU citizens.
55. Both Parties will honour their commitments to the PEACE and INTERREG funding
programmes under the current multi-annual financial framework. Possibilities for
future support will be examined favourably.
56. Given the specific nature of issues related to Ireland and Northern Ireland, and on the
basis of the principles and commitments set out above, both Parties agree that in the
next phase work will continue in a distinct strand of the negotiations on the detailed
arrangements required to give them effect. Such work will also address issues arising
from Ireland’s unique geographic situation, including the transit of goods (to and from
Ireland via the United Kingdom), in line with the approach established by the
European Council Guidelines of 29 April 2017.

Strazdas

Skedaddle wrote: »

First Up: the problem at present is that the UK is not behaving logically. It's willing to do huge self harm in the name of nationalism and very little else. So I'm not entirely convinced that European pragmatism and logic is going to work in a context where one side is approaching the negations from a position of dogma.

They don't seem to even know what they want and that's been the fundamental problem with even trying to negotiate anything at all. It's political bluster vs technocratic treaty law.

What's worrying me is that, as yet, and this is incredibly close to the point of no return, nobody has any notion of what the UK is likely to find politically acceptable. They seem to want business as usual while completely leaving and being openly hostile to the EU.

They'll be in for a rather rude awakening if they think they can approach a deal with the US unde "America First Trump" with this level of arrogance. It does not bode well - what are they going to do ? Demand tarrif free access to the United States, while ignoring all US regulations and trade laws and governing the entire deal in the English courts and possibly operating as a tax and regulatory haven?
That seems to be what they think is an acceptable deal with the EU..

Yes, indeed the UK position is a mass of contradictions. They talk about 'Global Britain' and pursuing many new trade deals whilst essentially telling their 27 nearest neighbours to eff off and ripping up existing trade deals. It appears to be a mixture of arrogance and stupidity.

Really Interested

Skedaddle wrote: »

No, I think in the current political situation the only side of NI being listened to by the UK Government is the DUP because it's effectively part of the UK Government in all but name due to the confidence and supply agreement.

Of course both sides in Ni should be part of any major changes, but due to circumstances, they're not being listened to.

Also I think if this were the UUP or even SF in the same position, they'd have a comprehension that a one sided solution isn't going to work and is extremely dangerous. The DUP are very unlikely to take the aspirations of the nationalist community on board and I think anyone with any sense of NI knows this. They most likely see this as a big win-win for them and their community and feel they've consolidated their own position.

An aspect of Tories are willing to do anything to get brexit over the line, even risk undermining NI's hard won and now established peace.

The UK hasn't come up with a solution for the NI border and I don't believe they have one. They're hoping the EU forgets about that and that continental business interests will sideline little old annoying Ireland. Or, that they'll be able to somehow bluster their way through or even try to take it off the table in lieu of a smooth trade deal. They're also vastly overestimating the strength of their hand with the EU.

However, and it's looking likely with the current trajectory, the only sanction the EU really has is to offer no deal and the UK spins into a crisis. That's also a potential disaster for Northern Ireland as it's an ultra hard Brexit. The EU can't compel the UK to do anything - if they're determined to leave without a deal, then that's their choice to make, even if the consequences are potentially dire.

The only real solution I can see is the Tory centre revolts, taking enough MPs with them to collapse the Government.

I agree with you totally. I was asking about SF in case you had information I was unaware of on the point. I get now what you are saying in light of where we are any opinion of any party in NI not the DUP is ignored, so as they say we are where we ar.

Zubeneschamali

First Up wrote: »

Nothing is off the table and nor should it be.

Things that violate the 4 freedoms within the EU are off the table. If they were on the table, the UK would not be leaving, they would be restricting immigration inside the EU.

Skedaddle

Aegir wrote: »

Have you read this https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/joint_report.pdf

Yes, that's a report. It's not any kind of binding agreement.

Any future stages need to be legally binding as otherwise we are back in the waffle and bluster department again as UK politics start to misremember things.

First Up

Really Interested wrote: »

I am really lost to figure out what you are saying on the one hand you said that there would be a border between the ROI and the EU, then you said you did not say that then you again said it above you said and i quote "he Single Market will not be compromised." but go on to say " the EU already monitors its external borders to achieve this and modifying existing arrangements to add an extra layer for Ireland is not considered to be either technically difficult or in breach of any treaty or EU law.

It might take the form of pre-shipment inspections rather than customs procedures on arrival but if UK goods are freely entering the ROI through a soft border," am i missing something but having pre shipment inspections sounds very much like a barrier to trade even if those inspections take place in Ireland rather than France.

It is my belief that an extra layer only applying to Ireland sounds very much like Ireland being outside the Customs Area? What am I missing? it is my opinion that any such arrangement other than at the NI ROI border will be impossible. Please correct me point to any document that says the EU is proposing or even thinking what you say. I want to know if this is a real possibility. Anything to back up your statements is all i would like to see.

Who will have these pre shipment inspections, as the external borders are policed by the sate so are you saying France willl do pre shipment inspections of goods going to france, or some EU body, what body if it is that. These are genuine questions.

You will just have to take my word for it that these matters are being discussed in detail against the background of a chaotic Brexit. They will become documents when things are clearer.

Verification of shipments is not a trade barrier. Certs of Origin are read electronically at ports around the world a few million times a day, including in Ireland for non-EU trade. All international sea and air ports of entry in the EU are equipped to process imports from outside the EU. The infrastructure and systems are there. Extending them to arrivals from Ireland wouldn't be a problem. Turkey is in a customs Union with the EU since 1995. Do you think Turkish shipments sail through?

The hassle for Irish exporters would be having to get Certs of Origin (good business for the Chambers of Commerce but a cost for the shippers) for goods that are currently treated effectively as domestic. It would means extra layers of administration and the risk of delays. Ideally it would be pre-shipment inspection and that would require some changes to infrastructure but if Brexit goes as badly as it might, we'll have customs procedures for goods going to and coming from the UK as well. You think Holyhead and, Fishguard are ready, never mind Dover or Felixtowe?

But the main risk would be commercial - importers across the EU might be deterred from using an Irish supplier if there are alternative sources within the EU that don't carry such possible risks of delay.

This is the sort of stuff that is currently being explored.

.

Zubeneschamali

First Up wrote: »

The hassle for Irish exporters would be having to get Certs of Origin (good business for the Chambers of Commerce but a cost for the shippers) for goods that are currently treated effectively as domestic. It would means extra layers of administration and the risk of delays.

Illegal.

Nody

In other news some British citizens went to court over the fact that they would be stripped of their EU citizenship due to UK leaving. A Dutch court has now referred it to the ECJ (the irony) for advice (can't link properly for some reason).

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-uk-nations-eu-citizenship-ecj-european-court-justice-keep-withdrawal-netherlands-holland-a8199251.html

Really Interested

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Illegal.

I agree, if these things are been talked about in the corridors of Power in the EU after legal advice then God help us.

First Up

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Illegal.

What's illegal about it?

Really Interested

Nody wrote: »

In other news some British citizens went to court over the fact that they would be stripped of their EU citizenship due to UK leaving. A Dutch court has now referred it to the ECJ (the irony) for advice (can't link properly for some reason).

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-uk-nations-eu-citizenship-ecj-european-court-justice-keep-withdrawal-netherlands-holland-a8199251.html

The only surprise is how long it took to get to reference!

steddyeddy

Northern Ireland's GDP will likely plummet 12% according to leaked papers.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/news.sky.com/story/amp/hit-to-northern-ireland-and-north-east-england-gdp-revealed-in-new-brexit-impact-papers-leak-11240254

Skedaddle

Skedaddle wrote: »

Yes, that's a report. It's not any kind of binding agreement.

Any future stages need to be legally binding as otherwise we are back in the waffle and bluster department again as UK politics start to misremember things.

it is a report on what has been agreed so far.

You said that:

Skedaddle wrote: »

Actually nobody else is ignoring that and the EU is *still* awaiting those commitments in the form of a legally binding agreement. They simply haven't been forthcoming.

So again, UK government credibility is becoming weaker and weaker.

so could you explain what "Legally binding agreement" the EU is *Still* waiting for.

Really Interested

First Up wrote: »

What's illegal about it?

"Article 28
(ex Article 23 TEC)
1.
The Union shall comprise a customs union which shall cover all trade in goods and which shall
involve the prohibition between Member States of customs duties on imports and exports and of all
charges having equivalent effect, and the adoption of a common customs tariff in their relations with third countries."

2.
The provisions of Article 30 and of Chapter 3 of this Title shall apply to products originating
in Member States and to products coming from third countries which are in free circulation in Member states."

Article 30
(ex Article 25 TEC)
Customs duties on imports and exports and charges having equivalent effect shall be prohibited
between Member States. This prohibition shall also apply to customs duties of a fiscal nature.

I do not think Article 36 gives a back door, but in any event only applies to 34 to 36.

Article 36
(ex Article 30 TEC)
The provisions of Articles 34 and 35 shall not preclude prohibitions or restrictions on imports,
exports or goods in transit justified on grounds of public morality, public policy or public security;
the protection of health and life of humans, animals or plants; the protection of national treasures
possessing artistic, historic or archaeological value; or the protection of industrial and commercial
property. Such prohibitions or restrictions shall not, however, constitute a means of arbitrary
discrimination or a disguised restriction on trade between Member States.

Nody

Nody wrote: »

In other news some British citizens went to court over the fact that they would be stripped of their EU citizenship due to UK leaving. A Dutch court has now referred it to the ECJ (the irony) for advice (can't link properly for some reason).

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-uk-nations-eu-citizenship-ecj-european-court-justice-keep-withdrawal-netherlands-holland-a8199251.html

it is an interesting argument.

The EU isarguing that EU nationals in the Uk should have all their rights retained, as they went to the UK in good faith as U citizens.

Surely, British citizens in an EU country went there in good faith and should have their rights as eu citizens retained.

More pressing in the Netherlands obviously, because they don't allow dual citizenship

Zubeneschamali

Aegir wrote: »

it is a report on what has been agreed so far.

Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.

Zubeneschamali

First Up wrote: »

What's illegal about it?

Ask your well connected EU insider buddies at the water cooler.

Sam Russell

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.

Except that the Phase I agreement states that the NI/ROI boarder 'overarches' any future agreement - whether there is one or not. In other words, the UK has agreed to a frictionless border in all circumstances.

First Up

Really Interested wrote: »

"Article 28
(ex Article 23 TEC)
1.
The Union shall comprise a customs union which shall cover all trade in goods and which shall
involve the prohibition between Member States of customs duties on imports and exports and of all
charges having equivalent effect, and the adoption of a common customs tariff in their relations with third countries."

2.
The provisions of Article 30 and of Chapter 3 of this Title shall apply to products originating
in Member States and to products coming from third countries which are in free circulation in Member states."

Article 30
(ex Article 25 TEC)
Customs duties on imports and exports and charges having equivalent effect shall be prohibited
between Member States. This prohibition shall also apply to customs duties of a fiscal nature.

I do not think Article 36 gives a back door, but in any event only applies to 34 to 36.

Article 36
(ex Article 30 TEC)
The provisions of Articles 34 and 35 shall not preclude prohibitions or restrictions on imports,
exports or goods in transit justified on grounds of public morality, public policy or public security;
the protection of health and life of humans, animals or plants; the protection of national treasures
possessing artistic, historic or archaeological value; or the protection of industrial and commercial
property. Such prohibitions or restrictions shall not, however, constitute a means of arbitrary
discrimination or a disguised restriction on trade between Member States.

So what's illegal about Customs verifying that the consignment meets the criteria of originating in a member state?