Brexit discussion thread III

Zubeneschamali

First Up wrote: »

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

That's not what I said was illegal. The illegal bit is producers in ireland having to jump through hoops to export to France, when exporters in France have no such burden to export to Ireland.

It is literally a barrier to trade.

Really Interested

First Up wrote: »

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

The important bit is "equivalent effect,"


What you say is been talked about is imposing a burden that is equivalent effect.

Zubeneschamali

Sam Russell wrote: »

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.

Immediately after the EU approved a move to Phase 1, David Davis said that the Brexit divorce agreement between Britain and the EU was a “statement of intent” rather than something legally enforceable.

The Brexit secretary’s comments came after it was reported that Downing Street advisers had told cabinet ministers who campaigned to leave the EU that promises around full regulatory alignment were “meaningless”.

Theresa May also appeared to suggest there was still some flexibility in the deal reached at the end of last week, writing to all Tory MPs – in a letter seen by the Guardian – to set out the details of the agreement but promising that “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed”.

CelticRambler

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

That's not what I said was illegal. The illegal bit is producers in ireland having to jump through hoops to export to France, when exporters in France have no such burden to export to Ireland.

It is literally a barrier to trade.

Perhaps FirstUp could understand it better if we brought a German customer into the equation!

German restaurant wants to serve good quality beef for tomorrow's Sunday roast; contacts French and Irish suppliers; Irish price and quality is better than the French offer, so German chef places his order, only to be told that the Irish supplier has to apply (and pay) for a certificate of origin that must be issued before the shipment departs Ireland, and checked upon arrival in Germany; the French supplier can throw a joint in the back of a van and drive it over the border.

That's discrimination between the farmers in two otherwise equal member states. And therefore illegal.

First Up

Really Interested wrote: »

First Up wrote: »

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

The important bit is "equivalent effect,"


What you say is been talked about is imposing a burden that is equivalent effect.

I think you are missing the point. Such a requirement on Irish exporters would only be imposed if Ireland is failing in its obligation to ensure that all goods in circulation in Ireland (and thus eligible for circulation in the SM) are in compliance. If the border with a non-compliant country is not controlled, then no such guarantee can be given and other member states are not only entitled to take measures - they are obliged to.

First Up

CelticRambler wrote: »

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

That's not what I said was illegal. The illegal bit is producers in ireland having to jump through hoops to export to France, when exporters in France have no such burden to export to Ireland.

It is literally a barrier to trade.

Perhaps FirstUp could understand it better if we brought a German customer into the equation!

German restaurant wants to serve good quality beef for tomorrow's Sunday roast; contacts French and Irish suppliers; Irish price and quality is better than the French offer, so German chef places his order, only to be told that the Irish supplier has to apply (and pay) for a certificate of origin that must be issued before the shipment departs Ireland, and checked upon arrival in Germany; the French supplier can throw a joint in the back of a van and drive it over the border.

That's discrimination between the farmers in two otherwise equal member states. And therefore illegal.

The German restaurant will buy its beef from a local wholesaler. The importation from Ireland will be done by a specialist company that will be fully aware of its obligations under food safety legislation. If the Irish exporter can't satisfy the German importer that the goods are in full compliance, it would be illegal for the German importer to buy them.

Really Interested

First Up wrote: »

I think you are missing the point. Such a requirement on Irish exporters would only be imposed if Ireland is failing in its obligation to ensure that all goods in circulation in Ireland (and thus eligible for circulation in the SM) are in compliance. If the border with a non-compliant country is not controlled, then no such guarantee can be given and other member states are not only entitled to take measures - they are obliged to.

And you ignore that if Ireland could not or would not control its border a perfectly legal system is in place to deal with a members not doing what it the member is obliged to. Which does not involve your original claim that the customs border will appear between ROI and EU.

While I accept the EU has been fairly leek free, from what i know it has been on the record in relation to all its possible scenarios, i am unaware of anyone claiming this was a possibility.

Really Interested

First Up wrote: »

The German restaurant will buy its beef from a local wholesaler. The importation from Ireland will be done by a specialist company that will be fully aware of its obligations under food safety legislation. If the Irish exporter can't satisfy the German importer that the goods are in full compliance, it would be illegal for the German importer to buy them.

I give up.

CelticRambler

Really Interested wrote: »

I give up.

Me too! :pac:

In other news, I see that the Belfast Telegraph is reporting on Ian Paisley's "no surrender" rant in the House of Commons, but not a word about the 12% hit to NI's GDP admitted by the NI Secretary. :rolleyes:

Really Interested

CelticRambler wrote: »

Me too! :pac:

I really don’t know of that was one of the best boards trolls ever, the other option is well!

Zubeneschamali

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Immediately after the EU approved a move to Phase 1, David Davis said that the Brexit divorce agreement between Britain and the EU was a “statement of intent” rather than something legally enforceable.

in what way would you legally enforce this commitment?

Nate--IRL--

Aegir wrote: »

in what way would you legally enforce this commitment?

You can't. Hence the push to translate it into legally binding language and draft it in treaty form.

The UK can walk away from it if they so wish.

EDIT:- However that said, the A50 treaty of which it will form a part of, will be signed well before any formal trade treaty, which will take many years.

Nate

Skedaddle

First Up wrote: »

The German restaurant will buy its beef from a local wholesaler. The importation from Ireland will be done by a specialist company that will be fully aware of its obligations under food safety legislation. If the Irish exporter can't satisfy the German importer that the goods are in full compliance, it would be illegal for the German importer to buy them.

That's actually not true. I encounter plenty of scenarios every single day where I deal directly with suppliers in France, Germany, and plenty of other EU states including the UK (for now), without going through any local wholesalers.

You're not really understanding the concept of a single market. It's just that - one market.

If an Irish meat producer were producing meat to less than EU minimum standards, they would be sanctioned IN IRELAND. It’s no different whether it’s an Irish, Bavarian, Finnish, Italian or Catalonian producer, the same harmonised rules apply. It would be as illegal for them to sell the substandard / non complaint meat in Cork as Berlin.

The Republic of Ireland *is* the EU market and will continue to be after Brexit in precisely the same way as Helsinki, Frankfurt or Madrid is and will be.

Sam Russell

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Immediately after the EU approved a move to Phase 1, David Davis said that the Brexit divorce agreement between Britain and the EU was a “statement of intent” rather than something legally enforceable.

The Brexit secretary’s comments came after it was reported that Downing Street advisers had told cabinet ministers who campaigned to leave the EU that promises around full regulatory alignment were “meaningless”.

Theresa May also appeared to suggest there was still some flexibility in the deal reached at the end of last week, writing to all Tory MPs – in a letter seen by the Guardian – to set out the details of the agreement but promising that “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed”.

So the Tories are saying - 'Yes, we did pull the wool over Barniers eyes, but still it means nothing!'

But Barnier and the EU said after they heard that from Davies that the agreement had to be put into a legal framework that is enforceable - and more recently, the transition deal can be enforced immediately by sanctions without recourse to the ECJ.

Now who would you think is bluffing and blustering?

First Up

Really Interested wrote: »

First Up wrote: »

The German restaurant will buy its beef from a local wholesaler. The importation from Ireland will be done by a specialist company that will be fully aware of its obligations under food safety legislation. If the Irish exporter can't satisfy the German importer that the goods are in full compliance, it would be illegal for the German importer to buy them.

I give up.

Or you could stick around and learn how the meat trade actually works.

Did you know that Argentinian and Brazilian beef has been exported from Ireland?

FreudianSlippers

Gerry T wrote: »

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?

Technically, it's possible but does anyone think NI can survive on its own?

Capt'n Midnight

UK wants access to Common Market. If there is a trade dispute it goes to the ECJ.

Which is notoriously slow and besides the UK doesn't want the ECJ.

So no surprise really that the EU has a plan for this.


http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-42964004

According to a footnote in the EU papers leaked to journalists in Brussels, if referring a dispute to the EU court would take too long, the withdrawal agreement "should provide for a mechanism allowing the Union to suspend certain benefits deriving for the United Kingdom from participation in the internal market".

Also no surprise that the usual suspects are frothing at the mouth over it.

Professor Moriarty

This headline tells you all you need to know about the Tory mindset:

Theresa May convenes Brexit 'war cabinet' to decide future EU links

Capt'n Midnight

More numbers - have a look the regions that voted against their best interests.

It's real slo-mo car crash stuff

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-42977967

The forecasts suggest the North-East of England would be worse hit by Brexit, with output falling by 3% if the UK stayed in the single market, 11% under a trade deal and 16% with not trade deal and World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules.

also

Migration cut 'could cost Scotland £10bn'

CelticRambler

First Up wrote: »

Or you could stick around and learn how the meat trade actually works.

OFFS :rolleyes: This isn't about "the meat trade" - it was an example of how your suggestion of special conditions being imposed on Ireland (for any intracommunity trade) would not be compatible with the EU's own rules.

Oh, and I do know how the meat trade works, especially as I'm part of "the system" that decides whether or not you can eat it. :P

ancapailldorcha

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Technically, it's possible but does anyone think NI can survive on its own?

I think quality of life for people in NI would plummet like a stone if NI were to have to go without the subsidies it gets from Westminster. Tax revenues would be a meagre fraction of what they are today while unemployment would skyrocket leading to significant amounts of emigration as people leave to find work. It ultimately depends on what you mean by survive but I would say no. It's too small, has no real economy of its own and the potential of such a serious economic downturn to stir up trouble would like deter prospective employers who'd want to be able to access the EU single market anyway.

Enzokk

Gerry T wrote: »

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?

Are there any tangible benefits to being a Commonwealth member, other than being able to compete in the Commonwealth Games every 4 years? I thought NI was already a member of the Commonwealth in any case and it seems to me that what you are proposing is that NI becomes totally free and independent of the UK and will have its links via acknowledging the Queen as the head of state. I could think of a few billion reasons why this would not work.

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.

The problem is that negotiating with a country that doesn't know what it wants leave you in a position where they could change their minds from day to day.

steddyeddy wrote: »

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

And to think the DUP will still advocate for Brexit. You have to wonder is there any historical and life changing decision that they will not be on the wrong side of history on?

Enzokk

Is there anything worse than a PM that cannot make a decision? How about a PM that would benefit from more trade with countries from emerging markets where you didn't have to wait for the EU to initiate trade? I think Jacob Rees Mogg would be the biggest disaster to hit the UK if he got into any sort of position of power. It's scary where this all could still end up.

Jacob Rees Mogg is in line for a huge personal windfall when britain exits the single market

I cannot copy any text from the article but they claim he is a long term backer of investment firm Somerset Capital who invests in emerging markets.

devnull

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

More numbers - have a look the regions that voted against their best interests.

It's real slo-mo car crash stuff

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-42977967

also

Migration cut 'could cost Scotland £10bn'

All the Brexiteers are calling it 'fake news' and 'MSM lies' and saying that it's just project fear mark 2 and has no basis on reality and all this kind of thing as you'd usually expect from them where they do not believe anything that does not suit their view, regardless of the source, or facts to back it up, and believe everything that does suit their view without anything to back it up.

It will never hit home with some of them what they are doing to their own country and voting to make themselves poorer, but they are took in by the likes of Jacob Rees-Mogg who I have no doubt if he got into power he wouldn't care a jot about the poor and the lower classes of society in the UK, but for some reason they seem to adore him despite the fact he couldn't care less about them.

But they're already laying the groundwork so when it all goes wrong they can turn around and blame the European Union for punishing them, pushed on by the politicians who just like scapegoating foreigners for all the countries problems to stop people blaming them, will scapegoat the European Union to stop people blaming them after Brexit has happened.

The public are being played, and they're falling right for it and they won't come out of this well, but it seems it is far too late for them to realise that as the politicians no doubt celebrate how they've hoodwinked large sections of society who back them no matter what.

First Up

CelticRambler wrote: »

First Up wrote: »

Or you could stick around and learn how the meat trade actually works.

OFFS :rolleyes: This isn't about "the meat trade" - it was an example of how your suggestion of special conditions being imposed on Ireland (for any intracommunity trade) would not be compatible with the EU's own rules.

Oh, and I do know how the meat trade works, especially as I'm part of "the system" that decides whether or not you can eat it. :P

And I responded by showing why the example offered proved my point rather than the one intended.

The Single Market functions because it has robust external borders - food safety being just one of benefits. If Ireland does not protect those borders, food imported into the UK under whatever terms it gets from wherever can then be shipped to mainland EU via our porous border.

Now tell me who will be to blame if that happens?

Water John

Yea Guy Pierce was calling John Bercow, 'a nasty little man', repeatedly with bitterness, on Sky News. Can see now it was because John Bercow ordered the release of the financial assesments that look so bad.
Brexiteers will do anything to bury the truth.

We will really know by the end of next week, what, if anything the Tory Govn't can agree among themselves to bring into EU negotiations. If the war cabinet cannot make progress, there stuffed.

PeadarCo

First Up wrote:

The Single Market functions because it has robust external borders - food safety being just one of benefits. If Ireland does not protect those borders, food imported into the UK under whatever terms it gets from wherever can then be shipped to mainland EU via our porous border.

Because Ireland will ultimately enforce the border. Domestic pressure from local businesses alone like the agri centre will not want to be undercut by British producers. It will cost but the cost of leaving the UK will be even more. Something that Ireland has already implicitly accepted by not following the UK out the door.

There will be smuggling but that's the same for any border as there is now.

PeadarCo

First Up wrote:

The Single Market functions because it has robust external borders - food safety being just one of benefits. If Ireland does not protect those borders, food imported into the UK under whatever terms it gets from wherever can then be shipped to mainland EU via our porous border.

Because Ireland will ultimately enforce the border. Domestic pressure from local businesses alone like the agri centre will not want to be undercut by British producers. It will cost but the cost of leaving the UK will be even more. Something that Ireland has already implicitly accepted by not following the UK out the door.

There will be smuggling but that's the same for any border as there is now.

First Up

PeadarCo wrote: »

First Up wrote:

The Single Market functions because it has robust external borders - food safety being just one of benefits. If Ireland does not protect those borders, food imported into the UK under whatever terms it gets from wherever can then be shipped to mainland EU via our porous border.

Because Ireland will ultimately enforce the border. Domestic pressure from local businesses alone like the agri centre will not want to be undercut by British producers. It will cost but the cost of leaving the UK will be even more. Something that Ireland has already implicitly accepted by not following the UK out the door.

There will be smuggling but that's the same for any border as there is now.

Correct. Local smuggling happens at all borders. Small beer.

Giving the UK a free pass into the EU so we can pretend the border doesn't exist would be the worst of all outcomes.

PeadarCo

First Up wrote:

Giving the UK a free pass into the EU so we can pretend the border doesn't exist would be the worst of all outcomes.

We won't. If the UK leaves the customs Union and single market the border will be enforced. A hard border will be a hard border. It would be unfortunate and nobody wants it. But it could happen if Brexit hardliners get there way it would be the case. By enforcing the border the UK won't have a free pass into the EU.

First Up

PeadarCo wrote: »

First Up wrote:

Giving the UK a free pass into the EU so we can pretend the border doesn't exist would be the worst of all outcomes.

We won't. If the UK leaves the customs Union and single market the border will be enforced. A hard border will be a hard border. It would be unfortunate and nobody wants it. But it could happen if Brexit hardliners get there way it would be the case. By enforcing the border the UK won't have a free pass into the EU.

Of course they won't. The discussion has been about if a hard border could be avoided without damaging our trade relations with the other 26. Some here seem to think its possible. I don't.

Really Interested

First Up wrote: »

Of course they won't. The discussion has been about if a hard border could be avoided without damaging our trade relations with the other 26. Some here seem to think its possible. I don't.

Seriously what are you talking about the UK will agree with EU or it will not, no agreement then hard border between NI and ROI. If there is agreement then some sort of soft border between UK and EU.

Are you saying that if the UK and EU will end up with a hard border which the ROI will just ignore, because sure we want too?

CelticRambler

First Up wrote: »

The discussion has been about if a hard border could be avoided without damaging our trade relations with the other 26. Some here seem to think its possible. I don't.

It is possible: hard border in the Irish Sea, special status for Northern Ireland. Problem solved.

And hey, look: that arrangement already exists for certain "products" - such as cattle, for which NI is considered part of the Island of Ireland, not Great Britain, and all those checks and controls you talk about are already in force, acting as a barrier to East-West movement within the UK.

So we have a working model for a post-Brexit GB, one that we already know was agreed by GB and the EU (until a very small group of NI kamikaze politicians decided to stamp their feet and demand more pain in exchange for less freedom) and one that remains the only logical and practical solution to the Brexiteers irrational red lines.

CelticRambler

CelticRambler wrote: »

It is possible: hard border in the Irish Sea, special status for Northern Ireland. Problem solved.

And hey, look: that arrangement already exists for certain "products" - such as cattle, for which NI is considered part of the Island of Ireland, not Great Britain, and all those checks and controls you talk about are already in force, acting as a barrier to East-West movement within the UK.

So we have a working model for a post-Brexit GB, one that we already know was agreed by GB and the EU (until a very small group of NI kamikaze politicians decided to stamp their feet and demand more pain in exchange for less freedom) and one that remains the only logical and practical solution to the Brexiteers irrational red lines.

The only sure fire way for a border in the Irish Sea to work is for referendum on the future of NI. Is it part of the uk or not.

First Up

Really Interested wrote: »

First Up wrote: »

Of course they won't. The discussion has been about if a hard border could be avoided without damaging our trade relations with the other 26. Some here seem to think its possible. I don't.

Seriously what are you talking about the UK will agree with EU or it will not, no agreement then hard border between NI and ROI. If there is agreement then some sort of soft border between UK and EU.

Are you saying that if the UK and EU will end up with a hard border which the ROI will just ignore, because sure we want too?

Eh no. I'm not saying that.

Junkyard Tom

Ian Paisley Jnr making an utter fool of himself on Newsnight, still saying the EU 'has as much to lose as Britain' and that Ireland's problem with a border is a consequence of a power struggle between Fine Gael and Sinn Féin in 'the south'.

SNIP. No GIF's please.

Really Interested

First Up wrote: »

Eh no. I'm not saying that.

So pleas say what you are saying clearly.

Capt'n Midnight

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Ian Paisley Jnr making an utter fool of himself on Newsnight, still saying the EU 'has as much to lose as Britain' and that Ireland's problem with a border is a consequence of a power struggle between Fine Gael and Sinn Féin in 'the south'.

Facepalm.

The numbers are scary. The DUP still haven't received much of that billion. Without EU regional funding NI is totally dependent on the whims of Westminster. If the economy tanks will they cut back the civil service or clamp down on benefits ?

Also Labour will be in government at some point in the future. Ditching NI means no Tory support from the DUP ever again. And Corbyn & Co. are quite happy to watch the UK go down the drain if it means purifying labour, and the recent election shows they can get close without having to compromise like "new labour" (with a small l )

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
- Napoleon Bonaparte

Peregrinus

First Up wrote: »

Of course they won't. The discussion has been about if a hard border could be avoided without damaging our trade relations with the other 26. Some here seem to think its possible. I don't.

It is possible, if the UK fullfills the agreement it made in Phase 1.

Are you saying that it is not possible that the UK will fulfill that agreement?

First Up

Peregrinus wrote: »

First Up wrote: »

Of course they won't. The discussion has been about if a hard border could be avoided without damaging our trade relations with the other 26. Some here seem to think its possible. I don't.

It is possible, if the UK fullfills the agreement it made in Phase 1.

Are you saying that it is not possible that the UK will fulfill that agreement?

I think it would be prudent not to rely on it. The UK cabinet is deeply divided and May is far from secure.

The UK's supposed commitment to an open border on Ireland will require either the UK's full alignment with the EU or NI having different status to the rest of the UK. The Tories are split down the middle on the former and the DUP won't agree to the latter.

I'd love to think the UK will emerge from this as members of the CU but it would be silly to bet everything on it.

First Up

Really Interested wrote: »

First Up wrote: »

Eh no. I'm not saying that.

So pleas say what you are saying clearly.

I have said everything clearly but if you tell me what is confusing you, I'll give it a go.

Peregrinus

First Up wrote: »

I think it would be prudent not to rely on it. The UK cabinet is deeply divided and May is far from secure.

The UK's supposed commitment to an open border on Ireland will require either the UK's full alignment with the EU or NI having different status to the rest of the UK. The Tories are split down the middle on the former and the DUP won't agree to the latter.

I'd love to think the UK will emerge from this as members of the CU but it would be silly to bet everything on it.

Oh, I certainly wouldn't bet everything on it.

But the UK has bet everything, if not on the UK remaining in the CU, then on the UK being sufficiently closely aligned with the EU as to faciliate an open border which doesn't threaten the integrity of the single market. That's a condition to the conclusion of any Brexit deal - a condition to which the UK has already agreed. And, since the UK badly needs a Brexit deal, they'll try very, very hard to satisfy that condition.

They may fail. In that event, there will be a hard border in Ireland. That will be really bad for us. But the consequence - no Brexit deal - will be even worse for the UK, so once they've got a sane, competent government which is not beholden to the DUP talks to remedy the situation can begin.

Skedaddle

I'm not convinced the UK has a single position on anything. The problem is May really has no political mandate to decide anything as she will be undermined by the "arch brexiteers". So, the commitments made are usually fairly meaningless.

Her position also seems to have gone from relatively soft brexit to a much more hard-line one over the past few months. I'm actually not entirely sure where she stands and I don't think the EU negotiators are either.

I see nothing credible coming from the British side at all. I mean what kind of government suppresses an economic report that it doesn't agree with politically?! That's downright dangerous and good have to ask if they're suppressing any other fundamental data that could be hiding any other potential crises. It's an utterly bizzare way to run a developed, modern country where transparency is expected. I've never seen anything like it modern British history. It's straight out of the Trump playbook of trying to alter and control the facts and censoring the civil service.

Really Interested

First Up wrote: »

I have said everything clearly but if you tell me what is confusing you, I'll give it a go.

You are saying that it is being talked about in EU that an effective border will be placed between ROI and EU. In what situation could that happen?

Skedaddle

Really Interested wrote: »

You are saying that it is being talked about in EU that an effective border will be placed between ROI and EU. In what situation could that happen?

It isn't being talked about at the EU. What is being discussed are contingencies for ensuring Ireland retains smooth access to the continent for good and services in the event or the UK going completely bonkers and falling out without any kind of deal.

The EU position is that the UK and Brexit won't be allowed to cause collateral damage the EU, which includes the Republic of Ireland. If that means being rather stoney faced and inflexible to the UK, that's what's going to happen.

There's a growing frustration and general sense of shock at how bonkers the UK has turned out to be on these issues and a lot of solidarity and sympathy with where Ireland has found itself stuck.

Don't forget that Ireland's not on the periphery in terms of it being a founder member of the Eurozone and having a been a solid EU member for decades. The European angle is they don't want to see a member state being isolated by the UK and they see precisely what is going on.

It's also worth remembering that Irish political parties, notably FG, are a hell of a lot more plugged into the mainstream of centrist EU politics than anyone in the UK. They're very highly networked and far better positioned than the Tories who are essentially hostile outsiders to the EU political mainstream and seen as even inspiring the likes of Le Pen and the AfD.

Really Interested

Skedaddle wrote: »

It isn't being talked about at the EU. What is being discussed are contingencies for ensuring Ireland retains smooth access to the continent for good and services in the event or the UK going completely bonkers and falling out without any kind of deal.

The EU position is that the UK and Brexit won't be allowed to cause collateral damage the EU, which includes the Republic of Ireland. If that means being rather stoney faced and inflexible to the UK, that's what's going to happen.

There's a growing frustration and general sense of shock at how bonkers the UK has turned out to be on these issues and a lot of solidarity and sympathy with where Ireland has found itself stuck.

Don't forget that Ireland's not on the periphery in terms of it being a founder member of the Eurozone and having a been a solid EU member for decades. The European angle is they don't want to see a member state being isolated by the UK and they see precisely what is going on.

I get all that but First Up has stated there will a effective customs border between ROI and EU in certain situation. I want to know in what situation. If it is been talked about in EU his claim it is a contingencie for what?

Skedaddle

Really Interested wrote: »

I get all that but First Up has stated there will a effective customs border between ROI and EU in certain situation. I want to know in what situation. If it is been talked about in EU his claim it is a contingencie for what?

Their statement is pure speculation as there's nothing of the sort being ppropsed and as Ireland *is* the EU and that such an imposition could put us in a situation that would undermine FDI here, it's extremely unlikely.

When push comes to shove, Ireland has to protect the economic stability of the country and future prospects. The NI border issue may end up being resolved by NI itself.

I'm disappointed in how Sinn Fein hasn't launched a massive sue ball at the UK over this. They shouldn't he just leaving this to drift toward Brexit with a hard border and there's only so much Dublin or Brussels can do about it, if the UK is determined to go that route.

I'm just surprised SF haven't been to the courts to attempt to enforce the GFA.

Really Interested

Skedaddle wrote: »

Their statement is pure speculation as there's nothing of the sort being ppropsed and as Ireland *is* the EU and that such an imposition could put us in a situation that would undermine FDI here, it's extremely unlikely.

When push comes to shove, Ireland has to protect the economic stability of the country and future prospects. The NI border issue may end up being resolved by NI itself.

I'm disappointed in how Sinn Fein hasn't launched a massive sue ball at the UK over this. They shouldn't he just leaving this to drift toward Brexit with a hard border and there's only so much Dublin or Brissels can do about it, if the UK is determined to go that route.

I'm just surprised SF haven't been to the courts to attempt to enforce the GFA.

Again I agree it is speculation. But First Up has said that it is been talked about in EU as a very real possibility. I have asked to make clear in what situation it becomes a possibility.


I do not believe it is a possibility and am simply trying to get First Up to set out what situation must exist for the EU to impose a effective Customs Border between EU and ROI.

I simply asked First Up a question for clarity of his claim I really assume only he can answer that question.

ancapailldorcha

It appears that the areas who wanted Brexit the most will be hit by it proportionally. Fate, it seems is not without a sense of irony:

https://twitter.com/StigAbell/status/961288429869977601

Skedaddle

The potential 13% tariffs on car exports and Japan’s soon to be activated free trade deal with the EU doesn’t bode well for Japanese car plants in the UK. It will be potentially more cost effective to just produce them in Japan.

I’d say those stats for the NE of England could even be a bit optimistic.