Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Brexit discussion thread IV
Comments
-
The EU has already indicated that, because of its history, location and size that they are willing to look at NI in a special way. They refuse to extend to the whole of the UK what they might consider acceptable for NI.0
-
Martin is trying to find a way to square the circle, and coming up with ideas.
The problem is, as the UK have found, is there really is no way around it. You cannot be both in and out at the same time, not with the red lines that the UK have drawn up. There are solutions available, EEA, but the UK have rejected them as they want to end FoM.
Both sides (or I guess all 3 if we include the EU) know that a hard border is the worst outcome, but nobody can work out how to avoid it given the decision that the UK has taken.
The fact that the UK gave little to no consideration or what was always going to be a very large issue during their campaign shows the thought process.
TM and the UK can continue to state they want to avoid a hard border all they want, yet the decision to vote to leave the EU, and then compound that with the red lines, means their actions are all pointing towards no other option.
So I wouldn't blame Martin, or anyone, for trying to think of a different plan.0 -
youreadthat wrote: »You guys need to stop reading the Irish Times and the Guardian, you're getting hysterical.
Brexit hasn't happened yet. Might never happen.
This is all hypothetical for now.0 -
Peregrinus wrote: »EU and UK law already apply in NI, so it would be a continuation of the status quo in that regard.
Well, EU Law currently applies in the UK generally. The problem is that the UK is considering no longer recognising the ECJ or any of the EU treaties and by the sounds of it, there are even discussions on the fringes about reintroduction of the death penalty, which would actually render membership of the Council of Europe impossible.
It would mean devolving a lot more power to Northern Ireland, in a situation where the region is incapable of even maintaining a stable government and is currently without one and seems to have no prospect and certainly seems to see no urgency about reestablishing one.
Without a functioning Northern Ireland government, who would even implement EU law, how would it be translated into local legislation or function?
The lack of a Northern Ireland Government is utterly compounding this crisis and sadly, the track record for ability to self-govern up there is abysmal.
You couldn't really have a situation where in the regular event that they're unable to agree or the local politicians throw their toys out of the pram that it would have the 'backstop' of direct rule from Westminster as that would be totally incompatible with EU law at that stage.
So, I mean what do you end up with? Something like the EU having to take over as guardian of the GFA and direct rule by the Commission and Parliament in periods of instability up there?
How would you even square the circle of Westminster MPs and legislation from Westminster operating in Northern Ireland as it could be totally incompatible with the European bodies of law, particularly if they really diverge to the degree that the Tories are quite regularly proposing.
The reality is that Northern Ireland is not a neatly self-contained US state or German Länder. Rather, it's a quasi-devolved region, with a history of tribal conflict between two groups who totally disagree on almost everything at a constitutional level and a rather unusual power-sharing local government that tries to interlock the two groups who increasingly have shown a total inability to cooperate and govern and that fits into a UK unitary state and parliamentary system.
It's a *very* strange setup by any standard.0 -
The issue is the the DUP and now the UK Government in legislation has absolutely ruled out any kind of different treatment for Northern Ireland in terms of customs arrangements. So, it's now yet another 'red line' and a non-starter, unless they change their position - which is looking very, very unlikely.
The proposal to just have Northern Ireland simultaneously in both is yet more 'cherry picking' and 'cakeism' form the EU's point of view too.
I just see no way forward on this at all as there's zero flexibility and total dogma involved.
If you think back to the Northern Ireland Peace Process, pretty much the only reason that pragmatism suddenly reigned in Northern Ireland was because New Labour took a huge majority in the House of Commons, rendering the Unionists irrelevant to the British government. We now have the total opposite and the DUP are far more extreme in their views than the UUP of the 1990s.
Am I missing something or is making NI a "Special Economic Zone" not just another name for the backstop? The only difference I can see is that the backstop would become the prefered outcome rather than a fall back position if all else fails.
The EU has clearly agreed that it is willing to make an exception like this for NI in alowing the backstop, not sure why some people here think they would about face if it was called a Special Economic Zone.0 -
Advertisement
-
That is a very good point EdgeCase.
Who exactly will NI be answerable to in terms of regulations. Technically the EU, but the UK as a whole won't recognise the jurisdiction of that court.
And without a functioning government, by default it reverts back to Westminster, so surely then they fall back out of the EU.0 -
Everybody focuses on the 60-80 headbangers in the ERG but more than 550 MPs in the HoC would never allow a no deal scenario to manifest.
There is no majority in the HoC for any particular form of Brexit: EEA, Canada, Hard Brexit or even for another Referendum and Remain.
And if they stay paralyzed like that, no-deal Hard Brexit happens next March.0 -
That is a very good point EdgeCase.
Who exactly will NI be answerable to in terms of regulations. Technically the EU, but the UK as a whole won't recognise the jurisdiction of that court.
And without a functioning government, by default it reverts back to Westminster, so surely then they fall back out of the EU.
It's a complete mess and I think you would really have to look at creating some kind of novel structure outside of the context of the British government and UK entirely to make that possible. Then you get into a direct conflict with the ideology of unionism and loyalism. So, you're back to the red lines again and so the circle continues to go around and around.0 -
Am I missing something or is making NI a "Special Economic Zone" not just another name for the backstop? The only difference I can see is that the backstop would become the prefered outcome rather than a fall back position if all else fails.
The EU has clearly agreed that it is willing to make an exception like this for NI in alowing the backstop, not sure why some people here think they would about face if it was called a Special Economic Zone.
A Special Economic Zone by definition makes it different to the rest of the UK. We are told that this will not happen.0 -
Northern Ireland has a functioning government right now; it's just not accountable to local democratic institutions, because there are none, but it functions. As for "who would even implement EU law?", well, who do you think is implementing EU law in NI right now?
The problem with the paralysis of the NI institutions is not that NI can't be governed; it plainly can, and however politically undesirable it might be there's no reason from a technical point of view why the present state of affairs can't continue indefinitely. And the proposed SEZ for NI doesn't require anything to be done in NI that isn't being done right now. What would happen if Westminster passed a law which diverged from EU requirements? Well, either Westminister could provide that the law did not extend to NI (a provision they routinely make at present) or they could pass a limited version of the European Communities Act 1972 providing that, in NI only, EU law would continue to prevail over UK law in relation to matters within the scope of the SEZ agreement between the UK and the EU.
No, the problem is not technical or practical but political. If NI continues as it currently is while GB diverges, that plainly changes the relationship between NI and GB in a way that requires some kind of democratic buy-in from people in NI, and the institutions in which that might be discussed, debated and eventually decided aren't functioning.0 -
Advertisement
-
Martin's suggestions are meaningless, much like the brexiteers he's put zero thought into them, he's just trying to imitate Leo and get good press coverage out of this fiasco0
-
EU law in Northern Ireland right now is implemented through the Northern Ireland Office which is responsible to the Northern Ireland Secretary who is a Tory minister in the UK Government.
In many (most) cases EU directives are being translated into EU law Westminster Legislation either applicable to the whole of the UK or to Northern Ireland specifically through Westminster bills. In many cases, the regional government in Northern Ireland has no authority over the areas involved as they're to do with things like external trade and so on, but in other cases there's no regional administration to implement the law, so it falls back to the UK Government to do.
It has a separate legal system and body of law, but in general the UK situation is 3 legal systems (and quasi-independent legal systems in the crown dependencies) in various degrees of integration with an overarching British legal system that is kind of hard to define as there is no clear distinction between a 'federal' and 'state' level in the UK system.
It would be far, far easier to apply a special economic zone if say Belgium left the EU and Wallonia wanted to stay in the EEA as there's a very distinct state, with properly defined structures and powers and a functioning, stable legislature to deal with.
That absolutely is not the case in Northern Ireland.
At best you would end up with some weird situation where Westminster would have to pretend to be virtually in the EEA when it was discussing matters pertaining to Northern Ireland and the UK Supreme Court would have to make judgements recognising the European courts for NI and not for the other jurisdictions in their 'systems within a system' chaos of state structures.
I hate being this pessimistic about the situation, but it is what it is.0 -
I wouldn't put it that dramatically as you need to take into account the demographics of the leave vote. There were fairly strong predictors of a leave vote, which were education, ethnicity, and age.Rhineshark wrote: »My point may be a little lost, but I suppose ultimately I wonder if the UK and to a smaller extent RoI are trapped in anglosphere island bubbles when it comes to understanding Europe fully.
I've noticed that myself with most of those in the UK I've had conversations with since the vote. Those who are graduate, young(ish), varied ethnicities etc. have much the same viewpoint as their compatriots not just in Ireland but across the rest of the EU. In fact I don't think I've actually met anyone from the UK in that group who are pro Brexit. The 'island bubble' doesn't really exist for them.
When it comes to the non graduate, white, British born older crowd though, I've found it a different story. There's a bizarre contradiction there where some of them think things are terrible in the UK, yet they are oddly nationalistic.
The sad part is that the second group is shrinking. The UK is becoming more diverse, more educated and the older crowd will pass on, yet they are leaving Brexit as a legacy for those who never wanted it in the first place.0 -
They don't have to push through anything, not pushing something through is all that is needed for no-deal Brexit to happen. It will happen not because the UK walks away, it will happen because they are too incompetent to get any deal over the line.
Letting it happen is a decision in and of itself. If the deal gets voted down in parliament, Article 50 will likely be extended alongside a GE.The issue is the the DUP and now the UK Government in legislation has absolutely ruled out any kind of different treatment for Northern Ireland in terms of customs arrangements. So, it's now yet another 'red line' and a non-starter, unless they change their position - which is looking very, very unlikely.
The proposal to just have Northern Ireland simultaneously in both is yet more 'cherry picking' and 'cakeism' form the EU's point of view too.
I just see no way forward on this at all as there's zero flexibility and total dogma involved.
If you think back to the Northern Ireland Peace Process, pretty much the only reason that pragmatism suddenly reigned in Northern Ireland was because New Labour took a huge majority in the House of Commons, rendering the Unionists irrelevant to the British government. We now have the total opposite and the DUP are far more extreme in their views than the UUP of the 1990s.
The UK will do what they are told - just like they have eventually done for every other dispute during these negotiations (sequencing of talks, £40bn divorce bill, free movement during transition etc.). Most MPs don't give a damn about NI, and nor do their constituents. It's not a sword they'd ultimately be willing to fall on.
May is going to try to sell a fudged soft Brexit as the framework for the future relationship (remember, what's needed from Article 50 is a non legally binding outline/framework to accompany the Withdrawal Agreement) while signing up to the legally binding backstop in the WA, with a promise that 'it won't need to be used'.
If the DUP ain't happy, then tough ****. If they bring the government down and a new one gets formed - they lose their bribe money and make it much easier for any other PM to sign the mandatory Irish protocol (whether they want to or not).
The odds of Corbyn as PM would be pretty good, and the DUP would be right to fear the precipitation of a United Ireland under his premiership.
They have far less power in this game than many perceive. Don't be fooled by their toxic rhetoric. The DUP are not a confident party in a strong position - they are in a weak position, caught between a rock and a hard place.0 -
Martin's suggestions are meaningless
A Special Economic Zone is not really any different in practice to the backstop, but there is nothing wrong with the backstop itself in practice, the problem is the DUP won't accept the language and optics.
So Martin rephrases it to make it sound a little different, shops it to the SDLP and everyone in the North starts talking Special Economic Zone. As crash-out Brexit, a hard border and economic Armageddon get closer, maybe folks in NI can grab onto this new phrasing and get behind it. It could help that it doesn't come from Darth Varadkar.0 -
I don't think the UK will "do what their told" to be quite honest. They are in a dogmatic frame of mind and I think we are looking at a scenario now where the full 'stiff upper lip' problem, i.e. total inability to backdown under any circumstances, has kicked in.
I honestly think we are looking at a self-harming crash out without an agreement and a few years of economic chaos and internal bickering from 2019 and then probably some kind of move towards EEA membership but maybe in about 2025.
I don't see reality kicking in without a massive crisis.
The only other thing that could change the dynamic might be a Trump-triggered global recession, causing some kind of shift / pause due to 'events'.0 -
-
Yes, but we can take that with a grain of salt. NI is already different to the rest of the UK in a whole variety of ways; that's what happens when you have separate legal jurisdictions, legislatures, etc within the one state. And the nature and scale of these differences waxes and wanes over time - it always has done - so nobody can expect a firm guarantee that there will be never be any change to the current NI/GB differences. Such a guarantee, if given, is either hyperbole or outright dishonest.A Special Economic Zone by definition makes it different to the rest of the UK. We are told that this will not happen.
Imreoir asks in post#3355 whether Martin's suggestion is any different from the backstop. I haven't seen the details of Martin's proposal, but the answer to Imreoir's question may well be no, it's not all that different. But Martin may be attempting to repackage the backstop in new language to encourage a fresh consideration, and some reflection on the advantages it could offer NI. This ties in with Barnier's call to "de-dramatise" the border issue.
Essentially, May needs some cover for reversing some of her damaging and untenable positions. So if the backstop becomes a Special Economic Zone, and is conceived of, and framed, in a way not motivated by identifying the least the UK needs to give in order to get a withdrawal agreeement, but in terms of how the UK can tweak Brexit so as to benefit NI rather than harming it (and, remember, May wants a "Brexit that benefits everybody") then SEZ status can be presented as a positive, not a grudging concession. Which is exactly the kind of shift in thinking that will enable May to minimise the damage that (she now realises) will be done by her ludicrous and irresponsible "red lines".0 -
Peregrinus : The problem is though, how do you implement any kind of setup like that without the government structures to actually carry it off? They simply don't exist due to the weird structure of the UK. You could easily do this in Germany, Belgium, even Spain due to the way the autonomous regions are devolved. The UK is actually a unitary state by definition. It just has devolved regions within that concept.
They are historical countries (or bits of historical countries in the case of NI) and they do have quite different politics, but in administrative and structural terms they're part of a single national parliamentary system and a unitary state.
There needs to be serious debate and discussion about how this could be done e.g. by creating some kind of new structure for Northern Ireland that is still complaint with the GFA and that gives both sides their national identity. It would literally have to be some kind of new democratic body. Ideally, it should have been Stormont, but... they're out of office in a sulk more than they're in.0 -
In one sense Martin is suggesting an economic advantage to NI that does not extend to the ROI.0
-
Advertisement
-
Water John wrote: »In one sense Martin is suggesting an economic advantage to NI that does not extend to the ROI.
We the EU/Ireland have been suggesting this for 2 years . For some reason they aren't interested0 -
It's not as bad as you make out. Remember, NI would be in the EEA but not in the EU, so it wouldn't be represented in the EU decision-making processes. When it came to implementing EU legislation in NI in accordance with the SEZ requirements Westminster could either do this itself with Orders-in-Council expressed to apply to NI only, or it could devolve the power to do so to the NI institutions, if and when functioning, or it could rely on a combination of Orders-in-Council and increases to devolved powers. It would be a nuisance, but not impossible. Simlarly there's no fundamantal objection for the right of access to the ECJ (or perhaps the EFTA court) being retained within the NI judicial system even after it is removed from the English and Scottish systems.EU law in Northern Ireland right now is implemented through the Northern Ireland Office which is responsible to the Northern Ireland Secretary who is a Tory minister in the UK Government.
In many (most) cases EU directives are being translated into EU law Westminster Legislation either applicable to the whole of the UK or to Northern Ireland specifically through Westminster bills. In many cases, the regional government in Northern Ireland has no authority over the areas involved as they're to do with things like external trade and so on, but in other cases there's no regional administration to implement the law, so it falls back to the UK Government to do.
It has a separate legal system and body of law, but in general the UK situation is 3 legal systems (and quasi-independent legal systems in the crown dependencies) in various degrees of integration with an overarching British legal system that is kind of hard to define as there is no clear distinction between a 'federal' and 'state' level in the UK system.
It would be far, far easier to apply a special economic zone if say Belgium left the EU and Wallonia wanted to stay in the EEA as there's a very distinct state, with properly defined structures and powers and a functioning, stable legislature to deal with.
That absolutely is not the case in Northern Ireland.
At best you would end up with some weird situation where Westminster would have to pretend to be virtually in the EEA when it was discussing matters pertaining to Northern Ireland and the UK Supreme Court would have to make judgements recognising the European courts for NI and not for the other jurisdictions in their 'systems within a system' chaos of state structures.
I hate being this pessimistic about the situation, but it is what it is.
Would it be administratively cumbersome, and involve a lot of duplication of effort? Yes, it would; SEZ's tend to do that. But, remember, the purpose of an SEZ is not administrative efficiency, but economic benefit and (usually) political advantage. If the political will were there, the administrative problems are all fairly easily soluble.0 -
Would the EU even accept such an incredibly messy administrative arrangement though?
Effectively it's like trying to put one French administrative region in the EEA while taking the rest out of the EU, yet still maintaining a single parliament and president in Paris.
You're getting into something more akin to China vs Hong Kong, only Hong Kong isn't also trying to be in the EU/EEA.
You honestly couldn't make this stuff up.
When you start to pick apart the structures of the UK, you start to realise that it's just layer upon layer of fudge all stuck together with waffle and gentleman's agreements type stuff.0 -
The EU has already said it is willing to consider special arrangements for NI. The fact that Barnier is the key point man is a tremendous plus. If he says OK then I'd say the EU would find a means of accommodating it.0
-
The optimal situation would probably have been to spin Northern Ireland out as a crown dependency and let it remain within the EU or at least the EEA, with similar status to the Isle of Man or Channel Islands, however I don't see how you can do that when it has a proven inability to self-govern.
You get a few years of positivity and sane government and then you get these long periods of lock-out and return to direct rule.
There's a huge urgency about getting the Northern Irish assembly back up and running, yet I can see nobody taking that urgency very seriously. You can't just let the whole situation drift with English priorities setting the agenda for Northern Ireland and I think that's equally applicable whether your'e a nationalist or a unionist. The NI voice is not being heard other than via the DUP which is a total distortion, even for the Unionist community. For example, where are pragmatic unionist business people being represented? Where are farmers being represented in this?! It's all about DUP dogma and a narrow constituency, largely around the NE of Northern Ireland and loyalist bits of urban areas.0 -
The appropriate bodies would be the Stormont bodies. At any time when those bodies were not functioning (like right now) then it would be done by the Secretary of State, and by Westminster, as necessary.Peregrinus : The problem is though, how do you implement any kind of setup like that without the government structures to actually carry it off? They simply don't exist due to the weird structure of the UK. You could easily do this in Germany, Belgium, even Spain due to the way the autonomous regions are devolved. The UK is actually a unitary state by definition. It just has devolved regions within that concept.
They are historical countries (or bits of historical countries in the case of NI) and they do have quite different politics, but in administrative and structural terms they're part of a single national parliamentary system and a unitary state.
There needs to be serious debate and discussion about how this could be done e.g. by creating some kind of new structure for Northern Ireland that is still complaint with the GFA and that gives both sides their national identity. It would literally have to be some kind of new democratic body. Ideally, it should have been Stormont, but... they're out of office in a sulk more than they're in.
This, after all, is what happened for years when the old Stormont was suspended, and there were no replacement institutions. EU law would be implemented in the UK by an Act of Parliament or an Order-in-Council, as appropriate, and by a parallel Order-in-Council made specially for NI. You could do pretty much the same thing this time, except you wouldn't need the implementing legislation for GB.0 -
You also can't do it, under the terms of the Belfast Agreement, without the consent of a majority in NI.The optimal situation would probably have been to spin Northern Ireland out as a crown dependency and let it remain within the EU or at least the EEA, with similar status to the Isle of Man or Channel Islands, however I don't see how you can do that when it has a proven inability to self-govern.0 -
Peregrinus wrote: »The appropriate bodies would be the Stormont bodies. At any time when those bodies were not functioning (like right now) then it would be done by the Secretary of State, and by Westminster, as necessary.
This, after all, is what happened for years when the old Stormont was suspended, and there were no replacement institutions. EU law would be implemented in the UK by an Act of Parliament or an Order-in-Council, as appropriate, and by a parallel Order-in-Council made specially for NI. You could do pretty much the same thing this time, except you wouldn't need the implementing legislation for GB.
This is the problem though. The Secretary for State is a fully political figure who is a minister within the British Government. They are not an independent body that takes over when Stormont (regularly) goes "out of service due to artistic differences". So, for example right now, could the EU actually trust a Tory minister not to just ignore EU law, or to try to snap the agreements for some narrow political agenda?
Or, could anyone trust that you wouldn't end up with some hardline Brexiteer in the office?
Let's just take a hypothetical example: you go a few years down the line and Northern Ireland is in the EEA, the DUP and SF have a fight over something totally unrelated, Stormont collapses and say Gove is Northern Ireland Secretary?
Would the EU/EEA be particularly comfortable with that?0 -
So the Secretary of State for NI would look for the UK parliament to pass EU laws in the UK for the use in only NI?
And what would happen, for example, if standards diverge? Extreme example that farmers are now allowed to use GMO feed. Farmers in the UK would produce cheaper meats for example. What does the farmer in NI do to compete? And why should a farmer, a UK citizen, not be allowed to choose to be under UK law rather than EU law?
And I think the UK see all this and that is why they are so set against it. They can foresee the problems down the line. At some point, NI will start to openly question where their future actually lies.0 -
Advertisement
-
Let's just take a hypothetical example: you go a few years down the line and Northern Ireland is in the EEA, the DUP and SF have a fight over something totally unrelated, Stormont collapses and say Gove is Northern Ireland Secretary?
I think the EU would be happy with any scheme that gets us "a few years down the line" in reasonable order.0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement