Brexit discussion thread IV

Cina

joeysoap wrote: »

The CTA doesn’t seem to apply to Dublin airport. Always had to show my passport ( I believe other forms I’d ID would be sufficient, but you still have to queue up like everybody else.) Unlike USA , where if you clear in Dublin you can walk straight out of the terminal.

There are no passport checks in Dublin Airport for departures, it's the airline's who can request them at their gates, which Ryanair and others usually do. UK airports however generally will check ID upon arrival.

Arrivals back do require ID/passport checks, however.

breatheme

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Tweet with a graph of EU Nurse registrations in the UK.

500 in Jan 2016, rising to 1300 in August, then plummeting to a low level, hovering at around 50 ever since.

Brexit uncertainty and outright hostility to foreigners means the UK won't have to try hard to exclude EU citizens. They will not be able to attract even the ones they want.

In the NMCs own report, you can also see Nurses leaving. Numbers joining from the EEA are at about 10% where they were in 2015. Numbers leaving have tripled.

https://twitter.com/doctor_oxford/status/1023606157171195905

The replies to that are borderline sad, yet hilarious. "We'll just train more nurses!" "Give them better wages!" and I'm here thinking, "oh sweetie, it's the Conservatives. This won't happen."

I had a Spanish friend who was a nurse in England, who has since relocated to Germany. They paid for her German lessons and has been working there ever since.

volchitsa

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I'd say there is a similar effect in scientists, researchers, programmers and lots of other roles for professionals who are mobile, but no-one is measuring it.

Don't have the links to hand, but it's already been reported for universities which rely heavily on postdoc teachers who are often from other countries, especially the EU with its freedom of movement.

Of course more Indian and African post docs can probably be brought in instead, but I don't imagine that will please the UKIP/racist wing of Brexit supporters.
The thought of their anger does rather please me, though, I admit. We're all entitled to a little Schadenfreude.

Leroy42

breatheme wrote: »

The replies to that are borderline sad, yet hilarious. "We'll just train more nurses!" "Give them better wages!"

And of course as part of the planning for Brexit I assume all of this is already underway, because you can't simply train a nurse overnight.

Or doctor, or vet, or or or.

Brexit was always going to be a tough ask, not because it wasn't the right thing to do, but simply because of the complexity due to the interconnectivity brought about by 40+ years.

But the UK has utterly failed to plan for any of it. In the Express today is an article pointing out that some guy calling into Farage phone in making the point that they should open up new routes to reduce the congestion to Dover etc. Now, that is a good idea. But again, can't happen overnight and carries with it so many questions and areas of problems that it is almost too difficult to even make a start.

Whatever about the foreign ports being capable of handling the increased traffic, what planning has been done in relation to UK ports? Staffing, space, IT systems etc etc.

There appears to be no planning done at all. Every problem is met with a "they need it more than we do" or similar. It seems the UK has taken the view that everyone else will work it all out for them.

Even Farage and the vets, he answer was "we'll hire more". But he gave no details of how, under what visa conditions and how much more the UK would need to pay since they would be losing out the long-term career path available to people now. Once people want to settle down and get a family they are going to opt for a more stable environment, not one they will have to leave if they want to move job etc.

An Ciarraioch

Fair to say public opinion is now firmly shifting towards Remain:

https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1023845007768408064

jm08

Nody wrote: »

The Finnish border to Russia is 1340km long and runs through large tracks of forests, lakes etc. and they can control theirs just fine with a similar total population as Ireland; are you claiming Ireland with less than a quarter of length can't handle the same?

I don't see putting in a 7.5 km wide 'border zone' either side of the border which requires a permit to enter as being much of a runner between Louth and South Armagh and banning cycling across the border to prevent people smuggling.

To the person asking how long it would take to close the border; since you're going for the 200 or so relevant border crossings (i.e. once that connect to a road going further into Ireland rather than simply going back up north again) quite quickly since you can drive trucks there and can do multiple sites in parallel.

There is about 10 border crossings between Russia and Finland (and some of those are rail/canal only). Approx. 50% of the traffic goes through 2 checkpoints.

LeinsterDub

First Up wrote: »

Because you said people will have to prove they are legitimately in the UK in order to work. They won't.

I didn't. I just told you what the current Tory policy is. I didn't make any comment on the feasibility of said policy.

Leroy42

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Fair to say public opinion is now firmly shifting towards Remain:

https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1023845007768408064

Yes, but is anybody actually listening?

Brexit has been such a disaster thus far, whether through incompetence or just the very nature of Brexit is open to debate, but either way there would be very few Brexiteers which would be in a rush to give the people the chance to vote again based on the realities rather than the fairytales.

Would TM have anything to gain? She might appear to be steering a better course, but in effect she is admitting that she and her government have failed.

Infini

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Fair to say public opinion is now firmly shifting towards Remain:

https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1023845007768408064

Seem's like the public are starting to cop on to the fact that they've been sold a pup. If thing's keep going this way we might see a cancellation of this farce before they do massive damage to themselves.

lawred2

Wonder will we see some opportunistic movement from the labour strategists triggered by numbers like that?

trellheim

There are no passport checks in Dublin Airport for departures, it's the airline's who can request them at their gates, which Ryanair and others usually do. UK airports however generally will check ID upon arrival.

Arrivals back do require ID/passport checks, however.

1. Elements of the CTA are present in the immigration act 2004 - no requirement for passport

see http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2004/act/1/section/11/enacted/en/html#sec11

2. Provision exists for outgoing checks but they are not done - see same section

3. UK airports generally do not check inbound CTA flights except the odd random Border Force check

4. Ryanair only check passports because they don't want to be lumped with the return costs of an illegal immigrant

murphaph

Peregrinus wrote: »

Sure, it's not our problem. But nevertheless we may be adversely affected by it. A simple obligation to register with the UK Border Force is pretty meaningless if it its not enforced. If, for an enforcement mechansm, the UK comes to the conclusion that it has to choose between (a) rolling out a national compulsory identity card scheme, or (b) ending the CTA and imposing migration checks on travellers between the RoI and the UK, which do you think they'll choose?

I see zero chance of the UK checking passports along the land frontier however.

Silent Running

Infini wrote: »

Seem's like the public are starting to cop on to the fact that they've been sold a pup. If thing's keep going this way we might see a cancellation of this farce before they do massive damage to themselves.

Let's assume for a moment that Brexit is (or can be) cancelled. How would that work? Would GB just slot back in to the old setup, with their special rebates and opt outs? Would their attitude to the EU be improved in any way? I have my doubts. They will remain a festering sore on the backside of the EU. In fact they might even be more belligerent, having been forced to stay in what they see as a prison.

I think GB needs a break away from the EU. They need their world view to be refreshed, maybe even solve some of their internal problems. If they want to apply for membership in the future, no problem, but not on the favourable terms they now have.

In my opinion, the damage has already been done, internationally and internally. The can is irreparably damaged and there are worms everywhere. Only a spell of reality will take the toxic edge off the UK.

Spook_ie

Leroy42 wrote: »

Yes, but is anybody actually listening?

Brexit has been such a disaster thus far, whether through incompetence or just the very nature of Brexit is open to debate, but either way there would be very few Brexiteers which would be in a rush to give the people the chance to vote again based on the realities rather than the fairytales.

Would TM have anything to gain? She might appear to be steering a better course, but in effect she is admitting that she and her government have failed.

Infini wrote: »

Seem's like the public are starting to cop on to the fact that they've been sold a pup. If thing's keep going this way we might see a cancellation of this farce before they do massive damage to themselves.

lawred2 wrote: »

Wonder will we see some opportunistic movement from the labour strategists triggered by numbers like that?

What in Article 50 makes you think that UK can just "change it's mind", I've seen various reports saying they could but what factual basis does anyone have?

Sam Russell

Spook_ie wrote: »

What in Article 50 makes you think that UK can just "change it's mind", I've seen various reports saying they could but what factual basis does anyone have?

Michel Barnier for one. He has sais so on many occasions.

trellheim

think GB needs a break away from the EU. They need their world view to be refreshed, maybe even solve some of their internal problems. If they want to apply for membership in the future, no problem, but not on the favourable terms they now have.

In my opinion, the damage has already been done, internationally and internally. The can is irreparably damaged and there are worms everywhere. Only a spell of reality will take the toxic edge off the UK.

This seems tempting but re-joining requires the rejoining nation to take on both Schengen and the Euro, either of which would be a step too far

Spook_ie

Sam Russell wrote: »

Michel Barnier for one. He has sais so on many occasions.

On what basis, there is afaik no clause anywhere that says 'Ah sure, we decided to change our minds, lets all get back around the table"

breatheme

Without a GE I see no second referendum happening.

LeinsterDub

Spook_ie wrote: »

What in Article 50 makes you think that UK can just "change it's mind", I've seen various reports saying they could but what factual basis does anyone have?

The guy who wrote article 50 said the UK could withdraw it

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/10/brexit-date-is-not-irreversible-says-man-who-wrote-article-50-lord-kerr

But that's just his opinion. It could possibly end up with a legal challenge.

trellheim

On what basis, there is afaik no clause anywhere that says 'Ah sure, we decided to change our minds, lets all get back around the table"

There is nothing in Art 50 that says its irrevocable http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-european-union-and-comments/title-6-final-provisions/137-article-50.html


PS if the UK sent a note "we've decided to withdraw our notification" I'd say it'll get a fair hearing !

First Up

LeinsterDub wrote: »

First Up wrote: »

Because you said people will have to prove they are legitimately in the UK in order to work. They won't.

I didn't. I just told you what the current Tory policy is. I didn't make any comment on the feasibility of said policy.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Taytoland

breatheme wrote: »

Without a GE I see no second referendum happening.

With the position of the UK government on no customs union and the EU rejecting that, the rest of the "negotiations" are a waste of time. Prepare for no deal, the reason you see all these scare stories in the media about medicine and food etc is a last ditch attempt from the remainers in the government and civil service trying to make Chequers more popular because after that they know what is coming. If they can't gain support for it then no deal Brexit is inevitable.

flatty

I wonder if politicians pay any attention to opinion polls.
As things stand, I think it highly likely that the majority of UK voters would vote to remain. I think both the govt and opposition know this. I think that neither has any intention of another referendum, despite the full knowledge that it is against the will of the people, and to the detriment of most.
It is unfathomable.

Spook_ie

LeinsterDub wrote: »

The guy who wrote article 50 said the UK could withdraw it

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/10/brexit-date-is-not-irreversible-says-man-who-wrote-article-50-lord-kerr

But that's just his opinion. It could possibly end up with a legal challenge.

And how long would that take, there'd likely be 3 or 4 general elections in the UK before that got decided, and then you'd still need to rerun the referendum ala Lisbon/ Nice to try and get the right result.

briany

Spook_ie wrote: »

What in Article 50 makes you think that UK can just "change it's mind", I've seen various reports saying they could but what factual basis does anyone have?

Have a look at clause L in this document.



http://uk.businessinsider.com/eu-brexit-resolution-article-50-can-be-revoked-2017-3

Spook_ie

trellheim wrote: »

There is nothing in Art 50 that says its irrevocable http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-european-union-and-comments/title-6-final-provisions/137-article-50.html


PS if the UK sent a note "we've decided to withdraw our notification" I'd say it'll get a fair hearing !

But there is nothing that says it is either

Sam Russell

Spook_ie wrote: »

On what basis, there is afaik no clause anywhere that says 'Ah sure, we decided to change our minds, lets all get back around the table"

Revokeing of the Art 50 woud require the unanimous agreement of all EU27 countries on the request of the UK. It is not certain the the EU27 would agree with or without some conditions. I could see Spain could require a deal on Gibraltar. There may be other prices demanded, but the EU would welcome a withdrawal of Art 50, if only to certify its non-punitive approach to the UK.

What position the UK would be in politically after the fact might be a little difficult to say. I cannot see them being other than like an unpopular relative at a wedding.

Leroy42

Spook_ie wrote: »

On what basis, there is afaik no clause anywhere that says 'Ah sure, we decided to change our minds, lets all get back around the table"

Once they get the agreement of the 27 then pretty much anything is possible.

In terms of letting them back, well they havn't left yet, so once it is before 29 March 2019 there is technically no return.

And why would the EU look to push things like opts out etc? If the UK opts to stay, that will be a massive win for the EU. From teethering on the brink of collapse according to some, to getting the full backing from one of the worlds largest economies.

They would have kept things pretty much as they are, but have a much weaker UK to deal with. Its win win for the EU.

There is little point looking to be seen to punish the UK.

Barnier has said they can withdraw, a French minister said it, Macron has said it. Ireland would be delighted. The NI issue goes away.

Silent Running

trellheim wrote: »

This seems tempting but re-joining requires the rejoining nation to take on both Schengen and the Euro, either of which would be a step too far

Well, that's where reality comes into play. They had all the toys and threw them out of the playpen. then stormed out, or will have. If it's a case that the reality is bleak outside the EU, and their only way back in is to swallow some bitter pills, they might suddenly acquire a taste for them.

I'm not advocating punishment. Just for the UK to realise that actions have consequences. They gambled on the EU bowing to them and they lost. Now the bet has to be paid. The EU will undoubtedly feel some pain, but it will get over it and move on. The upside is shedding a roadblock to progress.

Spook_ie

briany wrote: »

Have a look at clause L in this document.



http://uk.businessinsider.com/eu-brexit-resolution-article-50-can-be-revoked-2017-3

But that's not Article 50, that's a draft document and would require ratification by the other countries