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
-
Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 92,230 Mod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 90468
Yeah no.Water John wrote: »The fact that Gove doesn't fancy a, no deal scenario, would signal to me that, it won't happen.
Grove is a backstabber, so I don't trust anything he says.
He's made noises about fishing and farming, and then made other noises and done other stuff.0 -
Bit cynical wrote: »If Ireland's position is no border or no deal and much harder border + economic consequences, then we have to accept our part if the latter occurs. We miscalculated. We did not judge the situation correctly. We gambled and lost.
What other position could we/should we have adopted? What would have been the correct judgement of the situation?0 -
The more I read about the chaos about to it with a No deal Brexit the more worried I become for us in Ireland.
http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2018/07/27/this-is-what-no-deal-brexit-actually-looks-like
And
https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/thirty-six-things-that-will-happen-if-britain-crashes-out-of-europe-with-no-deal
And
https://youtu.be/Sx4AF-3Rd44
Agreed.
If I had been a citizen based in the UK permitted to vote in the 2016 Referendum,I probably would have voted in favour of leaving the European Union based on the campaign promises and right to take control back from bureaucrats based out in Brussels. Unfortunately, it would appear that the LEAVE side never thought about how things would actually work out in reality given the chaos that has continued to dominate political life at Westminster ever since that vote with BREXIT day fast approaching next March! Large elements from within the ruling Tories (incl. DUP in Northern Ireland), British Labour & UKIP seem more concerned about gaining party political advantage rather than securing the long term prospects for their own economy in terms of jobs, trade, standard of living etc;
I understand that the UK was often a close ally of Ireland at the negotiating table in the E.U. down through the years despite the historical tensions over the North. Unless BREXIT is stopped which is impossible to call at the moment, Ireland is losing a powerful ally and one has to wonder if Ireland's own future is secure post BREXIT. For this reason, I would be very concerned over the tone and style of our current political leaders namely, Mr. Varadkar and Mr. Coveney as I'm not sure their public approach has been helpful to our friends across the water. The UK also pumped significant funds into Ireland when we were on the ropes and we should remember this was not very long ago. Yes we are entitled to have a stand point to protect our own national interests but we should bear in mind that our influence in the E.U. is very small on the periphery which will become even weaker when the UK leaves the club. We should keep all of our options open and not antagonise either the UK or EU sides with megaphone diplomacy if possible. We have never been a member of the EEC>EC>EU without the UK and it's very different from the smaller western/central European block that we originally joined back in 1973 along with UK and Denmark.
If the North/South and East/West trading arrangements between Republic of Ireland/UK cannot be sorted out without it negatively impacting us, maybe we should consider having a referendum here in the Republic of Ireland on our continued membership of the E.U. based on the then known facts once we know the terms of the British Withdrawal. Of course, it's far from an ideal situation but our influence in the E.U. is likely to diminish further anyway in the years ahead post-BREXIT. We should never forget how the ECB treated Ireland after the last crash when it refused to burn even the junior bond holders which meant an even bigger debt on the the shoulders of every man. woman & child for many years ahead. We should play both sides to get what's best going forward for Ireland. Neither Britain nor the European Union should take Ireland for granted. I wonder how Garret Fitzgerald or Charlie Haughey would have handled things if either of them were in power today?0 -
AwaitYourReply wrote: »Agreed.
If I had been a citizen based in the UK permitted to vote in the 2016 Referendum,I probably would have voted in favour of leaving the European Union based on the campaign promises and right to take control back from bureaucrats based out in Brussels. Unfortunately, it would appear that the LEAVE side never thought about how things would actually work out in reality given the chaos that has continued to dominate political life at Westminster ever since that vote with BREXIT day fast approaching next March! Large elements from within the ruling Tories (incl. DUP in Northern Ireland), British Labour & UKIP seem more concerned about gaining party political advantage rather than securing the long term prospects for their own economy in terms of jobs, trade, standard of living etc;
I understand that the UK was often a close ally of Ireland at the negotiating table in the E.U. down through the years despite the historical tensions over the North. Unless BREXIT is stopped which is impossible to call at the moment, Ireland is losing a powerful ally and one has to wonder if Ireland's own future is secure post BREXIT. For this reason, I would be very concerned over the tone and style of our current political leaders namely, Mr. Varadkar and Mr. Coveney as I'm not sure their public approach has been helpful to our friends across the water. The UK also pumped significant funds into Ireland when we were on the ropes and we should remember this was not very long ago. Yes we are entitled to have a stand point to protect our own national interests but we should bear in mind that our influence in the E.U. is very small on the periphery which will become even weaker when the UK leaves the club. We should keep all of our options open and not antagonise either the UK or EU sides with megaphone diplomacy if possible. We have never been a member of the EEC>EC>EU without the UK and it's very different from the smaller western/central European block that we originally joined back in 1973 along with UK and Denmark.
If the North/South and East/West trading arrangements between Republic of Ireland/UK cannot be sorted out without it negatively impacting us, maybe we should consider having a referendum here in the Republic of Ireland on our continued membership of the E.U. based on the then known facts once we know the terms of the British Withdrawal. Of course, it's far from an ideal situation but our influence in the E.U. is likely to diminish further anyway in the years ahead post-BREXIT. We should never forget how the ECB treated Ireland after the last crash when it refused to burn even the junior bond holders which meant an even bigger debt on the the shoulders of every man. woman & child for many years ahead. We should play both sides to get what's best going forward for Ireland. Neither Britain nor the European Union should take Ireland for granted. I wonder how Garret Fitzgerald or Charlie Haughey would have handled things if either of them were in power today?
Ireland's future is best secured within the EU. It should not have needed proving, but if there was ever any doubt, this debacle shows that the UK will happily shaft us to persue their own interests. We would be foolish to isolate ourselves and put ourselves in the position of relying on the UK. A referendum on leaving the EU, now or after Brexit, would be a pointless waste of time. Ireland's palce is at the centre of the EU, anything else would be a threat to our national interest.
I'm not sure why you see our influence in the EU being gradually deminished in the years to come. It suggests to me that you don't really understand how the EU works. Could you explain this point?0 -
Ireland's future is best secured within the EU. It should not have needed proving, but if there was ever any doubt, this debacle shows that the UK will happily shaft us to persue their own interests. We would be foolish to isolate ourselves and put ourselves in the position of relying on the UK. A referendum on leaving the EU, now or after Brexit, would be a pointless waste of time. Ireland's palce is at the centre of the EU, anything else would be a threat to our national interest.
I'm not sure why you see our influence in the EU being gradually deminished in the years to come. It suggests to me that you don't really understand how the EU works. Could you explain this point?
Not going to speak on the other contributor's behalf but there is one large concern I would have about our place in a post-Brexit EU. The UK held a considerable amount of votes in the Council of Ministers, and a lot of clout in the EU Commission. They were in general relatively kind to Ireland's economic interests and helped form a blocking minority on some proposals.
This is crucial because Ireland's business model (most specifically the tax model) is not looked upon favourably by our fellow member states. When it comes to financial services and single market harmonisation -- areas where unanimity is not required in the Council -- we will not be able to rely on our British allies who were inclined to defend Ireland's economic interests.
The big question is, now that the UK has left and there is a greater concentration of power to France and Germany, will reform be pushed through to give smaller states more blocking power?0 -
Advertisement
-
I disagree. If it comes down to a choice between:Bit cynical wrote: »I don't think a hard border without any sort infrastructure is what was proposed. But I agree with you that implementing such a system would be difficult for both sides. But it would not be a return to the sort of border that used to exist. We're much more likely to get that sort of border if there's no deal.
I think the main point is that while the UK make their choices, we also have choices. The UK have to live by the consequences of their choices and we also have to live by ours.
If Ireland's position is no border or no deal and much harder border + economic consequences, then we have to accept our part if the latter occurs. We miscalculated. We did not judge the situation correctly. We gambled and lost.
- Brexit deal which results in a hard border in Ireland; and
- crash-out Brexit which results in a hard border in Ireland,
then the rational preference for Ireland is the crash-out Brexit.
This may seem odd, since both outcomes deliver a hard border, and the crash-out Brexit also delivers further economic dislocation.
But, of course, Brexit deal with hard border gives the UK what it wants, and leaves it sitting pretty. Whereas crash-out Brexit is not a stable or acceptable situation for the UK; they will still be in desperate need of a deal with the EU, and under considerable pressure to make the compromises necessary to achieve one. And, sooner or later - at the latest, after the general election which will probably follow hard on a crash-out Brexit - they'll be back at the negotiating table. (But this time, in all likelihood, unconstrained by dependence in Parliament on the DUP.) And the EU will stick to its guns; any deal will have to be such as will result in no hard border in Ireland.0 -
ArthurDayne wrote: »Not going to speak on the other contributor's behalf but there is one large concern I would have about our place in a post-Brexit EU. The UK held a considerable amount of votes in the Council of Ministers, and a lot of clout in the EU Commission. They were in general relatively kind to Ireland's economic interests and helped form a blocking minority on some proposals.
This is crucial because Ireland's business model (most specifically the tax model) is not looked upon favourably by our fellow member states. When it comes to financial services and single market harmonisation -- areas where unanimity is not required in the Council -- we will not be able to rely on our British allies who were inclined to defend Ireland's economic interests.
The big question is, now that the UK has left and there is a greater concentration of power to France and Germany, will reform be pushed through to give smaller states more blocking power?
This topic is one that we hear again and again.
However, I am always drawn to the following article that I remember vividly reading back in 2003. At the time I was working in a MNC, amongst a team of haughty Germans:
http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/fiskal-sensation-deutschlands-konzerne-zahlen-wieder-steuern-a-257270.html
It's in German. Anyway, the German corportion tax rate was (or still is?) set at central government level, whereas it was left to the local communities to decide if any tax at all were to be levied, Germany being a federal republic.
The article in my link reveals that 2003 was the first year in many's the moon that companies in Germany paid any corporartion tax at all. The sub-headline reads that up until 2003 the central government collected more money from dog licences than from corporation tax.
Excuse my ignorance, but does anyone know what the current status is?0 -
Other way round. What the article (which dates from 2003) says is that, following a change of government and a reform of corporation tax, the take from corporation tax fell to nil in 2001 - the first time it did so since the founding of the Federal Republic (in 1949). The reasons given, according to the article, were (a) the change in the tax law, (b) an economic downturn and (c) a change in companies' distribution policies. (I don't know what the last of these refers to.This topic is one that we hear again and again.
However, I am always drawn to the following article that I remember vividly reading back in 2003. At the time I was working in a MNC, amongst a team of haughty Germans:
http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/fiskal-sensation-deutschlands-konzerne-zahlen-wieder-steuern-a-257270.html
It's in German. Anyway, the German corportion tax rate was (or still is?) set at central government level, whereas it was left to the local communities to decide if any tax at all were to be levied, Germany being a federal republic.
The article in my link reveals that 2003 was the first year in many's the moon that companies in Germany paid any corporartion tax at all. The sub-headline reads that up until 2003 the central government collected more money from dog licences than from corporation tax.
The nil return in 2001 was the lowest point. Corporation tax returns began climbing again in 2002 and by 2005 they were above the pre-tax reform levels. They wobbled again with the 2008 financial crisis and ensuing recession, though never falling to nil. In 2016, the last year I have figures for, they were at an all-time high of 62.6 billion euros.Excuse my ignorance, but does anyone know what the current status is?
By comparison with other OECD countries, Germany does get a low proportion of its tax take from corporate taxes (5% as opposed to an OECD average of 9%). They make up for this by collecting a higher-than-average proportion of revenue in personal income tax and in social security taxes (which are mostly paid by employers rather than employees).
Germany is a federal republic, but I don't think that means that local communities or provinces get to decide whether the federal corporation tax will be imposed. I'm pretty sure they just get to decide whether they will levy any corporation tax, over and above the corporation tax levied by the federal government.0 -
Well I think our interests would be better served if agreement on the border was not made a showstopper for the overall agreement. Both Ireland and the UK want to limit the impact of a border after brexit, but realistically no agreement can be made until other areas of the agreement are made clear. Once this happens, then discussion of border arrangements can be made, ideally with direct Irish participation in consultation with the EU.What other position could we/should we have adopted? What would have been the correct judgement of the situation?
With respect to Peregrinus in another post, although I believe the UK will be back negotiating with the EU, it is unlikely that they will be seeking to rejoin the customs union and this, unfortunately, would be what they would have to do, if there were to be no border infrastructure whatsoever.0 -
I disagree. Effectively, by deciding which issue you will deal with first, you are deciding which issue you regard as more important. (That's why sequencing is such a big deal, and why the UK' caving to the EU position on sequencing at the start of the talks was a signal - abundantly confirmed by events since them - the the EU would be setting the priorities in the negotations.) If you proceed by deciding non-border issues first, and then explore what border solutions are feasible within the parameters set by the decisions you have made, you're likely to find that a hard border is inevitable. And this will be because you have agreed, in effect, to subordinate the objective of keeping the border open to the objective of leaving the single market and the customs union.Bit cynical wrote: »Well I think our interests would be better served if agreement on the border was not made a showstopper for the overall agreement. Both Ireland and the UK want to limit the impact of a border after brexit, but realistically no agreement can be made until other areas of the agreement are made clear. Once this happens, then discussion of border arrangements can be made, ideally with direct Irish participation in consultation with the EU.
Whatever about the UK thinking this is a good idea, there is absolutely no reason why Ireland would think this was a good idea.
I wouldn't be so sure. Leaving the Customs Union is going to be very damaging to the UK and the Tory government have belatedly realised this and are trying to reinvent the wheel to avoid the damage with their Chequers talk of a "combined customs territory". (These efforts will not succeed.) Meanwhile the Labour Party has adopted a policy of remaining in the Customs Union and of course after a crash-out Brexit and ensuing general election the EU may find itself talking to a Labour government. I would think a customs union would be very much on the cards.Bit cynical wrote: »With respect to Peregrinus in another post, although I believe the UK will be back negotiating with the EU, it is unlikely that they will be seeking to rejoin the customs union and this, unfortunately, would be what they would have to do, if there were to be no border infrastructure whatsoever.
The other point, of course, is that rejoining the customs union isn't necessarily the only route to an open border in Ireland. Creating a special customs zone in NI also offers possibilities While that would be anathema to the DUP, we'd likely be negotiating with a government not beholden to the DUP. And opinion polls suggest that it would be quite popular with voters in NI.0 -
Advertisement
-
Customs Union does not come close to alleviating problems for the UK. Their JIT processes need the single market.
As a general note, I would like to note that the lack of planning for a leave process was evident before the referendum.0 -
Wait a minute- it was Fianna Fail's own and sole decision to bail out all bond holders - and they did so without consulting the EU or any other country. They did so in an entirely selfish manner ( thinking they could steal funds from other countries' banking systems in an "I'm alright Jack" manner).AwaitYourReply wrote: »We should never forget how the ECB treated Ireland after the last crash when it refused to burn even the junior bond holders which meant an even bigger debt on the the shoulders of every man. woman & child for many years ahead.
Even if one wanted to guarantee bond holders to ensure future liquidity, it could have been done by guaranteeing future bond holders only - with the same effect as guaranteeing all - Existing bondholders had already paid their money in and taken their risks and their bonds were stuck until their expiry date.
Furthermore on giving the guarantee, many of the original bondholders would have sold their bonds, so it was an entirely different set of people there.
The only thing the EU did was that after Ireland tried to screw and destabilise everyone else with its bank guarantee, the EU stopped Ireland from reneging on its promises and causing further instability - " you've made your bed now lie in it".
Everything else is Fianna Fail revisionism to not take responsibility for its screw ups. In particular, if there is one lesson from Brexit it is that falsely blaming the EU for the failures of national politicians should not be tolerated- it can lead to a misinformed and delusional population who do something equally stupid to Ireland.0 -
Even if all that came to pass, do you think Ireland would have more success as an economic province of post Brexit UK??ArthurDayne wrote: »Not going to speak on the other contributor's behalf but there is one large concern I would have about our place in a post-Brexit EU. The UK held a considerable amount of votes in the Council of Ministers, and a lot of clout in the EU Commission. They were in general relatively kind to Ireland's economic interests and helped form a blocking minority on some proposals.
This is crucial because Ireland's business model (most specifically the tax model) is not looked upon favourably by our fellow member states. When it comes to financial services and single market harmonisation -- areas where unanimity is not required in the Council -- we will not be able to rely on our British allies who were inclined to defend Ireland's economic interests.
The big question is, now that the UK has left and there is a greater concentration of power to France and Germany, will reform be pushed through to give smaller states more blocking power?0 -
In the EU we have multiple Democratic ways of affecting decisions from our mep's to veto from our elected government.
If we leave and tie ourselves to the UK the only way to affect decision is to ask nicely. We will have already cut ties with our main trading partner and so will be unable to face them down.
As for the soft border or no deal. The EU has taken that position for Ireland's benefit. There is little else we want from this if we don't get that. Maybe a specific deal for agricultural products but even then the UK is unlikely to accept agricultural rules if they don't accept the rest.
The UK'S only proposal on the border so far is to simply use unobtanium style technology. If any of them thought it was a reasonable suggestion they would have organised a feasibility study by now. It is 8 months away and they need to do a feasibility study, put it up for tenure, wait for submissions, pick a submission, the company needs to hire people to do the work (they won't want to ship the entire workforce over for it), deal with weather delays, things going wrong and inevitable public backlash. It is not happening and they absolutely know they are lying about it.0 -
Essentially an empty promise or an utter lie if you wish, the statement is going against the UK's "constitution". The Parliament is sovereign, not the people. The European Union Referendum Act doesn't mention any obligation for the Parliament to implement the result. So this Cameron's statement is a political promise but has no constitutional, legal basis.brickster69 wrote: »"And ultimately it will be the judgment of the British people in the referendum that I promised and that I will deliver. You will have to judge what is best for you and your family, for your children and grandchildren, for our country, for our future. It will be your decision whether to remain in the EU on the basis of the reforms we secure, or whether we leave. Your decision. Nobody else’s. Not politicians’. Not Parliament’s. Not lobby groups’. Not mine. Just you. You, the British people, will decide. At that moment, you will hold this country’s destiny in your hands.
This is a huge decision for our country, perhaps the biggest we will make in our lifetimes. And it will be the final decision. So to those who suggest that a decision in the referendum to leave… …would merely produce another stronger renegotiation and then a second referendum in which Britain would stay… …I say think again. The renegotiation is happening right now. And the referendum that follows will be a once in a generation choice. An in or out referendum. When the British people speak, their voice will be respected – not ignored. If we vote to leave, then we will leave. There will not be another renegotiation and another referendum."
David Cameron, 20150 -
Given how much attention the UK is paying to the wishes, interests and concerns of, say, Scotland in relation to Brexit, why would we imagine that, if we were to join them in this lunacy. they would pay any attention at all to us?Even if all that came to pass, do you think Ireland would have more success as an economic province of post Brexit UK??0 -
AwaitYourReply wrote: »Agreed.
I understand that the UK was often a close ally of Ireland at the negotiating table in the E.U. down through the years despite the historical tensions over the North. Unless BREXIT is stopped which is impossible to call at the moment, Ireland is losing a powerful ally and one has to wonder if Ireland's own future is secure post BREXIT.
I can't quote all the traditional alliances, but the UK and RoI tended to be part of a small group of countries with similar aims. Netherlands is part of that group too. It's not quite a case of us against the world.
Honestly not sure I care whether Ireland's actually very measured talk is helpful to the Brexit negotiators in the UK. Varadkar and Coveney have not been particularly less measured than Kenny was. There is nothing wrong with looking out for our own interests rather than looking after Britain's interests at our own expense. An approach of ah sure lads we'll sort the border so you can be free of your obligations would not have been the best approach to take with the entirely feckless UK government here.For this reason, I would be very concerned over the tone and style of our current political leaders namely, Mr. Varadkar and Mr. Coveney as I'm not sure their public approach has been helpful to our friends across the water.
So? They gave us a bilateral loan, as did several other countries, the IMF and the European...hm, forgotten the name now. A pan-EU loans scheme. The other countries (Denmark and Sweden) let us pay them off early, and refinance the cheaper big ones (IMF and the EU one). The UK refused as the interest was more valuable. Make of that what you will. They had every right to, but it does shade the "goodness of their hearts to Ireland" message. We'd have given them a loan in the other direction to stabilise one of our biggest markets.The UK also pumped significant funds into Ireland when we were on the ropes and we should remember this was not very long ago.Yes we are entitled to have a stand point to protect our own national interests but we should bear in mind that our influence in the E.U. is very small on the periphery which will become even weaker when the UK leaves the club. We should keep all of our options open and not antagonise either the UK or EU sides with megaphone diplomacy if possible. We have never been a member of the EEC>EC>EU without the UK and it's very different from the smaller western/central European block that we originally joined back in 1973 along with UK and Denmark.
Yes, we are a peripheral country, and need to choose whether the UK or Europe is more important. I would prefer a smaller but pretty equitable place in the EU over a subservient place to the UK - and make no mistake about the rhetoric from the UK, it would be subservient.If the North/South and East/West trading arrangements between Republic of Ireland/UK cannot be sorted out without it negatively impacting us, maybe we should consider having a referendum here in the Republic of Ireland on our continued membership of the E.U. based on the then known facts once we know the terms of the British Withdrawal. Of course, it's far from an ideal situation but our influence in the E.U. is likely to diminish further anyway in the years ahead post-BREXIT. We should never forget how the ECB treated Ireland after the last crash when it refused to burn even the junior bond holders which meant an even bigger debt on the the shoulders of every man. woman & child for many years ahead. We should play both sides to get what's best going forward for Ireland. Neither Britain nor the European Union should take Ireland for granted. I wonder how Garret Fitzgerald or Charlie Haughey would have handled things if either of them were in power today?
Someone else already corrected you regarding FF and the bondholders, so I'll skip that.
Leaving the EU to make the border easier for the UK would be beyond mad. We would lose most of our trade and be in a rubbishing position to regain it - much as the UK will find out only more so. We would have no choice other than to try rude the coat tails of the larger economy next door and that is not a ship to tie your lifeboat to.
Also, every indication so far is that the UK is happy to throw bits of itself under the bus to get what it thinks it wants. It would and does have no compunction about throwing Ireland under anything going to get even an inch closer to having the EU agree to cake.
I would certainly not vote to remove our slice of EU cake and present it to the UK.
We're unlucky geographically here. But any country has to accept that it's nearest neighbour may lose its marbles at some point and your best bet is to have other countries to work with at that point, not join the basket case because we can't imagine being without it.
Ireland is better off having its own rightful seat at the larger table with both rights and responsibilities than hovering around the UKs small and alone table like a desperate suitor when the UK is in a mode of demanding rights at the expense of others and renaging on responsibilities as soon as it agrees them.0 -
The more I read about the chaos about to it with a No deal Brexit the more worried I become for us in Ireland.
http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2018/07/27/this-is-what-no-deal-brexit-actually-looks-like
And
https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/thirty-six-things-that-will-happen-if-britain-crashes-out-of-europe-with-no-deal
And
https://youtu.be/Sx4AF-3Rd44
That's a great article from prospect.
Usual high standard as well for Dunt.
He ended it with this great paragraph:
No matter how soothingly they suggest it, this is not something any rational person would want. The fact we are even talking about it suggests there is something deeply wrong with us.0 -
Anyone remotely contemplating Ireland leaving the EU simply doesn't understand the impact it would have. How can people not see that Ireland would have problems just as epically difficult as the UK if it tried to withdraw too?
For example, the UK as a country of more than 60 million is really going to struggle to replicate all of the regulatory bodies that are currently implemented at EU level. Why would Ireland find it any easier to do the same?
If the UK, a medium to largish country, stuggles to get FTAs on the global stage, what on earth do these people think Ireland's leverage would be in a similar position?
Never mind the impact on FDI and throwing away our advantages as a gateway to the EU for American multinationals.
The benefits of EU membership have become so normal and routine, and invisible, that some posters seem to have developed the same "Brexit Blindness" that is affecting so many in the UK.0 -
There was an old episode of Gogglebox shown a few months back, that happened to be the one in the lead up to the referendum. They were showing the "cast" (?) referendum material and their commentary was perfectly prescient. You'd almost think, like Reeling in the Years it had been edited to be more retrospective.As a general note, I would like to note that the lack of planning for a leave process was evident before the referendum.
"Nobody has said what it really means to Leave", "Do they have even have a plan for leaving?", "It'll take forever to negotiate our way out", etc etc. Aside from one person who said something along the lines of, "It won't make that much of a difference", the rest of them seemed to understand - like you say - that the quagmire the UK find themselves now in, was completely predictable and avoidable, and clear to the UK population, well before the referendum.
There is no doubt a small proportion of the population for whom Ireland leaving the EU would see their business improve and their income skyrocket. To hell with the rest of the economy, they'd like to improve their personal wealth by having a smaller captive market and not compete with a whole continent.Anyone remotely contemplating Ireland leaving the EU simply doesn't understand the impact it would have. How can people not see that Ireland would have problems just as epically difficult as the UK if it tried to withdraw too?
Everyone else is either non-Irish and doesn't get it, or is just completely off the rails and would rather see an isolated Ireland with a 30% unemployment rate, than a prosperous one inside the EU.0 -
Advertisement
-
Bit cynical wrote: »With respect to Peregrinus in another post, although I believe the UK will be back negotiating with the EU, it is unlikely that they will be seeking to rejoin the customs union and this, unfortunately, would be what they would have to do, if there were to be no border infrastructure whatsoever.
No, they don't have to join the CU. In fact, the White Paper fudge was rejected by the EU partly because it applies to the whole UK - the EU prefers to treat the UK as a 3rd country like Canada, and NI as a special case.
So when the UK come back to the table to negotiate a Canada type free trade deal, item 1) on the agenda will be No Border, item 2) will be EU citizens rights in the UK, and item 3) will be that 40 billion they owe.0 -
I don't think it's a risk you need to worry too much about. An opinion poll last year showed that just 11% favoured leaving the EU. Earlier this year Nigel Farage visited Ireland, spoke to the media and addressed a public meeting to promote the idea of "Irexit", after which a repeat of the poll, by the same polling company, showed that support for leaving had fallen to 7%. Mr Farage hasn't been back since.There is no doubt a small proportion of the population for whom Ireland leaving the EU would see their business improve and their income skyrocket. To hell with the rest of the economy, they'd like to improve their personal wealth by having a smaller captive market and not compete with a whole continent.
Everyone else is either non-Irish and doesn't get it, or is just completely off the rails and would rather see an isolated Ireland with a 30% unemployment rate, than a prosperous one inside the EU.0 -
Bit cynical wrote: »Well I think our interests would be better served if agreement on the border was not made a showstopper for the overall agreement. Both Ireland and the UK want to limit the impact of a border after brexit, but realistically no agreement can be made until other areas of the agreement are made clear. Once this happens, then discussion of border arrangements can be made, ideally with direct Irish participation in consultation with the EU.
With respect to Peregrinus in another post, although I believe the UK will be back negotiating with the EU, it is unlikely that they will be seeking to rejoin the customs union and this, unfortunately, would be what they would have to do, if there were to be no border infrastructure whatsoever.
That would leave the door open to a deal which requires border infastructure, which is unacceptable, and would also allow the border issue to be used as leverage by the UK in trade talks.
Preventing the need for border infastructure does not rely on the UK joining the Customs Union, it merely requires that there be a backstop for NI. The constant insistance that a backstop is impossible or an unrealistic demand is clearly nonsense, the UK has already agreed to a backstop. If they don't abide by there their commitments, then there can be no agreement.0 -
Peregrinus wrote: »I don't think it's a risk you need to worry too much about. An opinion poll last year showed that just 11% favoured leaving the EU. Earlier this year Nigel Farage visited Ireland, spoke to the media and addressed a public meeting to promote the idea of "Irexit", after which a repeat of the poll, by the same polling company, showed that support for leaving had fallen to 7%. Mr Farage hasn't been back since.
There was some speculation at the time of the Brexit referendum that anti-EU sentiment would increase in other EU countries possibly resulting in other countries leaving the EU.
Ironically, I think that Britain has done the EU project a great service in providing a real-life example of the economic chaos that can occur when a country exits an economically advantageous trading block. It has also provided evidence for the EU that it must avoid trying to go too far down the road of political union, thereby giving oxygen to the uber-nationalists in the member states.
Brexit may yet turn out to be the best thing that has ever happened to the EU.0 -
That would leave the door open to a deal which requires border infastructure, which is unacceptable, and would also allow the border issue to be used as leverage by the UK in trade talks.
Preventing the need for border infastructure does not rely on the UK joining the Customs Union, it merely requires that there be a backstop for NI. The constant insistance that a backstop is impossible or an unrealistic demand is clearly nonsense, the UK has already agreed to a backstop. If they don't abide by there their commitments, then there can be no agreement.
Maybe there should be a referendum held only in NI, to see if they would rather remain in the CU/SM or out with the UK. At this point it might be the only thing that would make the DUP budge.0 -
Maybe there should be a referendum held only in NI, to see if they would rather remain in the CU/SM or out with the UK. At this point it might be the only thing that would make the DUP budge.
That should be our position here. Let the people decide.
But that would be charactherised as meddling by the DUP because they know what the result would be.
I'm sure May would be all for it because it sorts one issue for her0 -
-
kunst nugget wrote: »That would effectively be a border poll so that would never happen.
It would also mean Scottish Independence, and the Welsh would argue for special status. London, too.0 -
It's not a border poll. The paradox is if NI accepted the EU proposal it would solidify NI's position in its present political status as part of the Union.0
-
Advertisement
-
The EU isn't offering a similar deal for Wales or London. They've made it very clear that it's for NI only, on account of particular considerations that relate only to NI.Zubeneschamali wrote: »It would also mean Scottish Independence, and the Welsh would argue for special status. London, too.
What about Scotland? Well, the EU is also not offering a similar deal for Scotland. But the Scots will be conscious that if they do have a second Indyref and leave the UK, they can (re)join the EU. And the harder and crashier the Brexit, the more that will look to the Scots like a quite good idea. But all this is true regardless of what happens in NI.0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement