Brexit discussion thread IV

Capt'n Midnight

What was that about not being competent enough to pour sand out a shoe if the instructions were written on the bottom of one ?

There is no good news for the UK public here. Rolling back on the divorce bill and pledges to NI won't help them make trade deals with the EU or anyone else later on.

A lot of news hidden in an article about mobile phone roaming charges.

Free mobile phone roaming 'not guaranteed' with a no-deal Brexit

Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab said the government would try to force firms to limit charges but he could not give a "cast iron guarantee" on the issue.

...

People applying for a new passport after Brexit will continue to get burgundy passports for a while - although they will not say "European Union" on the front cover
...

The UK would "recognise our strict legal obligations" but that the amount paid would be "significantly, substantially lower" than the £39bn agreed with the EU.

...

He also said there must be a "shift across the board in the EU's approach" on the issue of Northern Ireland: "They will have to meet us halfway... if they meet the ambition, the pragmatism we've shown through our White Paper proposals then I'm confident we can get a good deal for this country, but also for the EU."

...

Business leaders have repeatedly warned about the consequences of leaving the EU without a deal, with the CBI saying the UK would face tariffs on 90% of its EU exports and a number of new regulatory hurdles.

...

The Road Haulage Association has warned it will take "an average of about 45 minutes to process one truck on both sides of the channel" if customs checks are put in place.

"If that happens then the queues of HGVs in Kent will make the jams seen in the summer of 2015 appear as little more than waiting for the traffic lights to change," it adds.

Blue passports should be available in late 2019. As they are being printed by a French company they may not be affected by the usual UK overruns.

Water John

Well Barnier is not getting fresh instructions. Another waste of time by the UK.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/13/eu-leaders-will-not-give-michel-barnier-new-brexit-instructions

Cookie_Monster

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Residents of UK, including residents of NI who hold a UK driving licence will need to apply for an International Driving Licence in addition to their UK Driving Licence if they wish to drive in the EU (including driving south of the border) after a no-deal Brexit. People who hold a Driving Licence from an EU member state will continue to be allowed to drive in the UK without needing an International Driving Licence. This is according to the preparedness notice on Driving in the EU if there's no Brexit deal, issued by the British Government today. This notice states that should an EU national move to the UK, their driving licence will continue to be recognised for up to three years after they move to the UK.

One wonders if we will see a spate of people from NI applying to exchange their UK Driving Licence for an Irish Driving Licience as this would allow them to drive in the UK and the EU after a No-Deal Brexit?

Aren't intl licences only required for when the language of the country you are in is different to that of your licence? Like that I can drive in NZ on an irish licence no problem, but if I had a Chinese one I'd need the international version...

Imreoir2

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Aren't intl licences only required for when the language of the country you are in is different to that of your licence? Like that I can drive in NZ on an irish licence no problem, but if I had a Chinese one I'd need the international version...

No, You can use your domestic licence in another country if an agreement exists with that country to recognise your licence as valid (EU). Otherwise you need an international licence unless the country in question decided to waive the requirement for an international drivers licence, as New Zealand has for Licences in English from other countries.

Recognising an Irish, Canadian etc licence as valid without the need for an international drivers licence is a NZ policy, not an international practice. We don't reciprocate, if you have an NZ licence, you also need an international drivers licence to drive here.

Capt'n Midnight

How to prepare if the UK leaves the EU with no deal
From : Department for Exiting the European Union

Too much to wade through now.

Here's an example of Workers Rights that come via the EU and could in theory be rolled back.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/workplace-rights-if-theres-no-brexit-deal/workplace-rights-if-theres-no-brexit-deal

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/workplace-rights-if-theres-no-brexit-deal/workplace-rights-if-theres-no-brexit-deal

The workplace rights and protections covered in this notice come from EU law and include the following:

the Working Time Regulations, which include provisions for annual leave, holiday pay and rest breaks
family leave entitlements, including maternity and parental leave
certain requirements to protect the health and safety of workers
legislation to prevent and remedy discrimination and harassment based on sex, age, disability, sexual orientation, religion or belief, and race or ethnic origin in the workplace, and any resulting victimisation
the TUPE regulations, protecting workers’ rights in certain situations when there is a transfer of business or contracts from one organisation to another
protections for agency workers and workers posted to the UK from EU states
legislation to cover employment protection of part-time, fixed-term and young workers; information and consultation rights for workers, including for collective redundancies
legislation covering insolvency referred to in the Employment Rights Act 1996 and Pension Schemes Act 1993, administering redundancy related payments to employees in case of insolvency. The legislation that applies in Northern Ireland is the Employment Rights (Northern Ireland) Order 1996 and the Pension Schemes (Northern Ireland) Act 1993

.

prawnsambo

brickster69 wrote: »

[font=arial, sans-serif]International Driving Permits [/font][font=arial, sans-serif]cost[/font][font=arial, sans-serif] £5.50 / year and you can get them in any Post Office.[/font]

Getting insurance will prove trickier and a lot more expensive.

Peregrinus

Rhineshark wrote: »

True to the above and fair enough regarding how many people live near the border (would you know what it tends to be like in the English side in terms of pop density?), but I would raise that there hasn't been a border there in generations. If people managed to build straddling the border over the past few decades in Ireland, I would be rather surprised if they've managed to keep it delineated in Britain over centuries.

It's a much more "natural" border than the Irish border, and of course it has been around for a lot longer. It became the border precisely because it ran mostly through sparsely populated areas of poor land. Most people living south of those areas had their trade, social, etc connections with places still further south, and vice versa for those living to the north. And this is why, as English and Scottish national identities emerged, those living to the south came to see themselves as part of the English community/nation, while those living to the north saw themselves as Scots.

At the east and west ends the border mostly runs along rivers - the Tweed and the Esk respectively - and to the extent that it does so it's not straddled by farms or buildings, obviously. In the inland sections it mostly runs through uplands, which are sparsely settled. Much of them are now national parks. It's probably crossed more often by sheep than by people.

Having said that, there are points where the border does intersect with settlement. At the east end, a few miles from the sea, the border departs from the River Tweed in order to take the whole of Berwick-upon-Tweed into England. The border runs through agricultural land a few kilometres north of Berwick (pop: 12,000) and bisects a lorry park on the A1.

At the east end, the border runs along the River Esk and so doesn't bisect properties or buildings, but it lies only about 17 km north of Carlisle (pop. 70,000), and I think there would be some economic dislocation there.

Infini

Water John wrote: »

Well Barnier is not getting fresh instructions. Another waste of time by the UK.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/13/eu-leaders-will-not-give-michel-barnier-new-brexit-instructions

Im pretty sure that barring a massive climbdown by the UK were looking at Hard Brexit as a certainty in 8 weeks. Theres no getting around the fact the UK is paralysed by idiots over there and they're just stringing everyone along at this point.

Peregrinus

Infini wrote: »

Im pretty sure that barring a massive climbdown by the UK were looking at Hard Brexit as a certainty in 8 weeks. Theres no getting around the fact the UK is paralysed by idiots over there and they're just stringing everyone along at this point.

The Tory party conference winds up on 3 October. There'll be no movement before then. This creates the appearance of paralysis.

The appearance may also be the reality, of course, but it may not. If there is going to be any shifting on HMG's part it will happen in October. (Or, at least, we won't get to hear of it until October). So writing things off in September may be premature.

Rhineshark

Peregrinus wrote: »

It's a much more "natural" border than the Irish border, and of course it has been around for a lot longer. It became the border precisely because it ran mostly through sparsely populated areas of poor land. Most people living south of those areas had their trade, social, etc connections with places still further south, and vice versa for those living to the north. And this is why, as English and Scottish national identities emerged, those living to the south came to see themselves as part of the English community/nation, while those living to the north saw themselves as Scots.

At the east and west ends the border mostly runs along rivers - the Tweed and the Esk respectively - and to the extent that it does so it's not straddled by farms or buildings, obviously. In the inland sections it mostly runs through uplands, which are sparsely settled. Much of them are now national parks. It's probably crossed more often by sheep than by people.

Having said that, there are points where the border does intersect with settlement. At the east end, a few miles from the sea, the border departs from the River Tweed in order to take the whole of Berwick-upon-Tweed into England. The border runs through agricultural land a few kilometres north of Berwick (pop: 12,000) and bisects a lorry park on the A1.

At the east end, the border runs along the River Esk and so doesn't bisect properties or buildings, but it lies only about 17 km north of Carlisle (pop. 70,000), and I think there would be some economic dislocation there.

Ah gotcha, okay, that is more straightforward than the Irish border!

Maybe it's just my gut instinct (as reliable as that may not be!) thinking that the folks gung ho* for an independent Scotland don't entirely realise what a massive change it would be and the complexities of an international land border as they've (Britain) not had to deal with one on their island in centuries. I saw very little discussed of the practicalities during the first ref. Eeh.

Points accepted though. And no doubt it could be managed if it had to be.

How odd it would be if this whole stupid period in UK politics resulted in reuniting Ireland and a border cutting the north of Britain off from the rest instead.

*Not a dig at posters, as people posting on forums about it tend to want to go into the detail, rather a comment on the national debates at the time.

Peregrinus

Rhineshark wrote: »

Ah gotcha, okay, that is more straightforward than the Irish border!

Maybe it's just my gut instinct (as reliable as that may not be!) thinking that the folks gung ho* for an independent Scotland don't entirely realise what a massive change it would be and the complexities of an international land border as they've (Britain) not had to deal with one on their island in centuries. I saw very little discussed of the practicalities during the first ref. Eeh.

There is already an English-Scottish border, in the sense of a line that demarcates territories where different laws apply, where different courts and different legislatures have jurisdiction, where different authorities operate and even, to some extent, where different taxes apply. This has always been the case, but it has become more the case since Scottish devolution.

But it isn't a customs border, or a signficant regulatory border or (of course) a migration border.

And, when the Scottish indyref was held, the UK was in the EU and Scotland aimed to be, so even if the referendum had been passed, the border wasn't set to become a customs, regulatory or migration border (or only marginally more so that it already was).

I actually think that the Scottish indyref was a pretty good example of how a referendum should be conducted (in marked contrast to the Brexit referendum). There was a concrete and detailed plan for what an independent Scotland should aim to be like, and for how it would transition from UK membership to that new state. You might agree or disagree either about the objectives or that plan or about its feasability, but at least it was there, and you could vote for or against it. There was nothing like that in the Brexit referendum. There still isn't, if we're honest.

I agree that if the UK leave the EU and as a result (or partly as a result) Scotland then leaves the EU, this does raise issues about how people will be affected by what will be a regulatory, customs, etc border. Those issues weren't discussed in the Indyref - not through oversight but because in the context of the Indyref they didn't arise.

They would arise in the new scenario and, I agree, they are not trivial issues. But they are also not a mirror of the issues raised in relation to the Irish border. Scotland is a different country, with its own circumstances, issues and priorities.

Rhineshark wrote: »

How odd it would be if this whole stupid period in UK politics resulted in reuniting Ireland and a border cutting the north of Britain off from the rest instead.

It would be weirdly ironic, but it would just underline (a) how misconceived, and (b) how badly-planned and ill-thought-through, the whole Brexit project has been from the very beginning.

Zubeneschamali

Infini wrote: »

Im pretty sure that barring a massive climbdown by the UK were looking at Hard Brexit as a certainty in 8 weeks.

Yes, but given that a Hard Brexit would be an unprecedented disaster for the Government, I fully expect them to fold at the very last minute.

Infini

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Yes, but given that a Hard Brexit would be an unprecedented disaster for the Government, I fully expect them to fold at the very last minute.

Problem is there doesnt seem to be any effective leadership to do that. Theyre so divided they could crash hard by default.

LeinsterDub

EXCLUSIVE: Emails released by UK parliamentary standards watchdog reveal a ‘second’ bank account held by the powerful ERG group of Tory MPs, as they pressure May to abandon Chequers.

[URL] https://www.opendemocracy.net/uk/brexitinc/james-cusick-jenna-corderoy-peter-geoghegan/parliament-watchdog-probes-rees-mogg-s-hard[/url]

Rumours of more dark money on the hard Brexit side as James O'Brien would say I'm shocked not surprised

Sam Russell

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Yes, but given that a Hard Brexit would be an unprecedented disaster for the Government, I fully expect them to fold at the very last minute.

All they have to do is agree to have an inspection border in the Irish sea, and agree that NI will get what it voted for - remain in the SM and CU as far as it affects NI commerce and agriculture.

No biggie.

brickster69

prawnsambo wrote: »

brickster69 wrote: »

[font=arial, sans-serif]International Driving Permits [/font][font=arial, sans-serif]cost[/font][font=arial, sans-serif] £5.50 / year and you can get them in any Post Office.[/font]

Getting insurance will prove trickier and a lot more expensive.

Sorry to upset you.
https://www.abi.org.uk/news/news-articles/2018/05/drivers-get-the-green-light-for-hassle-free-post-brexit-driving-in-the-eu/

Zubeneschamali

Sam Russell wrote: »

All they have to do is agree to have an inspection border in the Irish sea, and agree that NI will get what it voted for - remain in the SM and CU as far as it affects NI commerce and agriculture.

Yes - but the DUP could bring the government down over that, so May won't do it until the last possible second.

That is what it is really all about: Not Europe, not the UK, no anyone's economic interest - the last 2 years of chaos in Westminster have all been entirely about keeping May in #10 as long as possible, measured in days. She thinks each extra day is worth risking economic ruin for the UK or she would cave right now.

Here is the historical record of PMs by length of tenure. (starting at #32 Callaghan). May needs just 15 more days to move up one place, 24 to move up two.

32 James Callaghan 3 years, 29 days Labour 1976
33 Neville Chamberlain 2 years, 348 days Conservative 1937
34 The Duke of Wellington 2 years, 320 days Tory 1828
35 Gordon Brown 2 years, 319 days Labour 2007
36 Spencer Perceval 2 years, 221 days Tory (Pittite) 1809
37 Henry Campbell-Bannerman 2 years, 122 days Liberal 1905
38 George Grenville 2 years, 85 days Whig (Grenvillite) 1763
39 The Earl of Chatham 2 years, 76 days Whig (Chathamite) 1766
40 Theresa May 2 years, 61 days (Incumbent) Conservative 2016

FrancieBrady

Sam Russell wrote: »

All they have to do is agree to have an inspection border in the Irish sea, and agree that NI will get what it voted for - remain in the SM and CU as far as it affects NI commerce and agriculture.

No biggie.

I understand the Unionist argument that it was a 'UK' wide referendum and the UK needs to act on the result, and leave as a whole, not cherrypick the areas that said yes or no.

The Unionists have a decision to make here, cause the UK to crash out without a deal, or to accommodate a deal that will benefit the whole UK by accepting a border in the Irish sea.
They will have to be forced to so this or willingly accept the compromise. It is in their gift really.

First Up

FrancieBrady wrote:

The Unionists have a decision to make here, cause the UK to crash out without a deal, or to accommodate a deal that will benefit the whole UK by accepting a border in the Irish sea. They will have to be forced to so this or willingly accept the compromise. It is in their gift really.

That looks to be the only workable solution but I can see problems getting it through Westminster. The DUP will oppose it of course but so will a fair few Tories so it will need Labour and Lib Dem support. It will be interesting to see how the DUP sees its future.

It won't be only Brexit issue to split parties so we can expect the Whips to have a busy time ahead.

bilston

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Sam Russell wrote: »

All they have to do is agree to have an inspection border in the Irish sea, and agree that NI will get what it voted for - remain in the SM and CU as far as it affects NI commerce and agriculture.

No biggie.

I understand the Unionist argument that it was a 'UK' wide referendum and the UK needs to act on the result, and leave as a whole, not cherrypick the areas that said yes or no.

The Unionists have a decision to make here, cause the UK to crash out without a deal, or to accommodate a deal that will benefit the whole UK by accepting a border in the Irish sea.
They will have to be forced to so this or willingly accept the compromise. It is in their gift really.

The choice the DUP may face is accept the Irish Sea border and prop up the Tory govt or oppose the Irish Sea border oversee the collapse the govt and see Jeremy Corbyn potentially become PM.

Either way it's a disaster for Unionism.

They helped create the mess by bizarrely supporting Brexit without giving one single argument as to how it would benefit the people of Northern Ireland. They are gangsters and as a Unionist myself I abhor the lot of them. They have done more to destroy the Union than SF ever managed in a much shorter period of time.

Pre Brexit there was basically no propsect of a United Ireland in the next 50 years. Post Brexit (or at least post vote) I'd say it could happen before 2030. The muppets in the DUP have only themselves to blame.

I still don't understand why there isn't a bigger outcry as to why the DUP were taking out adverts in the Metro supporting Brexit (what has a London commuter paper got to do with the DUP) or why (and how) they spent almost half a million quid on the Brexit campaign. They spent £20,000 on the last Assembly election (albeit it was a bit of a snap vote, but still the contrast is too big to be ignored).

The reality is the DUP have been used and soon they will be cast aside to ensure the Brexiteers get what they want.

LeinsterDub

brickster69 wrote: »

Sorry to upset you.
https://www.abi.org.uk/news/news-articles/2018/05/drivers-get-the-green-light-for-hassle-free-post-brexit-driving-in-the-eu/

UK drivers and hauliers should not have to apply or pay for ‘Green Card’ documentation from insurers when they travel in an EU member state after Brexit, the Department for Transport has confirmed in a letter to the ABI

Litteraly the first line. 'Should not' not 'will not' confirmed by the DoT who've not done anything to make the should a will

Sam Russell

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Litteraly the first line. 'Should not' not 'will not' confirmed by the DoT who've not done anything to make the should a will

Also, the insurance requirement system post Brexit is subject to EU Commission approval, which will be part of a 'deal' or 'no deal' scenario.

No deal means no deal. It is not even certain that a Green Card system would be allowed to operate post Brexit.

Leroy42

Sam Russell wrote: »

No deal means no deal. It is not even certain that a Green Card system would be allowed to operate post Brexit.

It goes back to the misunderstanding of what a no deal actually means.

As was highlighted by Gove's letter to the 27 remaining members regarding transport, the UK believe that a NO deal only relates to the Withdrawal agreement, the NI Border mainly and they get to keep the 39bn (although not all and they won't say how much they will pay regardless of a deal/no deal).

The impact statements all are based on the premise that deals will be done, mini side deals. They are not preparing for a No Deal as most of us would understand it, they think they simply change EU to UK and continue on as is.

If that really is their view, then no wonder Raab is so bullish in the negotiations. In their heads, they have all the cards. They can wave the NI border and the 39bn at the EU and expect the EU to cave as there is almost no downside to the UK.

BonnieSituation

listermint wrote: »

Ah the figures from the UK Government for regional impact Post Brexit.

NI looks super duper healthy

https://twitter.com/JamesMelville/status/1040201931342405637

That tweet doesn't seem to be there again. Anyone got another link to what it's saying?

lawred2

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-45516678?SThisFB

Bit of crystal ball thinking by Mark Carney

This will definitely be grist to the mill for those that believe project fear to be a thing

Enzokk

bilston wrote: »

The choice the DUP may face is accept the Irish Sea border and prop up the Tory govt or oppose the Irish Sea border oversee the collapse the govt and see Jeremy Corbyn potentially become PM.

Either way it's a disaster for Unionism.

They helped create the mess by bizarrely supporting Brexit without giving one single argument as to how it would benefit the people of Northern Ireland. They are gangsters and as a Unionist myself I abhor the lot of them. They have done more to destroy the Union than SF ever managed in a much shorter period of time.

Pre Brexit there was basically no propsect of a United Ireland in the next 50 years. Post Brexit (or at least post vote) I'd say it could happen before 2030. The muppets in the DUP have only themselves to blame.

I still don't understand why there isn't a bigger outcry as to why the DUP were taking out adverts in the Metro supporting Brexit (what has a London commuter paper got to do with the DUP) or why (and how) they spent almost half a million quid on the Brexit campaign. They spent £20,000 on the last Assembly election (albeit it was a bit of a snap vote, but still the contrast is too big to be ignored).

The reality is the DUP have been used and soon they will be cast aside to ensure the Brexiteers get what they want.

The grand plan was that the UK would prosper so much outside the EU that people in NI would look at Ireland and the EU and will never ever want to even consider either going back to the EU or a united Ireland. They seem to have neglected the analysis of anything related to the EU though and this rather large blind spot will cost them all they hold dear. Serves them right, tbh.

Professor Moriarty

bilston wrote: »

The choice the DUP may face is accept the Irish Sea border and prop up the Tory govt or oppose the Irish Sea border oversee the collapse the govt and see Jeremy Corbyn potentially become PM.

Either way it's a disaster for Unionism.

They helped create the mess by bizarrely supporting Brexit without giving one single argument as to how it would benefit the people of Northern Ireland. They are gangsters and as a Unionist myself I abhor the lot of them. They have done more to destroy the Union than SF ever managed in a much shorter period of time.

Pre Brexit there was basically no propsect of a United Ireland in the next 50 years. Post Brexit (or at least post vote) I'd say it could happen before 2030. The muppets in the DUP have only themselves to blame.

I still don't understand why there isn't a bigger outcry as to why the DUP were taking out adverts in the Metro supporting Brexit (what has a London commuter paper got to do with the DUP) or why (and how) they spent almost half a million quid on the Brexit campaign. They spent £20,000 on the last Assembly election (albeit it was a bit of a snap vote, but still the contrast is too big to be ignored).

The reality is the DUP have been used and soon they will be cast aside to ensure the Brexiteers get what they want.

A provision in funding rules dating back to the Troubles lets Northern Irish political parties accept anonymous donations. So if you wanted to channel money, dodgy or otherwise, into the Leave campaign, then the DUP would be the ideal vehicle. Thus the London adverts paid for by the DUP.

Imreoir2

brickster69 wrote: »

Sorry to upset you.
https://www.abi.org.uk/news/news-articles/2018/05/drivers-get-the-green-light-for-hassle-free-post-brexit-driving-in-the-eu/

"once the Commission have agreed it"

Who was it that ruled out no-deal deals again? Oh Right, the commission.

Sam Russell

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

A provision in funding rules dating back to the Troubles lets Northern Irish political parties accept anonymous donations. So if you wanted to channel money, dodgy or otherwise, into the Leave campaign, then the DUP would be the ideal vehicle. Thus the London adverts paid for by the DUP.

Not just that London ad, but a bit extra on the side for themselves - perhaps for the odd holiday not paid for by foreign Governments.

ancapailldorcha

Mod: I can't say that I like the DUP any more than anyone here (especially as I live in the UK) but I'd be grateful if we could have less of the name calling. Thanks.