Brexit discussion thread IV

Water John

I wouldn't blame the Interent. I think we, the Irish value education. We are very quick to call out spoofers, even in the local pub.

An Ciarraioch

EdgeCase wrote: »

It's not just the internet. The level of knowledge being put forward by everyone from government ministers to major television journalists is just abysmally low. Rhetoric and even blatent lies go totally unchallenged.

And Lilico regards himself as one of the more intelligent Brexiteers!

https://twitter.com/andrew_lilico/status/1020331187452162048

First Up

Leroy42 wrote: »

First Up wrote: »

That is nonsense. Planes from all over the world land in the UK.
After Brexit, UK airlines may lose "fifth freedoms" which is the right to operate services between countries other than the UK.
That's all.

But it clearly says in the article that they will lose the rights, and unlike trade there is no WTO fallback.

Are you saying the IAA are wrong?

Planes from all over the world land in the UK because of EU regs. So that plane will be still able to land in Dublin or Paris. If the UK sign up to the EU regs then, yes they can still land, but we are talking about a no deal scenario.

And when you say may, what does that mean? They either will or they won't. Do you mean they may unless a deal is reached?

Planes all over the world land in other parts of the world under various agreements. Planes landed in the UK before it was in the EU and will do so after it leaves. New agreements will replace the current one. That's all.

brickster69

Imreoir2 wrote: »

First Up wrote: »

That is nonsense. Planes from all over the world land in the UK.
After Brexit, UK airlines may lose "fifth freedoms" which is the right to operate services between countries other than the UK.
That's all.

They will also lose the legal framework for certifying aircraft. They are covered under EU agreements now, if they crash out, the certs they issue will not be worth the paper they are written on outside the UK.

If the UK crashed out most of the fleets aircraft could not fly due to insurance policies being invalid. Probably like 40 million other insurance policies in the EU.

Francie Barrett

Leroy42 wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/transport-and-tourism/uk-flights-will-not-be-able-to-land-in-ireland-without-post-brexit-deal-1.3571311

I assume that the opposite it true, that ROI and EU flights will not be able to land in the UK

I am sorry, but that is scaremongering of the highest order.

The problem here is that people are conflating Britain exiting the EU without a free trade deal, with that of Britain leaving the EU without having agreement on anything. Why are people under the apprehension that if the EU and the UK can't agree on trade, that any sort of agreement is out the window? Barnier himself said last month that Britain and UK still have agreement on about 80% of Brexit. Even if between now and next March there is agreement on nothing else, I don't see any reason why the UK can't leave the EU with at least agreement on that 80%.

If that is the case, then there is no reason in the world why open skies should not fall into that 80%. It is literally in no one's interest for air travel between Britain and the EU to be restricted and no politicians are going to be stupid enough to allow it to happen.

listermint

First Up wrote: »

Planes all over the world land in other parts of the world under various agreements. Planes landed in the UK before it was in the EU and will do so after it leaves. New agreements will replace the current one. That's all.

New agreements and certifications would have to be made.

You just said it in your own post.

That's the point everyone is making.

But it seems to be your assertion that you can do that overnight by email with a simple send and reply....

brickster69

Imreoir2 wrote: »

First Up wrote: »

That is nonsense. Planes from all over the world land in the UK.
After Brexit, UK airlines may lose "fifth freedoms" which is the right to operate services between countries other than the UK.
That's all.

They will also lose the legal framework for certifying aircraft. They are covered under EU agreements now, if they crash out, the certs they issue will not be worth the paper they are written on outside the UK.

If the UK crashed out most of the fleets aircraft could not fly due to insurance policies being invalid. Probably like 40 million other insurance policies in the EU. Similar to most cargo ships also.

First Up

listermint wrote: »

First Up wrote: »

Planes all over the world land in other parts of the world under various agreements. Planes landed in the UK before it was in the EU and will do so after it leaves. New agreements will replace the current one. That's all.

New agreements and certifications would have to be made.

You just said it in your own post.

That's the point everyone is making.

But it seems to be your assertion that you can do that overnight by email with a simple send and reply....

I'm saying that aviation agreements will be stand alone and will not be dragged into the UK's trading terms with the EU.

An Ciarraioch

First Up wrote: »

I'm saying that aviation agreements will be stand alone and will not be dragged into the UK's trading terms with the EU.

It has nothing to do with trading, but because the current aviation agreement is dependent on EU airspace, it would automatically lapse on the 29th of March, unless the Withdrawal Agreement (which covers all aspects of EU legislation) is finalised.

An Ciarraioch

Francie Barrett wrote: »

I am sorry, but that is scaremongering of the highest order.

The problem here is that people are conflating Britain exiting the EU without a free trade deal, with that of Britain leaving the EU without having agreement on anything. Why are people under the apprehension that if the EU and the UK can't agree on trade, that any sort of agreement is out the window? Barnier himself said last month that Britain and UK still have agreement on about 80% of Brexit. Even if between now and next March there is agreement on nothing else, I don't see any reason why the UK can't leave the EU with at least agreement on that 80%.

If that is the case, then there is no reason in the world why open skies should not fall into that 80%. It is literally in no one's interest for air travel between Britain and the EU to be restricted and no politicians are going to be stupid enough to allow it to happen.

May herself stated to a Commons committee this week that no agreement had yet been reached on aviation.

Akrasia

First Up wrote: »

Planes all over the world land in other parts of the world under various agreements. Planes landed in the UK before it was in the EU and will do so after it leaves. New agreements will replace the current one. That's all.

Eventually, but how long would those new agreements take? Especially if the UK are in an internal political crisis and on bad terms with the EU?

Akrasia

Francie Barrett wrote: »

I am sorry, but that is scaremongering of the highest order.

The problem here is that people are conflating Britain exiting the EU without a free trade deal, with that of Britain leaving the EU without having agreement on anything. Why are people under the apprehension that if the EU and the UK can't agree on trade, that any sort of agreement is out the window? Barnier himself said last month that Britain and UK still have agreement on about 80% of Brexit. Even if between now and next March there is agreement on nothing else, I don't see any reason why the UK can't leave the EU with at least agreement on that 80%.

If that is the case, then there is no reason in the world why open skies should not fall into that 80%. It is literally in no one's interest for air travel between Britain and the EU to be restricted and no politicians are going to be stupid enough to allow it to happen.

Its called a no deal brexit for a reason

Imreoir2

Francie Barrett wrote: »

I am sorry, but that is scaremongering of the highest order.

The problem here is that people are conflating Britain exiting the EU without a free trade deal, with that of Britain leaving the EU without having agreement on anything. Why are people under the apprehension that if the EU and the UK can't agree on trade, that any sort of agreement is out the window? Barnier himself said last month that Britain and UK still have agreement on about 80% of Brexit. Even if between now and next March there is agreement on nothing else, I don't see any reason why the UK can't leave the EU with at least agreement on that 80%.

If that is the case, then there is no reason in the world why open skies should not fall into that 80%. It is literally in no one's interest for air travel between Britain and the EU to be restricted and no politicians are going to be stupid enough to allow it to happen.

Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, if the backstop is not agreed there will be no withdrawal treaty, there will be agreement on nothing.

devnull

In the UK for work at the moment and been asked by several people today as to why 'your Prime Minister" is bullying us and trying to punish the UK for leaving the European Union by banning their planes to get some revenge.

When I explained to them the reasons behind it, the regulatory environment, how aircraft are certified, insurance and open skies they told me that I am just peddling the made up myths by an inexperienced PM who is trying to hoodwink the UK into paying huge amounts of money to land planes to bleed the UK dry on behalf of the EU after losing all their membership payments.

Another one said when the UK leaves with no deal, Ireland will start offering the UK money to land their planes at Irish airports as they need the British planes and couldn't survive without them and Ryanair and Aer Lingus would go bust overnight as it would force all their aircraft to be grounded as the vast majority of their planes go to the UK.

Another one told me that there will be no problem and everything in relation to trade will carry on as normal, as with aviation, ports and crime detection because this is done at European level and that the UK are still going to be in Europe, they are just not going to be paying money to the European Union to give to other countries.

Honestly as someone who spent a period in the UK when growing up, I wonder what the hell has happened to the country and how they can believe the garbage the likes of the Sun put out. But the scary thing is a large amount of people actually believe the rubbish.

J Mysterio

Leroy42 wrote: »

So, the UK had a solution, being part of the EU, decided to opt out of that, which the EU is still offering, but according to her it is up to the EU to come up with a solution, rather than stick to the agreements that she herself had already entered into.

Mind boggling indeed.

sink

First Up wrote: »

I'm saying that aviation agreements will be stand alone and will not be dragged into the UK's trading terms with the EU.

There are essentially two stages to the Brexit negotiations. The first stage is the Withdrawal Agreement, this has 3 main focuses; Money (settling of accounts), People (citizens rights) and the Irish Border. The second stage is the future relationship, this includes all agreements on the future relationship including trade and aviation. The EU has been absolutely resolute that stage one must be completed before any part of stage two and can be agreed, that includes aviation. Without stage one being agreed to, stage two won't even begin to be discussed.

It's not a question of it being dragged into the UK's trading terms, that's a separate policy area of stage two. It's a question of dealing with legacy issues that need to be resolved before they can even get to trade or aviation. They can't come to an agreement on anything else without first agreeing to stage one.

Call me Al

It's also worth pointing out that, despite sabre rattling ahead of time, Dave Davis agreed this two stage approach with the EU without any debate or controversy well in advance of the actual initial talks.
In typical fashion, for domestic purposes, he argued once he got home that NI discussions were unrealistic without looking at it in the context of a FTA, but that's as far as his discontent went.
Talks proceeded as per the agreed timetable set down by the EU.

Trasna1

Water John wrote: »

I wouldn't blame the Interent. I think we, the Irish value education. We are very quick to call out spoofers, even in the local pub.

To be honest, if we had been fed a diet of anti EU rhetoric for 40 years we would be the exact same. Ireland has a very pro-eu media and that really helps to bolster support for the project here.


We are not any smarter, or better educated than them across the Irish sea. We are susceptible to the same bs.

Nody

First Up wrote: »

I'm saying that aviation agreements will be stand alone and will not be dragged into the UK's trading terms with the EU.

And we're telling you that as per the current rules such a deal can only be struck after they have left EU and only if EASA confirms the full process of confirming that the CAA has satisfactory supervision. That includes CAA building up all the competencies that EASA has currently (such as certification of engines, airplane parts etc.) in the UK again; i.e. it's not something done over night or by the stroke of a pen. There are actual actions required behind such a certification and not something you ignore and hope things will work out. If you want to get an idea what it involves I recommend this blog post as a starting point; it is a very big deal and yes UK planes would be grounded.

flutered

zapitastas wrote: »

That is the most likely outcome if they had decided to go down that route. A republican paty swearing allegiance to a British monarch in order to be able to cast votes in the HoC wouldn't exactly be too palatable to many members

if sf went to westminister, imagne the furore from the erg, the edl, the tory party, never mind the tabloids

PeadarCo

Nody wrote:

And we're telling you that as per the current rules such a deal can only be struck after they have left EU and only if EASA confirms the full process of confirming that the CAA has satisfactory supervision. That includes building up all the competencies that EASA has currently in the UK again; i.e. it's not something done over night.

The assumption people seem to be making is that it would be crazy for both sides to reach the end of March and there be no deal relating to airlines. But the whole brexit process on the UK side has been crazy putting it mildly. What Leo has said is nothing new. Michael O Leary was warning of this potential last year. According to an article in the Irish Times Easyjet have set up a new subsidiary to try get around this problem.

When you have hard brexiters advocating a hard brexit. When you have people commenting on line in the UK saying they should just leave now and have a brexit without any agreement, it is very important that you have people like Leo, like Michael O leary highlighting the consequences if that is what happens.

An Ciarraioch

Registration system for EU citizens to be trialled in NW England in August:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/20/post-brexit-registration-system-eu-citizens-trial-august

flutered

Enzokk wrote: »

As I was trying to say, in hindsight they should have taken up their seats. But to expect them to have only taken their seats for these votes is not reasonable. Had they taken up their seats at the start of the current parliament it would have made a difference regarding the votes. Just the threat of her majority being even smaller than it is now would be a warning. Seeing that Theresa May won the votes in the ERG amendments by a maximum of 4 votes (I think), simple arithmetic tells you their 7 votes would have swing it the other way.

The vote on the customs union where the Tories played the system was won by 6 votes. Again simple math tells you their 7 votes would have changed the result.

But I am not blaming them for the vote results. They have always run on not taking up their seats, but their votes could have made it very hard for Theresa May.

their votes would not make it hard for may imo, there would be a massive swing to ensure it would not happen, just look at the anti irish racism on twitter and the red tops tell one that

sink

Essentially the problem with aviation boils down to this

The UK as a signatory of the International Air Services Transit Agreement (IASTA), has agreed to allow fellow signatories to fly over their airspace and is granted the same right in return. The IASTA is a non EU agreement that predates the EU aviation agreements and is still in force. Upon leaving the EU the UK will retain this right.

However the right to land and disembark passenger and cargo require an an additional Air Service Agreement (ASA). The UK as an EU member joined the European Common Aviation Area (ECAA) a component of the EEA, which superseded and voided all prior ASA's between members. It also granted the EU the power to negotiate ASA's with third countries as a single block. The EU ASA's also supersede and voided any pre-existing ASA's between individual members and third countries.

The UK upon leaving the EU will no longer be a member of the ECAA. It will also no longer be party to any ASA's that were negotiated by the EU. This includes the Open Skies agreement with the USA an Canada. If the UK does not sign new agreements with the EU and other third countries it's airlines won't legally be able to land and disembark passengers and cargo in those countries and also foreign airlines won't be allowed to land in the UK.

It's not a question of insurance, or safety certification, those issues are covered by Air Service Agreements.

If anyone wants more information about the legal structures governing the right to fly Internationally, I recommend watching this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thqbjA2DC-E

And also for more detail this Wikipedia article.

Freedoms of the air

Nody

EU offered UK a 100% trade zero tariff and no quotas deal and UK rejected it because it was not good enough (no services, no unlimited access to the single market without checks, no access to EU institutions etc.); hence they got offered a better deal than Japan which would go in effect on day 1 rather than over 15 years. Tell us again what are EU doing to punish UK?

ancapailldorcha

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I came across this today:



Emphasis on "Taking back control is a careful change, not a sudden step - we will negotiate the terms of a new deal before we start any legal process to leave." I don't know how there isn't more anger about this sort of thing. Cummings knew he was promising unicorns and had no qualms about doing so, nor did Johnson and Gove who were senior government figures at the time.

This is the point I've been making for a while, there's clips of loads of Brexiters before the vote saying "No-one is talking about leaving the single market" yet somehow that's now absolutely a key cornerstone of leaving the EU. Farage FFS talked about Norway. I doubt many of the 52% have changed their minds over it because it's just slid that way, they're being told the EU are being mean and that Britain shall prevail again.

listermint

Trasna1 wrote: »

To be honest, if we had been fed a diet of anti EU rhetoric for 40 years we would be the exact same. Ireland has a very pro-eu media and that really helps to bolster support for the project here.


We are not any smarter, or better educated than them across the Irish sea. We are susceptible to the same bs.

I disagree I think we are better educated. Education comes with quality we are not quagmired where the history of our country is coloured in vast swathes of tint to portray us as the victor.

I think their education system is more matter if fact tbh.

So yes I disagree. It shows in the general worldly outlook even business perspective. Not just EU, global.

sink

MIGFOIIE wrote: »

Its a non issue, blow all out of proportion to scare people.
Good luck flying from Ireland to Europe without going over UK airspace.
Going to be interesting flying from continetal Europe to north America and not going over UK airspace.
Hell if the EU act the complete dick, the UK could block access to airspace over UK territories world wide.
It will not happen, it is a non issue

I take it you didn't read anything I just said so I'll repeat it just for you.

The UK as a signatory of the International Air Services Transit Agreement (IASTA), has agreed to allow fellow signatories to fly over their airspace and is granted the same right in return. The IASTA is a non EU agreement that predates the EU aviation agreements and is still in force. Upon leaving the EU the UK will retain this right.

Unless the UK want's to leave the IASTA, it has to allow Irish flights to fly over UK airspace. If the UK leaves the IASTA, it won't be able to fly in any other countries airspace.

The Issue is not about flyover rights, it's only about landing rights.

trellheim

Let's look at some airlines


1. Easyjet - UK airline, but has established Easyjet europe under austrian AOC - says it will have 100+ aircraft ready to go by brexit.
2. Aer Lingus - Spanish Airline - part of IAG
3. BA - Spanish Airline - part of IAG
4. Ryanair - Irish airline but has huge bases in UK

so the situation is not what people might think

Nody

trellheim wrote: »

Let's look at some airlines


1. Easyjet - UK airline, but has established Easyjet europe under austrian AOC - says it will have 100+ aircraft ready to go by brexit.
2. Aer Lingus - Spanish Airline - part of IAG
3. BA - Spanish Airline - part of IAG
4. Ryanair - Irish airline but has huge bases in UK

so the situation is not what people might think

No one is disputing that the planes can fly in Europe after Brexit and are free to land in the UK; returning from UK is a whole different issue however. Remember those air lines who moved over did so to ensure they remained under the EU regulation and authority; guess which regulation is not there with the UK if they go for their touted "hard brexit"?

Seth Brundle

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Registration system for EU citizens to be trialled in NW England in August:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/20/post-brexit-registration-system-eu-citizens-trial-august

Bloody hell. All they need is a load of star shaped badges!

McGiver

https://twitter.com/2di2d/status/1019341803441582081?s=09

BBC is imho complicit in Brexit by poisoning the UK political culture.

McGiver

Seth Brundle wrote: »

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Registration system for EU citizens to be trialled in NW England in August:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/20/post-brexit-registration-system-eu-citizens-trial-august

Bloody hell. All they need is a load of star shaped badges!

How about issuing IDs for all citizens like any other civilised European country?

devnull

McGiver wrote: »

How about issuing IDs for all citizens like ant other civilised European country?

Unfortunately the words 'civil liberties' will come up fairly soon if they did, I'd say.

devnull

McGiver wrote: »

https://twitter.com/2di2d/status/1019341803441582081?s=09

BBC is imho complicit in Brexit by poisoning the UK political culture.

BBC is a joke, Channel 4 and Sky are an awful lot better and few would have predicted that the later would have been a few years ago.

lawred2

devnull wrote: »

BBC is a joke, Channel 4 and Sky are an awful lot better and few would have predicted that the later would have been a few years ago.

Channel 4 is far superior to Sky

Akrasia

devnull wrote: »

BBC is a joke, Channel 4 and Sky are an awful lot better and few would have predicted that the later would have been a few years ago.

For an organisation often accused of false balance, a 100% Eurosceptic representation is a bit mad.


I think it's probably because the bog standard MEPs are boring eurocrats with no public profile while the likes of farage get good ratings from those who like him, and those who hate him

I would expect that there were plenty of pro Europe voices to counter the MEPs:-$

EdgeCase

trellheim wrote: »

Let's look at some airlines


1. Easyjet - UK airline, but has established Easyjet europe under austrian AOC - says it will have 100+ aircraft ready to go by brexit.
2. Aer Lingus - Spanish Airline - part of IAG
3. BA - Spanish Airline - part of IAG
4. Ryanair - Irish airline but has huge bases in UK

so the situation is not what people might think

What actually matters is the % of shareholders, the fact that IAG's technically brass plated in Madrid isn't really relevant. It's the fact that IAG could have more than 50% non EU, including UK-based share holders in which case, the entire group could lose operating rights. Ryanair's in a similar position.

There are plans in place at IAG to force non-EU based shareholders to divest within 10 days of a hard brexit if needs be.

No one other than IAG knows what the situation is but it looks like after March 2019, it could be as low as 20% EU based shareholders, which is a HUGE problem for both Aer Lingus and Iberia who are in countries that have had had nothing to do with Brexit.

Capt'n Midnight

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Registration system for EU citizens to be trialled in NW England in August:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/20/post-brexit-registration-system-eu-citizens-trial-august

Even money that at least one of those people gets an official letter telling them to leave.

Because it happened before to people who registered.
Home Office mistakenly sent up to 100 letters to EU citizens telling them to leave UK or face removal

devnull

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Even money that at least one of those people gets an official letter telling them to leave.

Because it happened before to people who registered.
Home Office mistakenly sent up to 100 letters to EU citizens telling them to leave UK or face removal

Put it this way, I wouldn't exactly be rushing to sign up for one if it was me as an EU national in the UK.

Enzokk

Trasna1 wrote: »

To be honest, if we had been fed a diet of anti EU rhetoric for 40 years we would be the exact same. Ireland has a very pro-eu media and that really helps to bolster support for the project here.


We are not any smarter, or better educated than them across the Irish sea. We are susceptible to the same bs.

I think if anyone has ever heard someone complain about people from the EU coming to Ireland and claim benefits and have babies means that in Ireland the message could be spread as well.

Akrasia wrote: »

For an organisation often accused of false balance, a 100% Eurosceptic representation is a bit mad.


I think it's probably because the bog standard MEPs are boring eurocrats with no public profile while the likes of farage get good ratings from those who like him, and those who hate him

I would expect that there were plenty of pro Europe voices to counter the MEPs:-$

That graphic is misleading. It shows MEP's that have appeared, yet on every show I believe they have a Labour MP as well as a Conservative MP. It would help no-one to have two Labour politicians appear and two Conservatives politicians who both spout the company line on the show. They have totally missed the pot with their reporting of Brexit, but you have to be careful on what we see as facts.

Here is an interesting article about the ERG.


'We're the opposition': Rees-Mogg and his European Research Group

Baker has already made a series of pointed interventions in the Commons – demanding the publication of DexEU documents, for example – that underline his determination to use every weapon at MPs’ disposal against the government of which he was so recently a part.

He has highlighted how much planning for a no-deal Brexit, the issue for which he was responsible, has already been done, in an attempt to undermine the idea that such an outcome would be a catastrophe.

One source of the ERG’s power is its sheer numbers. When Conservative whips were trying to explain to furious remainers why they had caved in to Rees-Mogg and his colleagues, they told them the ERG had up to 80 MPs ready and willing to vote against the Chequers deal.

So there we have why Theresa May has crumbled to the ERG. They have enough letters ready to go to challenge her leadership. These MP's would also just need to stand together behind a candidate and their numbers would be enough to get that candidate in front of the party membership. The effectively control the Conservatives now as Theresa May has shown bowed to their pressure.

I guess the only way she could have avoided this was to reach across the aisle for support and to work with Labour to get a consensus deal, but with the two party system in effect basically it is impossible to do this.

Capt'n Midnight

lawred2 wrote: »

Channel 4 is far superior to Sky

ITN do the news for Channel 4 (and Channel 5). It's the same way that RTE do the news for TG4.

It's just not as dumbed down as News At Ten or that Sir Trevor stuff, hey he's getting paid well so more power to him.

SKY I can't do. First with the news, while the others are still checking if it's accurate.

BonnieSituation

Here's some video of her meeting the teens in Belfast today.

The awkwardness is palpable.

sound is desperate mind you

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZW0-RE-Ezg8

bilston

I'm sure this has already been discussed but would a "no deal Brexit" mean a hard border by default?

Or does anyone know?!

Capt'n Midnight

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Bloody hell. All they need is a load of star shaped badges!

At first I was "they all going to be deputy sheriffs? "

Then I was :eek:


At present here and in the UK you don't need to carry ID.

Can you imagine the fuss if people were forced to carry their nice new Blue Passports* everywhere ?



*made in France . what's the % for UK tariff or French VAT on passports ?

An Ciarraioch

bilston wrote: »

I'm sure this has already been discussed but would a "no deal Brexit" mean a hard border by default?

Or does anyone know?!

Yes, as Britain would be in neither the EEA, nor a customs union, WTO rules would automatically apply.

Nody

bilston wrote: »

I'm sure this has already been discussed but would a "no deal Brexit" mean a hard border by default?

Or does anyone know?!

Yes; basically all scenarios outside of either NI remaining in a special deal (DUP blocking this) or UK remaining in an Norway style deal (EEA+) would lead to a hard border.

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Yes, as Britain would be in neither the EEA, nor a customs union, WTO rules would automatically apply.

Well it's not so much WTO rules as the applications coming from having no border controls (you're free to have zero border controls under it as long as all countries are treated equal).

McGiver

Enzokk wrote: »

That graphic is misleading. It shows MEP's that have appeared, yet on every show I believe they have a Labour MP as well as a Conservative MP. It would help no-one to have two Labour politicians appear and two Conservatives politicians who both spout the company line on the show. They have totally missed the pot with their reporting of Brexit, but you have to be careful on what we see as facts.

No, it isn't. UK has 73 MEPs, yet the only one appearing is Fartage, a europhobe, and Hannan, a eurosceptic.

McGiver

Nody wrote: »

bilston wrote: »

I'm sure this has already been discussed but would a "no deal Brexit" mean a hard border by default?

Or does anyone know?!

Yes; basically all scenarios outside of either NI remaining in a special deal (DUP blocking this) or UK remaining in an Norway style deal (EEA+) would lead to a hard border.

Or the whole UK staying in the CU.

Nody

McGiver wrote: »

Or the whole UK staying in the CU.

CU is not enough; Turkey is in a CU and they got plenty of checks at the border. To have a open border it needs to be CU + SM which means Norway (EEA) deal or tighter integration.