Brexit discussion thread V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

Professor Moriarty

Call me Al wrote: »

In which case our insistence on the backstop is moot. It will be a hard border by default.

Yes. And all that will flow from it

Zubeneschamali

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

48

But 48 does not remove May, it only allows a no confidence vote. She will still win that if only the ERG are against her.

Itssoeasy

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

But 48 does not remove May, it only allows a no confidence vote. She will still win that if only the ERG are against her.

That's correct the 48 only sets the process in motion. How many are in the ERG though ? The Tories have 315 MPs or there abouts so is it a simple majority that's needed ?

Professor Moriarty

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

But 48 does not remove May, it only allows a no confidence vote. She will still win that if only the ERG are against her.

Of course. She needs more than 50% to survive. However, a no confidence vote where she barely survives will further damge her and split the party even more.

Shelga

I’m reading this from France, on holidays, using the 6GB of data that is included in my roaming allowance under EU rules.

A small thing I know, but will British people lose these mobile roaming agreements from March next year? Isn’t it losing daily useful stuff like this that is going to be so annoying for the average Brit, and yet they voted to make their situation worse. Madness.

zapitastas

Shelga wrote: »

I’m reading this from France, on holidays, using the 6GB of data that is included in my roaming allowance under EU rules.

A small thing I know, but will British people lose these mobile roaming agreements from March next year? Isn’t it losing daily useful stuff like this that is going to be so annoying for the average Brit, and yet they voted to make their situation worse. Madness.

And will people living along the border get hit for roaming charges in their own homes again

Professor Moriarty

Shelga wrote: »

I’m reading this from France, on holidays, using the 6GB of data that is included in my roaming allowance under EU rules.

A small thing I know, but will British people lose these mobile roaming agreements from March next year? Isn’t it losing daily useful stuff like this that is going to be so annoying for the average Brit, and yet they voted to make their situation worse. Madness.

For some, it will be a moot point as they will have lost their jobs and won't be going on foreign holidays.

FrancieBrady

Shelga wrote: »

I’m reading this from France, on holidays, using the 6GB of data that is included in my roaming allowance under EU rules.

A small thing I know, but will British people lose these mobile roaming agreements from March next year? Isn’t it losing daily useful stuff like this that is going to be so annoying for the average Brit, and yet they voted to make their situation worse. Madness.

zapitastas wrote: »

And will people living along the border get hit for roaming charges in their own homes again

The change in the area of telecoms will be interesting if not very expensive.
I heard one industry expert on the radio last week talking about how it is very likely that calling Britain on a phone will slowly become as expensive as calling China.
I remember the days when calling family in Britain required a small mortgage.

Call me Al

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

For some, it will be a moot point as they will have lost their jobs and won't be going on foreign holidays.

And Ireland will be the fall guy for having the audacity to not allow the UK government use us like a pawn.
They really are a deplorable bunch.

Professor Moriarty

Call me Al wrote: »

And Ireland will be the fall guy for having the audacity to not allow the UK government use us like a pawn.
They really are a deplorable bunch.

The Tory and UKIP Little Englanders are deplorable. The rest are either fighting hard for reality or have been conditioned over decades by the Tory press.

Rjd2

Call me Al wrote: »

In which case our insistence on the backstop is moot. It will be a hard border by default.

The Brexiters have been posturing for ages now, and the usual right wing sources every week

"confidence at a all time low with May, challenge imminent"

If I was May I'd like her to quote Conor and say to them "You'l do ****ing nothing"

The Brexiters don't have the numbers to beat May and they know that no matter how much they spin.

Professor Moriarty

Rjd2 wrote: »

The Brexiters have been posturing for ages now, and the usual right wing sources every week

"confidence at a all time low with May, challenge imminent"

If I was May I'd like her to quote Conor and say to them "You'l do ****ing nothing"

The Brexiters don't have the numbers to beat May and they know that no matter how much they spin.

She probably would limp on having been further wounded but it wouldn't be an absolutely certainty that she would survive. Many MPs are keeping their counsel and some Remain MPs have said they want her gone. A lot would depend on what was said before the vote.

pH

Shelga wrote: »

I’m reading this from France, on holidays, using the 6GB of data that is included in my roaming allowance under EU rules.

A small thing I know, but will British people lose these mobile roaming agreements from March next year? Isn’t it losing daily useful stuff like this that is going to be so annoying for the average Brit, and yet they voted to make their situation worse. Madness.

On the plus side though, Google will work again and won't be subject to ludicrous rules that say that content on the BBC website can't be indexed by Google because of a completely made up 'right to be forgotten' that the ECJ invented out of thin air. So swings and roundabouts and all that.

I still haven't seen the exact text of the GF agreement that says no customs border can exist between NI ad RoI, but if one exists, and it already is in an international agreement why does the Gov feel such a need that it's replicated in another treaty?

The UK position has always been perfectly clear to me, they said they would bend over backwards that whatever trade deal is agreed with the EU in the NI case it would not be enforced at the border, they'd enforce it elsewhere, hence the 'no hard border'. It may not be possible to sell RoI milk into NI anymore, but the trucks attempting to import it will not be stopped on the border.

It seems that 'no hard border or the provos will me mighty upset and might need to slaughter another few thousand odd people' brigade, now seem to be transitioning to 'friction-free trade or the provos will surely start killing again'.

And to all the OMG the UK is committing economic suicide boys, Ireland definitely was economically less well off outside the UK, but who cares? The decision to be an independent state and control out own destiny is/was of far more importance than any economic hardship at the time.

Thargor

Shelga wrote: »

I’m reading this from France, on holidays, using the 6GB of data that is included in my roaming allowance under EU rules.

A small thing I know, but will British people lose these mobile roaming agreements from March next year? Isn’t it losing daily useful stuff like this that is going to be so annoying for the average Brit, and yet they voted to make their situation worse. Madness.

8GB these days according to a text I had from 3...

Leroy42

Rjd2 wrote: »

The Brexiters have been posturing for ages now, and the usual right wing sources every week

"confidence at a all time low with May, challenge imminent"

If I was May I'd like her to quote Conor and say to them "You'l do ****ing nothing"

The Brexiters don't have the numbers to beat May and they know that no matter how much they spin.

Who is going to be willing to take on the role at this point?

Davies has been talked out but in all honesty whomever the new leader, the decision they will be faced with are the same decisions facing TM, except that they will be the leader because of the hard brexiteers and as such will probably have to deliver a no deal (is achieving nothing still called delivering?)

Even JRM accepts that a no deal is chaos, what leader wants to be the one held responsible for that.

TM is going nowhere

Professor Moriarty

pH wrote: »

On the plus side though, Google will work again and won't be subject to ludicrous rules that say that content on the BBC website can't be indexed by Google because of a completely made up 'right to be forgotten' that the ECJ invented out of thin air. So swings and roundabouts and all that.

I still haven't seen the exact text of the GF agreement that says no customs border can exist between NI ad RoI, but if one exists, and it already is in an international agreement why does the Gov feel such a need that it's replicated in another treaty?

The UK position has always been perfectly clear to me, they said they would bend over backwards that whatever trade deal is agreed with the EU in the NI case it would not be enforced at the border, they'd enforce it elsewhere, hence the 'no hard border'. It may not be possible to sell RoI milk into NI anymore, but the trucks attempting to import it will not be stopped on the border.

It seems that 'no hard border or the provos will me mighty upset and might need to slaughter another few thousand odd people' brigade, now seem to be transitioning to 'friction-free trade or the provos will surely start killing again'.

And to all the OMG the UK is committing economic suicide boys, Ireland definitely was economically less well off outside the UK, but who cares? The decision to be an independent state and control out own destiny is/was of far more importance than any economic hardship at the time.

If they will bend over backwards to ensure that any trade deal won't be enforced at the border then they will have no problem agreeing to a backstop. Comparing Ireland leaving the UK to the UK leaving the EU is plain silly.

Leroy42

So you think people will be happy to pay extortionate roaming charges so that google can return better results for the BBC website?

But on a deal, why should the EU make any deal with a country that is openly and happily saying that they will implement consistent border controls.

The EU don't need to give any FTA agreement. The Brexiteers all claim that the EU will need a deal but without a NI border what is to stop any EU company simply sending all goods through Dublin, up through NI and into GB.

The current UK stance means the EU already has a FTA with the UK without having to agree to anything. So they can stall on any deal as the UK have nothing to offer.

lawred2

pH wrote: »

On the plus side though, Google will work again and won't be subject to ludicrous rules that say that content on the BBC website can't be indexed by Google because of a completely made up 'right to be forgotten' that the ECJ invented out of thin air. So swings and roundabouts and all that.

I still haven't seen the exact text of the GF agreement that says no customs border can exist between NI ad RoI, but if one exists, and it already is in an international agreement why does the Gov feel such a need that it's replicated in another treaty?

The UK position has always been perfectly clear to me, they said they would bend over backwards that whatever trade deal is agreed with the EU in the NI case it would not be enforced at the border, they'd enforce it elsewhere, hence the 'no hard border'. It may not be possible to sell RoI milk into NI anymore, but the trucks attempting to import it will not be stopped on the border.

It seems that 'no hard border or the provos will me mighty upset and might need to slaughter another few thousand odd people' brigade, now seem to be transitioning to 'friction-free trade or the provos will surely start killing again'.

And to all the OMG the UK is committing economic suicide boys, Ireland definitely was economically less well off outside the UK, but who cares? The decision to be an independent state and control out own destiny is/was of far more importance than any economic hardship at the time.

I don't think the straws can withstand that level of clutching to be honest

oscarBravo

Imreoir2 wrote: »

I find it strange that the people who dislike the EU the most also seem to be the least informed on how the EU actually works.

There's nothing strange about it. With very few exceptions, the EU that most Eurosceptics love to bitch and moan about is entirely a figment of their own imagination. They don't need to understand the intricacies of how it works, or even know the most basic facts about it; all they know is that the EU is terrible and undemocratic and a dictatorship and straight bananas and powerful hoovers and up yours Delors and blah blah blah.

When someone shows up here ranting about the unelected president of the EU, it's safe to ignore them. If they are prepared to be that angry about something they're that determined to know nothing about, then there's absolutely nothing whatsoever to be gained by arguing with them - they're immune to reason.

mickoneill31

pH wrote: »

On the plus side though, Google will work again and won't be subject to ludicrous rules that say that content on the BBC website can't be indexed by Google because of a completely made up 'right to be forgotten' that the ECJ invented out of thin air. So swings and roundabouts and all that.
.

So the UK won't be able to store any EU personal information? That's another disaster for them if that was true. I thought they were going to comply with gdpr after Brexit.

I think the UK government said they expect UK phone companies not to profit from people roaming. Of course they've no control over companies not based in the UK so I don't know whatll happen in those cases.

Rhineshark

mickoneill31 wrote: »

So the UK won't be able to store any EU personal information? That's another disaster for them if that was true. I thought they were going to comply with gdpr after Brexit.

I think the UK government said they expect UK phone companies not to profit from people roaming. Of course they've no control over companies not based in the UK so I don't know whatll happen in those cases.

Yeah, but what the UK government "expects" generally has no bearing on reality the last few years. If there's no roaming deal, costs of people roaming will be passed on by the UK phone companies to their customers. Of course they're going to profit from roaming, does May et al really think that they'll agree to make a loss so the gov doesn't look bad? It'll either cost or there'll be no service. May can say what she likes.

pH

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

If they will bend over backwards to ensure that any trade deal won't be enforced at the border then they will have no problem agreeing to a backstop. Comparing Ireland leaving the UK to the UK leaving the EU is plain silly.

Because the backstop doesn't seem to be about a hard border, nor does it seem to be about Irish produce still having access to a NI market (and vice versa) the only backstop on offer by the EU at the moment is keeping NI open for German cars and French wine (custom's union and single market)

NI's 'exports' are as follows: (I put exports in quotes as I'm including sales to the rest of the UK)

£14bn - rest of UK
£4bn - ROI
£2bn - rest of EU.

Why anyone thinks NI would be better off cut-off from the £14 for the sake of £6 is beyond me!

mickoneill31

Rhineshark wrote: »

Yeah, but what the UK government "expects" generally has no bearing on reality the last few years. If there's no roaming deal, costs of people roaming will be passed on by the UK phone companies to their customers. Of course they're going to profit from roaming, does May et al really think that they'll agree to make a loss so the gov doesn't look bad? It'll either cost or there'll be no service. May can say what she likes.

They could legislate to control local companies. They won't though. They'll just blame the companies and wring their hands. Same as usual. Or blame the EU. That might be plan b. It's worked so far.

Imreoir2

J Mysterio wrote: »

I keep seeing this everywhere: all media outlets. It's so stupid it makes my brain hurt:

'Brexit: UK would extend transition period if backstop demand dropped'

Thinking about it that could potentially work, if the transition period was made a backstop. Ie, the transition period does not end unless the arrangements are in place to solve the border question.

Of course that would be even worse than the current backstop as far as brexiteers are concerned.

Professor Moriarty

pH wrote: »

Because the backstop doesn't seem to be about a hard border, nor does it seem to be about Irish produce still having access to a NI market (and vice versa) the only backstop on offer by the EU at the moment is keeping NI open for German cars and French wine (custom's union and single market)

NI's 'exports' are as follows: (I put exports in quotes as I'm including sales to the rest of the UK)

£14bn - rest of UK
£4bn - ROI
£2bn - rest of EU.

Why anyone thinks NI would be better off cut-off from the £14 for the sake of £6 is beyond me!

What? The backstop is to ensure the border remains open.

Leroy42

pH wrote: »

Because the backstop doesn't seem to be about a hard border, nor does it seem to be about Irish produce still having access to a NI market (and vice versa) the only backstop on offer by the EU at the moment is keeping NI open for German cars and French wine (custom's union and single market)

NI's 'exports' are as follows: (I put exports in quotes as I'm including sales to the rest of the UK)

£14bn - rest of UK
£4bn - ROI
£2bn - rest of EU.

Why anyone thinks NI would be better off cut-off from the £14 for the sake of £6 is beyond me!

Because it is not just about NI/ROI trade. If there is no border what is to stop all EU produce going through NI into the GB market?

And if the UK are prepared to ignore tariffs and regulations on one of their borders, why should the EU have any faith in them sticking to the rules on anything else.

PeadarCo

pH wrote:

Because the backstop doesn't seem to be about a hard border, nor does it seem to be about Irish produce still having access to a NI market (and vice versa) the only backstop on offer by the EU at the moment is keeping NI open for German cars and French wine (custom's union and single market)

Question do you understand the consequences of leaving a single market and customs union? Because that rant about German cars suggests you don't. The backstop is primarily about security and mitigating the damage to border communities who rely on N Ireland being in the same market and customs union.

Strazdas

pH wrote: »

Because the backstop doesn't seem to be about a hard border, nor does it seem to be about Irish produce still having access to a NI market (and vice versa) the only backstop on offer by the EU at the moment is keeping NI open for German cars and French wine (custom's union and single market)

NI's 'exports' are as follows: (I put exports in quotes as I'm including sales to the rest of the UK)

£14bn - rest of UK
£4bn - ROI
£2bn - rest of EU.

Why anyone thinks NI would be better off cut-off from the £14 for the sake of £6 is beyond me!

Are you aware that 60% of NI's exports to GB go through the Republic's ports?

Call me Al

pH wrote: »

Because the backstop doesn't seem to be about a hard border, nor does it seem to be about Irish produce still having access to a NI market (and vice versa) the only backstop on offer by the EU at the moment is keeping NI open for German cars and French wine (custom's union and single market)

NI's 'exports' are as follows: (I put exports in quotes as I'm including sales to the rest of the UK)

£14bn - rest of UK
£4bn - ROI
£2bn - rest of EU.

Why anyone thinks NI would be better off cut-off from the £14 for the sake of £6 is beyond me!

Indeeed. May be if they embraced the EU market as we in the Republic have done the 6 counties wouldn't be the economic basket case they are today.

pH

PeadarCo wrote: »

Question do you understand the consequences of leaving a single market and customs union? Because that rant about German cars suggests you don't. The backstop is primarily about security and mitigating the damage to border communities who rely on N Ireland being in the same market and customs union.

Of course I do. A trade deal will need to be done between the UK and the EU to decide what tariffs apply to which goods and what standards apply to them. If this is very close to 'free trade' then whatever slight anomalies there are can be handled away from border posts themselves. If both side take a protectionist position and all sorts of tariffs and trade restrictions are imposed then a border checks will be required on both sides.

I can see no chance that NI remains in the customs union and single market after Brexit. It would be financial suicide for them to have a hard border between themselves and the rest of the UK, which as I pointed out is a much more important trading partner than RoI and the EU. I have no idea how legislation to do this could be passed who would enforce such a border, who they would report to, what legal powers they would have etc.

There is still a small chance that all of the UK will remain in something like the customs union and single market, I think that is more likely than a NI only solution, but at present it's not something that I think is likely.

Anyway as I said before this is all a moot point, Ireland believes it already has a guarantee to an open border in the GFA so there's nothing really to worry about here is there, from a border perspective?