Brexit Discussion Thread VI

Hurrache

Scoondal wrote: »

Yes, in such a case EU would not engage with them. But UK can do it, right ? Is this why Mrs. May seems to be doing nothing at the moment ?
UK can exit A50 and a couple of days later trigger A50 again. They get another 2 years as a member of EU. It is possible.

Not if they believe it's not in good faith.

prawnsambo

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

We wouldn't have to be party to any UK trade deals, and we would not have to accept US goods for sale in Ireland. We are talking about where you physically check the goods. And we have made it a political priority that those checks do not take place anywhere near Northern Ireland.

In the case of a hard brexit, that is unavoidable unfortunately. Both the UK and the EU would require it, no matter the posturing coming from certain sections of the UK establishment. No border checks means industrial scale smuggling.

J Mysterio

Mr.Wemmick wrote: »

Yes, and the next leader of the Labour party I think. Either her or K. Starmer would be good.

I've been very impressed with her throughout this whole debacle, particularly in the committee's. I like Hilary Benn too for the same reason. While Starmer seems a decent fellow, his closeness to Corbyn has almost tainted him but he does speak his own mind sometimes I guess.

Folkstonian

prawnsambo wrote: »

I'm slightly flummoxed by your surprise. This is Ireland. We have our own politicians. That we even pay enough attention to british politics to know the names of some of your politicians should be the surprise. Or is this british exceptionalism again?

Just because both of you contribute very frequently to these threads (you must have posted hundreds of times?) often submitting apparently learned analyses of contemporary British politics and society - I simply assumed that given your clear enthusiasm for Brexit politics, you’d know Yvette Cooper was a member of the Labour Party

And to satisfy you, yes a tiny hint of British exceptionalism as well.

johnnyskeleton

prawnsambo wrote: »

It's not that simple. A lot of chicken is exported from NI (and Ireland) to the UK and turned into ready meals and re-imported. There would be no way to know the source of the chicken or other meat products, once they are processed. And that's just at that basic level. There would be thousands of products imported here from the UK into multiples like Tesco and M&S and we would have no control over their content or any means of establishing it. So ostensibly our product gets processed, comes back and is re-exported and we've no tracability? Death of our food industry right there.

Traceability is a regulatory matter and can be enforced just the same as any other regulation. What you describe in terms of no means of establishing the origins is something that has already arisen in the context of the EU:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_horse_meat_scandal

In 2013 French abatoirs were selling horse meat falsely declared as beef. That happened within the EU.

In relation to products that get processed and are re-exported, that too is something that happens in Europe. A recent example is that bicycle parts were being imported into Europe, assembled and sold as European bikes. So the EU passed regulations in relation to these:

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2018/march/tradoc_156658.exemptions.en.L79-2018.pdf

If there was a problem with a perception of poor food being imported from the UK into Ireland, that too could be resolved by regulation.

prawnsambo

Folkstonian wrote: »

Just because both of you contribute very frequently to these threads (you must have posted hundreds of times?) often submitting apparently learned analyses of contemporary British politics and society - I simply assumed that given your clear enthusiasm for Brexit politics, you’d know Yvette Cooper was a member of the Labour Party

And to satisfy you, yes a tiny hint of British exceptionalism as well.

Well you can look on it as a manifestation of the fractured nature of British politics. Where both of the main parties are so split on the subject that you can't tell which is which from their pronouncements on the issue.

FrancieBrady

Folkstonian wrote: »

Just because both of you contribute very frequently to these threads (you must have posted hundreds of times?) often submitting apparently learned analyses of contemporary British politics and society - I simply assumed that given your clear enthusiasm for Brexit politics, you’d know Yvette Cooper was a member of the Labour Party

And to satisfy you, yes a tiny hint of British exceptionalism as well.

I generally listen to what people have to say and react. Not great with names tbh.
I don't really bother distinguishing parties as like FG/FF here Con/Lab sound much the same around Brexit issues anyhow - utterly confused and self interested.

J Mysterio

I think the UK might see the dropping of registration fees as a concession to the EU, and perhaps one that should be met in kind. EU only want to discuss the future relationship though, the deal being done and redlines remaining as they are.

Folkstonian

J Mysterio wrote: »

I've been very impressed with her throughout this whole debacle, particularly in the committee's. I like Hilary Benn too for the same reason. While Starmer seems a decent fellow, his closeness to Corbyn has almost tainted him.

I agree that Hillary Benn is clearly an astute, principled man. And a great orator as well, something Corbyn most certainly isn’t. I always think back to his speech in parliament before the Syria vote, a candidate for the most compelling address to the house this century.

Starmer is just another of Corbyn’s lackeys. Unwilling to stand with the likes of Benn and Cooper against a man doing terrible damage to the party

johnnyskeleton

prawnsambo wrote: »

In the case of a hard brexit, that is unavoidable unfortunately. Both the UK and the EU would require it, no matter the posturing coming from certain sections of the UK establishment. No border checks means industrial scale smuggling.

Which is why we are looking to try to find ways around a hard brexit.

prawnsambo

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Traceability is a regulatory matter and can be enforced just the same as any other regulation. What you describe in terms of no means of establishing the origins is something that has already arisen in the context of the EU:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_horse_meat_scandal

In 2013 French abatoirs were selling horse meat falsely declared as beef. That happened within the EU.

In relation to products that get processed and are re-exported, that too is something that happens in Europe. A recent example is that bicycle parts were being imported into Europe, assembled and sold as European bikes. So the EU passed regulations in relation to these:

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2018/march/tradoc_156658.exemptions.en.L79-2018.pdf

If there was a problem with a perception of poor food being imported from the UK into Ireland, that too could be resolved by regulation.

Yes. That exact episode was what coloured my thinking when posting. But you can't regulate for a country that's outside the regulatory framework. How is that supposed to work?

briany

Just to help me get this straight - May's plan B is to take her current plan and open it to amendments from the HoC?

bilston

Cross Channel Freight Trade could drop by up 87% for 3-6 months according to a leaked Border Force document on Sky News tonight in a No Deal Brexit.

That means a lot of empty supermarket shelves, shortage of medicines, fuel price rises, and a lack of parts for manufacturing meaning factories closing and lots and lots of jobs being lost.

That might explain why British Army reservists are getting their call up papers over the next few weeks...

prawnsambo

briany wrote: »

Just to help me get this straight - May's plan B is to take her current plan and open it to amendments from the HoC?

Apparently yes. It probably should be referred to henceforth as "Build a Brexit".

J Mysterio

briany wrote: »

Just to help me get this straight - May's plan B is to take her current plan and open it to amendments from the HoC?

lol, yes.

It will be some sort of Frankenstein of the deal agreed. Just like Boris said: 'take the deal, get rid of the backstop, and then surgically remove the bad bits.

And then... it will be presented to the EU presumably....

prawnsambo

bilston wrote: »

Cross Channel Freight Trade could drop by up 87% for 3-6 months according to a leaked Border Force document on Sky News tonight in a No Deal Brexit.

That means a lot of empty supermarket shelves, shortage of medicines, fuel price rises, and a lack of parts for manufacturing meaning factories closing and lots and lots of jobs being lost.

That might explain why British Army reservists are getting their call up papers over the next few weeks...

Guarding the stockpiles apparently. Hard to imagine that this level of security is needed or that things would get so broken as to require it.

Eric Cartman

prawnsambo wrote: »

Guarding the stockpiles apparently. Hard to imagine that this level of security is needed or that things would get so broken as to require it.

all those post apocalyptic films might come in handy soon enough. When the kegs and cigarette machines run dry thats when itll kick off.

Call me Al

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

You haven't already explained that to me, but do you think that the scale of it is larger than enforcing a hard border with Northern Ireland? Over 200 border crossings vs. a handful of ports! Even leaving the logistics aside, it's certainly far less politically charged.

Regarding calling into question the integrity of all our exports, what you are fundamentally trying to suggest is that the EU would not accept exports from Ireland if there was an open border with the U.K. But lets look at the reality of the situation. No border is completely impenetrable. Drugs, for example, get into the EU and circulate amongst member states all the time. Likewise with non duty paid cigarettes from outside the E.U. There is no way of absolutely stopping these things, all you can do is impose checks. If the E.U. was satisfied with an arrangement , they can hardly complain about it at the same time.

We aren't dealing with good choices. We are dealing with a catastrophic hard brexit or finding some kind of practical solution. Let's not be like the British and pick battles we cannot win. We want to avoid a hard border in Northern Ireland at all costs. This means we will need to find compromises in other areas or else accept the mutually assured destruction of no deal. Which is probably what is going to happen in any event.

We aren't talking about these few old reliable common black-market things coming into our country. We are talking about anything and everything Any thing that the UK will import via a trade deal or unscrupulous import/export business. How do we control or police this? And by virtue of the fact that it's all things it compromises our domestic market, and yes I do think that this alone will be more difficult to enforce than a hard border with the North, before we even consider the consequences for our export markets. I think this would be the end of our compliance with EU standards.

I do agree with you on one point. We aren't dealing with good choices, so why should we start compounding them for ourselves.
I would contend that this is a battle we have to win.

Eta when I talk about domestic market in thus and previous posts I'm talking about the goods and services traded and consumed within the ROI, not what we are exporting.

SimonTemplar

How safe is May in her position. I mean she survived a vote of no confidence as did her government. Is it now impossible to force her out if she doesn't resign?

Eric Cartman

SimonTemplar wrote: »

How safe is May in her position. I mean she survived a vote of no confidence as did her government. Is it now impossible to force her out if she doesn't resign?

Im convinced may was only saved and is only safe because all the talk is economic at the moment and the markets plus everyone in political spheres is far too afraid to hand this unsteady ship over to Corbyn, it would tank the pound overnight. If Corbyn resigned and a moderate took his place it would start the sharks circling for May.

prawnsambo

Eric Cartman wrote: »

all those post apocalyptic films might come in handy soon enough. When the kegs and cigarette machines run dry thats when itll kick off.

I think somebody is already selling Brexit survival packs. Fairly sure I saw it mentioned on Twitter where they had already sold 600 of them at £300 a pop or thereabouts.

Eric Cartman

prawnsambo wrote: »

I think somebody is already selling Brexit survival packs. Fairly sure I saw it mentioned on Twitter where they had already sold 600 of them at £300 a pop or thereabouts.

Id imagine superkings and carling have done a joint venture on a giant warehouse in sheffield just to make sure they keep everyone calm.

SimonTemplar

CNN's headline is 'May's Brexit Plan B is Plan A again'. It is a total national embarrassment.

Enzokk

Folkstonian wrote: »

I agree that Hillary Benn is clearly an astute, principled man. And a great orator as well, something Corbyn most certainly isn’t. I always think back to his speech in parliament before the Syria vote, a candidate for the most compelling address to the house this century.

Starmer is just another of Corbyn’s lackeys. Unwilling to stand with the likes of Benn and Cooper against a man doing terrible damage to the party

I think you are being harsh on Starmer. I have seen nothing to suggest he is a Corbyn lackey and he is actually in direct opposition to Corbyn on Brexit. You have to remember that Corbyn doesn't actually have enough supporters in the party to fill all of the shadow cabinet positions with yes men so he has to have those with opposing views in the shadow cabinet.

As for standing against Corbyn, he was only elected in the 2015 election and thus would have only been a MP for a few weeks in the first leadership bid. He also backed Andy Burnham for leadership. It was only a year later when Corbyn was challenged again and he would have been an MP for only a little more than a year at that as well. His views on the EU is in stark contradiction of those of Milne and McDonell as well so he is at least in my eyes in no way a Corbyn lackey.

I would think if there was a new leadership challenge he would have more to think about in terms of standing this time as he has had experience for a few years now at least.

SimonTemplar wrote: »

How safe is May in her position. I mean she survived a vote of no confidence as did her government. Is it now impossible to force her out if she doesn't resign?

She is safe because the DUP will back her as they know she is their backdoor to power and the Conservatives will always put party ahead of country.

tuxy

SimonTemplar wrote: »

CNN's headline is 'May's Brexit Plan B is Plan A again'. It is a total national embarrassment.

You have to have some shame left to be embarrassed.

Seth Brundle

Akrasia wrote: »

There will be a HOC amendment next week that will demand either an extension to A50 or a revocation of A50 if no withdrawal agreement is passed before 29th of March

The UK are in no position to be making demands from the EU!

Mezcita

Enzokk wrote: »

I think you are being harsh on Starmer. I have seen nothing to suggest he is a Corbyn lackey and he is actually in direct opposition to Corbyn on Brexit. You have to remember that Corbyn doesn't actually have enough supporters in the party to fill all of the shadow cabinet positions with yes men so he has to have those with opposing views in the shadow cabinet.

As for standing against Corbyn, he was only elected in the 2015 election and thus would have only been a MP for a few weeks in the first leadership bid. He also backed Andy Burnham for leadership. It was only a year later when Corbyn was challenged again and he would have been an MP for only a little more than a year at that as well. His views on the EU is in stark contradiction of those of Milne and McDonell as well so he is at least in my eyes in no way a Corbyn lackey.

I would think if there was a new leadership challenge he would have more to think about in terms of standing this time as he has had experience for a few years now at least.





She is safe because the DUP will back her as they know she is their backdoor to power and the Conservatives will always put party ahead of country.

Curious as to why nobody has tried to push Corbyn out yet though. Surely they must be getting worried with Labour being behind in the polls despite the Tories being so useless.

Call me Al

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

We wouldn't have to be party to any UK trade deals, and we would not have to accept US goods for sale in Ireland. We are talking about where you physically check the goods. And we have made it a political priority that those checks do not take place anywhere near Northern Ireland.

So where do these checks take place? In the Irish sea. Once the items are already on the ROI supermarket shelves? In the Irish sea?

Spanish Eyes

I really hope at this stage that the EU negotiators do not give an inch now.

Time is nearly up. Forget about the Polish Foreign Minister, who the feck does he think he is anyway? SNIP. Mod: No more insults please.

10000maniacs

prawnsambo wrote: »

Guarding the stockpiles apparently. Hard to imagine that this level of security is needed or that things would get so broken as to require it.

If it gets that bad in the UK after a hard Brexit, I don't see it being any different here. Tesco's/ Dunnes/ Boots and Supervalu shelves are in the mainstream stocked from the UK. And Aldi/LIDL stock comes via the UK. The UK are dragging us down with them.