Brexit Discussion Thread VI

Infini

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

I feel it's the opposite - the EU Commission and EU Leaders' are putting the prospect of a compromise with the backstop on the table. It'll never be acknowledged publicly and it will have to be something the Irish Government proposes.

The latest reports emerging are that the Irish Government is growing increasingly concerned that Ireland could be isolated outside of Europe alongside Britain if a hard border is not implemented on the island of Ireland in the event of a no deal scenario. It is being suggested that a customs hard border could be imposed at Calais and Rotterdam. This is a seriously worrying development for Ireland. The Taoiseach apparently briefed the leaders of the opposition parties on the matter this evening. It seems to me that the EU Commission could be about to force Ireland to compromise on the backstop in order to avoid us being isolated with Britain, or force us to implement a hard border ourselves.

The Irish Examiner are carrying a detailed story on it tomorrow.

I would hold on any hearsay and such right now until things are clearer. Right now everyone is planning contingencies and noone knows whats truly going to happen. This is a problem purely of the UKs making and they wont be able to get away from the EU in the long run. There wont be any kicking of Ireland or anything either at most they might have extra checks. The backstop will not be dropped or changed because quite literally its the only workable option for Ireland. If they cannot have it as part of WA it will be part of future agreement.

If there is a border the simple truth is they cant just be seen to throw Ireland under the bus expecially considering this will be caused by the reckless actions of a former member state with an utterly incompent government. Not only that but the last thing the EU needs is to fuel populists in other EU states either and be seen to damage a member for circumstances outside their control.

joeysoap

Charles Babbage wrote: »

Sealing roads would simply lead to people opening them again. You could shoot them, of course, but that might have political consequences or the Gardai and Army might simply refuse.



Historical precedents re stopping smuggling are not good.

https://www.independent.ie/regionals/argus/news/building-tunnels-under-the-border-to-smuggle-pigs-fascinated-worlds-media-26938725.html



However, even if there was a "no deal" on 30 March, I wouldn't panic, the British have to make a deal, the cannot ignore the EU. The majority in NI want the border open, a "no deal" is not stable.

Didn’t Brendan McGahon (Louth td) say that more oil went through Culloville than through the Straits of Hurmuz? In the Dail. He was (half) joking. I think.
Couldn’t close the roads that time anyway. As for foot and mouth, sometimes I was stopped, sometimes had to dip my feet in a bucket the Garciai had, sometimes the car was sprayed. Dundalk fc had to play in drogheda but nobody told the birds not to fly over the border. And if there was delays you just went around the checkpoint. Nuisance and depending on what road you were on sometimes added a few miles to your journey. ( you had to guess which was better). Nobody wants a return of that.

sandbelter

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

I feel it's the opposite - the EU Commission and EU Leaders' are putting the prospect of a compromise with the backstop on the table. It'll never be acknowledged publicly and it will have to be something the Irish Government proposes.

The latest reports emerging are that the Irish Government is growing increasingly concerned that Ireland could be isolated outside of Europe alongside Britain if a hard border is not implemented on the island of Ireland in the event of a no deal scenario. It is being suggested that a customs hard border could be imposed at Calais and Rotterdam. This is a seriously worrying development for Ireland. The Taoiseach apparently briefed the leaders of the opposition parties on the matter this evening. It seems to me that the EU Commission could be about to force Ireland to compromise on the backstop in order to avoid us being isolated with Britain, or force us to implement a hard border ourselves.

The Irish Examiner are carrying a detailed story on it tomorrow.

Customs checking your exports into Europe will signal to the world a de facto Irexit.

This is the worst possible outcome for Ireland....a hard board is a disaster but this would send a simple message to the world....Europe comes second.

Kermit.de.frog

They should take it to the wire and no deal. If it's a hard border so be it but we should not allow ourselves be pushed around by the UK.

A second referendum in the UK is not far away now. If the government holds out there is every prospect a vote can be forced through the Commons.

judeboy101

Rte confirming story, Leo told party leaders checks on France and Holland on goods from Ireland. We will be effectively outside CU .

https://www.rte.ie/news/2019/0122/1024903-brexit-border/

Peregrinus

judeboy101 wrote: »

Rte confirming story, Leo told party leaders checks on France and Holland on goods from Ireland. We will be effectively outside CU .

Important gloss required here: checks in France and Holland on goods from Ireland in a no-deal Brexit situation, if we fail to operate checks on goods crossing the RoI/UK border.

But, seriously, this isn't news to anybody, is it? This is the whole reason why we need a Withdrawal Agreement with a backstop in it.

judeboy101

Peregrinus wrote: »

Important gloss required here: checks in France and Holland on goods from Ireland in a no-deal Brexit situation, if we fail to operate checks on goods crossing the RoI/UK border.

But, seriously, this isn't news to anybody, is it? This is the whole reason why we need a Withdrawal Agreement with a backstop in it.

The UK have never moved from their position that they will not put up a hard border. Leo and Simon have spun that they won't. The EU supports Ireland and the GFA, "we are Irish" bull****. Ironically JRM said this is what would happen a year ago. Seems he was more honest than Leo & friends.

Zubeneschamali

Peregrinus wrote: »

Important gloss required here: checks in France and Holland on goods from Ireland in a no-deal Brexit situation, if we fail to operate checks on goods crossing the RoI/UK border.

I forget the date, but it is maybe a year, year and a half ago, Irish officials were talking about Border preparations and Varadkar told them to shut up about it. Not to stop planning, but to stop talking.


Precisely because all the "EU will stab us in the back and then kick us out and then take their knife home with them" talk would start. As, indeed, it has.

judeboy101

judeboy101 wrote: »

Rte confirming story, Leo told party leaders checks on France and Holland on goods from Ireland. We will be effectively outside CU .

https://www.rte.ie/news/2019/0122/1024903-brexit-border/

Well that would be a guaranteed return to violence.

The Irish hating the British for wrecking the country, and the British hating the Irish for wrecking the withdrawal agreement, and NI stuck in the middle.

Calina

judeboy101 wrote: »

Rte confirming story, Leo told party leaders checks on France and Holland on goods from Ireland. We will be effectively outside CU .

https://www.rte.ie/news/2019/0122/1024903-brexit-border/

Well frankly, I want a hard border in that case. And it is about time Britain recognised and took ownership of it. I dont care if the said they didnt want one, it results from their decision. At no point has anyone on the UK side been honest about the consequences of their decision.

Hard border results from Brexit. UK is responsible for it.

Enzokk

EdgeCase wrote: »

Bear in mind another issue : it will be a customs border if it happens. It won't be a security or immigration border as movement of people issues don't really arrise.

Yes it would only be a custom post but as Fintan O'Toole puts it in this clip that it becomes a target and once it is a target you have to protect it. That is when the trouble starts.

https://twitter.com/The_Convention_/status/1086214907304046592

The move from just a customs post to a security post attached could happen very quickly and from there we sort of know where it leads to.

EdgeCase wrote: »

There's no compromise situation on the table. The single market rules are very serious and are further backed up by the WTO rules.

The only solution would take Ireland out of the common market and into some associate member status which would be a total disaster.

I'd say we are going to have to come up with some kind of academic and technical border that works on paper trails tbh and try damn hard to convince the EU and WTO that it is going to be actually enforced bureaucratically to the point that no infrastructure is needed.

We do know that both Ireland and the UK knows about the need to keep the border open. If the UK wasn't serious about this we would not have had the backstop that was agreed in the WA. So I still think it is just as likely that we will still see a deal on the side of no deal (I know how that sounds) where the UK will do customs checks in the Irish Sea to avoid a border in the case of no deal instead of them also having to put up a border in NI. Their military will be stretched on the mainland in any case to also have to worry about dying again in NI. That is my hope at least.

Peregrinus wrote: »

Important gloss required here: checks in France and Holland on goods from Ireland in a no-deal Brexit situation, if we fail to operate checks on goods crossing the RoI/UK border.

But, seriously, this isn't news to anybody, is it? This is the whole reason why we need a Withdrawal Agreement with a backstop in it.

Well in no deal there would need to be checks somewhere, it would just depend where they will take place. What we are reading right now is that our government is exploring all the options open to them. This is going to be one big game of chicken and seeing the reaction of some here they would not fare well if they were put in the hot seat.

Peregrinus

judeboy101 wrote: »

The UK have never moved from their position that they will not put up a hard border.

Has HMG (as opposed to this or that loopy Brexiter) actually said this? SFAIK they have not but I'm open to correction. (But if you are correcting me, a link to a source for HMG saying this would be appreciated.)

judeboy101 wrote: »

Leo and Simon have spun that they won't. The EU supports Ireland and the GFA, "we are Irish" bull****. Ironically JRM said this is what would happen a year ago. Seems he was more honest than Leo & friends.

IrlGov's position has been that they don't intend to erect border controls because they expect the UK to honour its no-hard-border guarantee, so it won't be necessary. We've always known that if the UK welshes on its gurantee, it will be necessary, and planning/preparation has taken this into account. But it was never a wise strategy for IrlGov to say that they didn't expect the UK to honour its guarantee - how would that help matters? - so they have avoided discussing this.

Enzokk

Faisal Islam shared this interesting tweet about polls and their support for Remain or Leave and how Remain has has a lead for a long time now. This is actually different than before the referendum where the polls were actually very close and split on whether people would want to remain or leave.

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1087859091748413440

Opinion polling for the United Kingdom European Union membership referendum

Also we have to think that the polling companies will have refined the way they interpret the data following the referendum as they were in uncharted waters before the vote.

Peregrinus

Enzokk wrote: »

Faisal Islam shared this interesting tweet about polls and their support for Remain or Leave and how Remain has has a lead for a long time now. This is actually different than before the referendum where the polls were actually very close and split on whether people would want to remain or leave.

What the polls show is:

(a) if there were a second referendum, most people would vote to Remain; but

(b) most people don't want a second referendum.

Confused? Me too.

Enzokk wrote: »

Also we have to think that the polling companies will have refined the way they interpret the data following the referendum as they were in uncharted waters before the vote.

The thing last time, as I understand it, was that the polls correctly reflected how people would vote, but the polling companies failed to correctly predict who would vote. Which is to say, the polls were correct about how voters of various ages, gender, socioeconomic class, etc would break down between Leave and Remain, but what was not forseen was the very high turnout, with groups that normally vote in low numbers turning out in high numbers.

Presumably they're trying hard to get this right now. But whether they succeed or not, we won't know unless there is actually a second referendum.

Mr.Wemmick

George Osborne being interviewed in Davos said the problem here if you continue to pretend you are leaving without a deal it just might become a reality.
He went on to say that Philip Hammond has sensibly told UK business leaders that isn't a possibility, but we now need to hear it from the Prime Minister.

Osborne's comments highlight what a shambles this whole process is when no one really knows what the hell is going on and what is going to happen.

judeboy101

Peregrinus wrote: »

Has HMG (as opposed to this or that loopy Brexiter) actually said this? SFAIK they have not but I'm open to correction. (But if you are correcting me, a link to a source for HMG saying this would be appreciated.)


IrlGov's position has been that they don't intend to erect border controls because they expect the UK to honour its no-hard-border guarantee, so it won't be necessary. We've always known that if the UK welshes on its gurantee, it will be necessary, and planning/preparation has taken this into account. But it was never a wise strategy for IrlGov to say that they didn't expect the UK to honour its guarantee - how would that help matters? - so they have avoided discussing this.

You ask for link then quote "the UK to honour its no hard border guarantee"

RobMc59

Peregrinus wrote: »

What the polls show is:

(a) if there were a second referendum, most people would vote to Remain; but

(b) most people don't want a second referendum.

Confused? Me too.


The thing last time, as I understand it, was that the polls correctly reflected how people would vote, but the polling companies failed to correctly predict who would vote. Which is to say, the polls were correct about how voters of various ages, gender, socioeconomic class, etc would break down between Leave and Remain, but what was not forseen was the very high turnout, with groups that normally vote in low numbers turning out in high numbers.

Presumably they're trying hard to get this right now. But whether they succeed or not, we won't know unless there is actually a second referendum.

The last you gov survey I completed asked some quite in depth questions about Brexit- testing your understanding of things like "what does a no deal brexit mean?"-scary that there are UK citizens that don't understand the implications of a hard brexit,or indeed,any type of brexit imo.

Peregrinus

judeboy101 wrote: »

You ask for link then quote "the UK to honour its no hard border guarantee"

Yes. The UK's no-hard-border guarantee is that it won't Brexit on terms that result in a hard border. That's quite different from a statement that the UK will not in any circumstances operate border controls. The only way to honour the no-hard-border guarantee is to enter into agreed arrangements to keep the border open. Has the UK government ever said that, even in the absence of any agreed arrangements, it still won't operate border controls itself? I don't believe it ever has, but I'm happy to be corrected.

nice_guy80

You just cannot trust the UK in anything

they are lobbying all the EU countries behind the EU's back and trying to get the WA amended and trying to isolate Ireland.

murphaph

I would be totally and utterly opposed to border controls in France, throwing us into a single market and customs union with the crazies next door. Back to the 1930's.

Better a hard border and then veto any UK FTA with the EU that did not result in an open border (no Canada++ etc.). It would take a while to get set up any infrastructure anyway (we can drag our feet a bit there), spot checks by mobile patrols would be the order of the day and in the meantime the UK will be imploding around a permanent traffic jam in Kent, hopefully leading to government collapse and a national rethink.

NI will vote for unification once UK GDP falls 8% and the Westminster teat runs dry. I would vote for it too to get rid of the border. I suspect an awful lot of people who were quite happy with the status quo would do the same.

Macy0161

murphaph wrote: »

I would be totally and utterly opposed to border controls in France, throwing us into a single market and customs union with the crazies next door. Back to the 1930's.

Surely it's just kite flying/ scaremongering to prep for the inevitable hard border on the island in the event of a no deal? They really can't be seriously considering it as a solution, just saying this is the only way if no deal and no border controls!?!

FrancieBrady

Not sure what the confusion is about this am.
Surely all the posturing, all the negotiating and statements were about the prospect of a hard border if the UK exited without a deal?

Surely that was why we needed a 'backstop'?

We haven't, as yet got an agreed backstop. Of course there will be a hard border in those circumstances?

Call me Al

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Not sure what the confusion is about this am.
Surely all the posturing, all the negotiating and statements were about the prospect of a hard border if the UK exited without a deal?

Surely that was why we needed a 'backstop'?

We haven't, as yet got an agreed backstop. Of course there will be a hard border in those circumstances?

The easy way out of Britain's mess is for us to accept a time-limited backstop. Then that can gets kicked right down the road. Again. That's where we are being pushed.

lawred2

Call me Al wrote: »

The easy way out of Britain's mess is for us to accept a time-limited backstop. Then that can gets kicked right down the road. Again. That's where we are being pushed.

No that's the easy way out for Britain from a problem of their own creation.. and it would be a gift.

The easy way out for all is NI accepting that they have a unique place in this world and staying in the single market with checks in the Irish Sea.

The best of both worlds for them.

But the self destructive nature of identity politics and sectarianism precludes such pragmatism

FrancieBrady

Call me Al wrote: »

The easy way out of Britain's mess is for us to accept a time-limited backstop. Then that can gets kicked right down the road. Again. That's where we are being pushed.

Never quite trusted Leo and Simon on this. I can see it being suggested alright.

I think though that will fracture the Dail.
Westminster fractured and paralysed with division and the Dail fractured and paralysed with division?
We create the vacuum of inaction that was created in 1969. We certainly don't want to do that again.

Call me Al

lawred2 wrote: »

No that's the easy way out for Britain from a problem of their own creation..

The easy way out is NI accepting that they have a unique place in this world and staying in the single market with checks in the Irish Sea.

The best of both worlds for them.

But the self destructive nature of identity politics and sectarianism precludes such pragmatism

You get me wrong. I agree.

But it's also the easy way out for some member states in the EU with no skin in the game other than maybe having thousands of their citizens living and working in UK. As was demo'd by our Polish "friend". Hence we end up kicking the can down the road with this time-limited backstop.

The UK are once again treating us appallingly, with no regard for their own citizens living in NI.

McMurphy

lawred2 wrote: »

No that's the easy way out for Britain from a problem of their own creation.. and it would be a gift.

The easy way out for all is NI accepting that they have a unique place in this world and staying in the single market with checks in the Irish Sea.

The best of both worlds for them.

But the self destructive nature of identity politics and sectarianism precludes such pragmatism

Would a UK general election, where hopefully, if it's spelled out clearly and simply enough for the people in the North what awaits them if the dup are returned to their positions as kingmakers potentially solve the mess?

Macy0161

Call me Al wrote: »

The easy way out of Britain's mess is for us to accept a time-limited backstop.

I don't see that as being enough to get the WA over the line in the HoC, unless May concedes on her red lines for the following negotiations (opening up a customs union, which does have a majority).

prawnsambo

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Never quite trusted Leo and Simon on this. I can see it being suggested alright.

I think though that will fracture the Dail.
Westminster fractured and paralysed with division and the Dail fractured and paralysed with division?
We create the vacuum of inaction that was created in 1969. We certainly don't want to do that again.

Maybe you're right. But I would think that if they blink now, they're screwed. And I reckon they know that. It's not as though they made conciliatory noises when the idea was floated, so accepting it now would be a very visible and weakening climb down.

It's squeaky bum time. Which is the game May is playing with the HoC. We don't need to blink because she's driving her car directly at those who oppose her withdrawal agreement. And the other car has the ability (if it so wants) to call the whole thing off.

Zubeneschamali

Call me Al wrote: »

The easy way out of Britain's mess is for us to accept a time-limited backstop.

How long do you reckon, about 800 years?