Brexit Discussion Thread VI

boggerman1

Car crash interview by Michael creed on morning Ireland.still troting out the line that we don't want a hard border.everyone knows that there was going to have to be borders reintroduced once Britain decided to walk.if the EU border is now going to be Calais sure we in the south are going to be in the EU but outside the EU border or am I wrong.agriculture will be f**ked so

Leroy42

It is clear that the UK will not go with a No deal, and even if they do so because time ran out there will still be a large contingent within the HoC which will continue to push for a deal afterwards and that will grow rapidly as the real consequences become clear.

Already they are a few who voted against TM deal now saying they would vote for it, once she can get concessions. But they are simply settling the ground so the acceptance of the deal even without the concessions.

Leo, Ireland and the EU simply need to hold tight. What it totally uncalled for is that we give in to the total chaos in the UK. If we give in to that, say a time limit, there is simply no incentive for the UK to do anything on the basis that come the end of the time limit the EU and Ireland will simply give in once more.

A number of txts into Newstalk this morning claiming we should leave with the UK. Apart from the nonsense idea that it is is terms of trade links etc, are they proposing that we start to take up seats in the HoC as otherwise we would have no say in the rules and regulations set for us in this union.

kuro68k

nice_guy80 wrote: »

You just cannot trust the UK in anything

That's the real problem here. The UK is totally untrustworthy, which means the EU won't take any risks, and the UK assumes everyone else is just as bad as it is.

prawnsambo

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

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?

I think most people in the north know what the story is. But the UUP need to get their act together and present a viable option to those who are finding the DUP a bit too lemming-like for their taste.

seamus

murphaph wrote: »

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.

Realistically we're only concerned about goods anyway, so you pick the major arteries and set up checkpoints to stop and check all southbound commercial vehicles (we don't care about northbound) while allowing passenger vehicles through unchecked on another lane.

Some will take back roads to avoid it, but if you're driving an artic on your employer's time you're going to just take the M1 and not try navigate some rural roads. Getting a grip on 80%+ of goods movements should be doable inside a week. That's not to say the queues will move quickly. There'd be several hours spent waiting to be checked. A man with a chipper van could make a good killing.

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.

Ultimately we may as well take no backstop in that case. If the UK are unwilling to agree to the backstop, it's because they want the freedom to set up a hard border if they feel like it.

In the event of the backstop kicking in, they won't be encouraged to set up a new agreement, they will simply run down the clock as a negotiating tactic and use the impending economic doom as a way to try and get what they want.

They're doing it to themselves right now, so of course they would do the same thing to us.

Ultimately it's not really about the backstop anyway. If it wasn't about that, it would be about something else. The UK has not conducted any of this negotiation in good faith.

Get Real

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?

I agree with you there. I'm just disappointed this morning that I read the EU seems to have put the ball in Ireland's court as they seem to be asking us to accept concessions. Rather than maintain a unified stance

https://m.independent.ie/business/brexit/eu-now-looks-set-to-ask-ireland-to-accept-concessions-37739911.html

In reality, okay, we'd need a hard border in a no deal Brexit.

But, by the EU asking *US* for concessions, it puts a UK referendum issue in our court, and gives the UK a chance to deflect blame and say "well, we're waiting on Ireland's decision"

Even though Brexit wasn't our idea.

Leroy42

Get Real wrote: »

I agree with you there. I'm just disappointed this morning that I read the EU seems to have put the ball in Ireland's court as they seem to be asking us to accept concessions. Rather than maintain a unified stance

What concessions have the EU asked us to accept?

prawnsambo

seamus wrote: »

Realistically we're only concerned about goods anyway, so you pick the major arteries and set up checkpoints to stop and check all southbound commercial vehicles (we don't care about northbound) while allowing passenger vehicles through unchecked on another lane.

Some will take back roads to avoid it, but if you're driving an artic on your employer's time you're going to just take the M1 and not try navigate some rural roads. Getting a grip on 80%+ of goods movements should be doable inside a week. That's not to say the queues will move quickly. There'd be several hours spent waiting to be checked. A man with a chipper van could make a good killing.

Back in time before the SM and CU were fully operational, there were customs posts in Carrickcarnan and Greenore on this side of the border and Newry on the other. Afaik, they still exist and the process would involve stopping at those posts to clear customs so that there were no delays at the actual border. On the Newry road, there was a small customs checkpoint at the border which would stop passing traffic. Iirc, they would just check to make sure you had your papers in order, but that wouldn't be entirely necessary at first. So it can be soft enough at the actual crossing points at least for a time.

FrancieBrady

Get Real wrote: »

I agree with you there. I'm just disappointed this morning that I read the EU seems to have put the ball in Ireland's court as they seem to be asking us to accept concessions. Rather than maintain a unified stance

In reality, okay, we'd need a hard border in a no deal Brexit.

But, by the EU asking US for concessions, it puts a UK referendum issue in our court, and gives the UK a chance to deflect blame and say "well, we're waiting on Ireland's decision"

Even though Brexit wasn't our idea.

A large part of what you are listening to this morning is the slow learners in Ireland finally waking up and catching up.

I am not aware of the rest of the EU officially asking US for concessions. Can you link? (I am aware of a rogue Polish minister asking at the behest of a UK MP)

Leroy42

seamus wrote: »

Realistically we're only concerned about goods anyway, so you pick the major arteries and set up checkpoints to stop and check all southbound commercial vehicles (we don't care about northbound) while allowing passenger vehicles through unchecked on another lane.

Some will take back roads to avoid it, but if you're driving an artic on your employer's time you're going to just take the M1 and not try navigate some rural roads. Getting a grip on 80%+ of goods movements should be doable inside a week. That's not to say the queues will move quickly. There'd be several hours spent waiting to be checked. A man with a chipper van could make a good killing.

A chain is only as strong as the weakest link. If, for example, the UK agree a trade deal with the US and start getting chlorinated chicken, how can we assure the rest of the EU that that is not coming into our products? We can't.

Will they accept a certain %? Doubt it. So in effect we will see all ROI goods being tested in EU ports. In effect the UK will have the same trade terms outside the EU than we will have inside it.

The time is fast approaching where Ireland needs to make a decision. DO we blindly follow the UK off the cliff, or do we stick with the EU. In my opinion, there is only one choice.

Christy42

Get Real wrote: »

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?

I agree with you there. I'm just disappointed this morning that I read the EU seems to have put the ball in Ireland's court as they seem to be asking us to accept concessions. Rather than maintain a unified stance

https://m.independent.ie/business/brexit/eu-now-looks-set-to-ask-ireland-to-accept-concessions-37739911.html

In reality, okay, we'd need a hard border in a no deal Brexit.

But, by the EU asking *US* for concessions, it puts a UK referendum issue in our court, and gives the UK a chance to deflect blame and say "well, we're waiting on Ireland's decision"

Even though Brexit wasn't our idea.

The EU have not asked as far as I can tell. Leo just laid out the options and this was one of them. He should have kept stum or kept a tighter leash on the people in the room though.

Remember this may seem like a get out clause for the UK but their economy still tanks. It is not a real get out for those worried about Brexit there. They just drag us further down with them in this scenario.

prawnsambo

Get Real wrote: »

I agree with you there. I'm just disappointed this morning that I read the EU seems to have put the ball in Ireland's court as they seem to be asking us to accept concessions. Rather than maintain a unified stance

https://m.independent.ie/business/brexit/eu-now-looks-set-to-ask-ireland-to-accept-concessions-37739911.html

In reality, okay, we'd need a hard border in a no deal Brexit.

But, by the EU asking *US* for concessions, it puts a UK referendum issue in our court, and gives the UK a chance to deflect blame and say "well, we're waiting on Ireland's decision"

Even though Brexit wasn't our idea.

You're parrotting a headline in The Indo where the body of the article doesn't back up the headline. As usual.

There is no mention of concessions being required. Just a spin on what was said yeaterday about what a hard brexit would mean for the border. Which, to be brutally honest is pretty much "D'uh". We knew this. We always knew this.

seamus

Get Real wrote: »

I agree with you there. I'm just disappointed this morning that I read the EU seems to have put the ball in Ireland's court as they seem to be asking us to accept concessions. Rather than maintain a unified stance

https://m.independent.ie/business/brexit/eu-now-looks-set-to-ask-ireland-to-accept-concessions-37739911.html

There's nothing in that about asking Ireland to accept concessions.

The EU stating that a hard border is inevitable after no deal, is not news to anyone, least of all our Government.

For whatever reason the Indo seems to be taking the line that the Withdrawal Agreement is still up for negotiation and that Angela Merkel can change it with the flick of a pen.

I guess when the EU position has remained so consistent and unchanged, bad journalists have to invent drama to make interesting stories.

badtoro

Where exactly has the suggestion of a border on the European mainland coast come from? Is the origin known?

I would prefer a hard border on this island than a border between Ireland and the rest of the EU.

Leroy42

That article in the Irish Independent

EU now looks set to ask Ireland to accept concessions

contains no mention of concessions in the actual article.

It merely states that a No deal means hard border.

Edit, - as others have pointed out

EdgeCase

All this talk of leaving with the UK is insane.

1. The UK does not see us as a partner of any kind of equal status. We would have no say in anything that might impinge their notion of English sovereignty. So we would be begging for crumbs. We don't even have a guarantee that they would agree to operate a customs union with us. They never did in the past. We had no customs union with the UK or single market until 1993 when the European Single Market reached a stage when the border was dissolved.

2. We have no formal arrangement with the UK beyond a travel area for Irish or UK people which is unaffected by Brexit anyway.

3. We use the Euro. Setting up the IEP again would mean almost certain economic collapse. Particularly given our debt load from 2008 and the likelihood of massive inflation. Even the practicalities of undoing that would make the UK's Brexit seem like a walk in the park.

4. FDI and even domestic companies needing EU access would leave rather rapidly.

5. The economic uncertainty would probably cause a flight of capital and savings to eurozone.

Basically Irexit would be economic suicide. You'd pretty much destroy Ireland's economy, set it back to the 1950s and render us utterly beholden to the whims of the UK government.

Does anyone (other than maybe the DUP) want that?!

My view of it is hold on to what we have and ride this out, while maximizing any upsides to Brexit in terms of grabbing as much fleeing UK trade as we possibly can.

Northern Ireland's situation will likely resolve itself too as political pressure in the north inevitably will be brought to bear should a hard border emerge or should the NI economy go into serious decline.

An Irexit situation could set Irish independence back decades and turn us back into a de facto UK dependency.

Also, if someone's going to drive a car off a cliff, you don't let them lock you into the boot!

lawred2

seamus wrote: »

There's nothing in that about asking Ireland to accept concessions.

The EU stating that a hard border is inevitable after no deal, is not news to anyone, least of all our Government.

For whatever reason the Indo seems to be taking the line that the Withdrawal Agreement is still up for negotiation and that Angela Merkel can change it with the flick of a pen.

I guess when the EU position has remained so consistent and unchanged, bad journalists have to invent drama to make interesting stories.

what's in it for the Indo to pen such crap?

in the business section as well!

LeinsterDub

boggerman1 wrote: »

Car crash interview by Michael creed on morning Ireland.still troting out the line that we don't want a hard border.everyone knows that there was going to have to be borders reintroduced once Britain decided to walk.if the EU border is now going to be Calais sure we in the south are going to be in the EU but outside the EU border or am I wrong.agriculture will be f**ked so

What we want and what we have to do are two different things. I want to be in the pub beside a nice warm fire I have to be in work however

Russman

IMO only the very blinkered or stupid would put any "blame" on the Irish govt. if border posts have to go up as a result of a crash out. The world and its mother have known that there can't not be a border if there's no backstop or trade deal. No doubt one party would use it for political point scoring but most reasonable people would know its been foisted upon us by the UK's actions (in reality the DUP). In reality there's no choice, its not a will we or won't we put up a border, we'll simply have to.

I think a hard border is by far the lesser of two evils if it comes to choosing between it or staying in the SM & CU. But I'd definitely be flagging our potential use of the veto when the FTA negotiations happen down the line.

prawnsambo

lawred2 wrote: »

what's in it for the Indo to pen such crap?

in the business section as well!

Clickbait. It's in their DNA now. I pretty much never read it because (a) it's packed with tabloidesque stories and (b) the 'journalism' has gone full-on clickbaity.

And this is another example of it. If a story can be spun to create a headline that will get everyone clicking, then lots more ad revenue. And that's the sole and only point.

One thing I took from that article was that Varadkar has met with opposition leaders to discuss the situation. And that's a good move. It cuts down on stupid questions being asked in the Dail that will only exacerbate the situation and create more clickbaity headlines.

VinLieger

boggerman1 wrote: »

Car crash interview by Michael creed on morning Ireland.still troting out the line that we don't want a hard border.everyone knows that there was going to have to be borders reintroduced once Britain decided to walk.if the EU border is now going to be Calais sure we in the south are going to be in the EU but outside the EU border or am I wrong.agriculture will be f**ked so

The border wont be at calais because that then impinges on our freedom of movement and services

VinLieger

prawnsambo wrote: »

One thing I took from that article was that Varadkar has met with opposition leaders to discuss the situation. And that's a good move. It cuts down on stupid questions being asked in teh Dail that will only exacerbate the situation and create more clickbaity headlines.

This exactly, its good to see them all knowing to work together in the best interests of the country and not use this to gain leverage or points over each other, unlike the eejits next door

LeinsterDub

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.

That would be a time-limited some thing else . As it fundamentally wouldn't be a backstop if it's time-limited

RobMc59

EdgeCase wrote: »

All this talk of leaving with the UK is insane.

1. The UK does not see us as a partner of any kind of equal status. We would have no say in anything that might impinge their notion of English sovereignty. So we would be begging for crumbs.

2. We have no formal arrangement with the UK beyond a travel area for Irish or UK people which is unaffected by Brexit anyway.

3. We use the Euro. Setting up the IEP again would mean almost certain economic collapse. Particularly given out debt load from 2008 and the likelihood of massive inflation. Even the practicalities of undoing that would make the UK's Brexit seem like a walk in the park.

4. FDI and even domestic companies needing EU access would leave rather rapidly.

5. The economic uncertainty would probably cause a flight of capital and savings to eurozone.

Basically Irexit would be economic suicide. You'd pretty much destroy Ireland's economy, set it back to the 1950s and render us utterly beholden to the whims of the UK government.

Does anyone (other than maybe the DUP) want that?!

My view of it is hold on to what we have and ride this out, while maximizing any upsides to Brexit in terms of grabbing as much fleeing UK trade as we possibly can.

Northern Ireland's situation will likely resolve itself too as political pressure in the north inevitably will be brought to bear should a hard border emerge or should the NI economy go into serious decline.

An Irexit situation could set Irish independence back decades and turn us back into a de facto UK dependency.

Also, if someone's going to drive a car off a cliff, you don't let them lock you into the boot!

This whole view is based on NI collapsing and what can be "grabbed "from the UK-I thought it was the UK who was self serving and selfish?

EdgeCase

I think that the way out of this is a referendum in Northern Ireland for a special status that keeps the status quo.

The problem is that the DUP won't allow the people of NI to have a voice in this.

The Tories have allowed themselves to be used by the DUP to undo the Good Friday Agreement and they can't seen see it because they're so blinded by jingoism and ignorance of recent history.

I can assure you that history won't be kind to those who've brought chaos back to these islands.

Bob24

A couple of months ago I was warning here of the danger of fully relying on the EU and the fact that the Irish border issue was just used a way to pressure the UK during deal talks, meaning we would lose EU support on that matter as soon as that pressure point was not required anymore. I remember saying that on the day of a no-deal brexit (it it happens) it wouldn’t be the UK but the Rebublic which would be pushed to reinstate border checks first, upon request of the EU.

This is what the EC has confirmed and our government is still in total denial:
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/government-rejects-idea-hard-border-needed-in-no-deal-scenario-1.3767245

Time for them to get a grasp with reality: the pressure for us to comply with EU rules and start border checks would be unmanageable for ireland whereas it would be fairly easy for the UK to take it easy for a while in terms of WTO-related checks, hence making it clear the the border is not being reinstated by the UK but by the EU and the republic.

Russman

RobMc59 wrote: »

This whole view is based on NI collapsing and what can be "grabbed "from the UK-I thought it was the UK who was self serving and selfish?

Every country is self serving and selfish.

Captain Obvious

Bob24 wrote: »

A couple of months ago I was warning here of the danger of fully relying on the EU and the fact that the Irish border issue was just a way to pressure the UK meaning we would lose EU support on that matter as soon as that pressure point was not required anymore. I remember saying that on the day of a no-deal brexit it wouldn’t be the UK but the Rebublic which would pushed to reinstate border checks first, upon request of the EU.

This is what the EC has confirmed and our government is still in total denial:
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/government-rejects-idea-hard-border-needed-in-no-deal-scenario-1.3767245

We haven't lost EU support though. The hard border in the case of a no-deal exit was always going to be a reality. The EU have stuck by us in insisting any deal must keep regulatory alignment ion the island of Ireland.

BonnieSituation

lawred2 wrote: »

what's in it for the Indo to pen such crap?

in the business section as well!

It's the indo for one. But they've been very eager to peddle this line the last few weeks wrt Ireland backing down.

A horrible dangerous rag.

BonnieSituation

Russman wrote: »

IMO only the very blinkered or stupid would put any "blame" on the Irish govt. if border posts have to go up as a result of a crash out. The world and its mother have known that there can't not be a border if there's no backstop or trade deal. No doubt one party would use it for political point scoring but most reasonable people would know its been foisted upon us by the UK's actions (in reality the DUP). In reality there's no choice, its not a will we or won't we put up a border, we'll simply have to.

I think a hard border is by far the lesser of two evils if it comes to choosing between it or staying in the SM & CU. But I'd definitely be flagging our potential use of the veto when the FTA negotiations happen down the line.

But the blinkered and stupid do still exist.

They're are people still angry at FG over VAT on kids shoes in the 82 budget.