Brexit Discussion Thread VI

FrancieBrady

Infini wrote: »

It's essentially the most practical that's probably the most likely. The border by design is an artificial creation by the British a century ago but it's was an incredibly bad implementation (expecially that road that crosses the border twice for example). The simple truth is that checking at ports and airports is viable and straightforward its prohibitively costly to have a land border and a drain of resources.

4 times. The Drumully Salient. Monaghan/Clones to Cavan road or the Belfast Galway road...take your pick.
I traveled it twice today and almost every second day. Many people travel it every single working day.

Bit cynical

Infini wrote: »

It's essentially the most practical that's probably the most likely. The border by design is an artificial creation by the British a century ago but it's was an incredibly bad implementation (expecially that road that crosses the border twice for example). The simple truth is that checking at ports and airports is viable and straightforward its prohibitively costly to have a land border and a drain of resources.

If it turns out that the UK either backs down from Brexit altogether or the UK Parliament votes in a deal incorporating the backstop, then the EU strategy will have been the right one for Ireland all along and, although I had been having misgivings about it, I will have to admit that I was wrong. I hope this is the case, but it seems less and less likely. I too want a frictionless border but it is only in these two outcomes that what we want happens and we can call the strategy a success. Merely demanding it as part of negotiations does not mean it is correct. The other side have to agree to it.

Christy42

Bit cynical wrote: »

If it turns out that the UK either backs down from Brexit altogether or the UK Parliament votes in a deal incorporating the backstop, then the EU strategy will have been the right one for Ireland all along and, although I had been having misgivings about it, I will have to admit that I was wrong. I hope this is the case, but it seems less and less likely. I too want a frictionless border but it is only in these two outcomes that what we want happens and we can call the strategy a success. Merely demanding it as part of negotiations does not mean it is correct. The other side have to agree to it.

Those are the only possible outcomes that guarantee a frictionless border aside from tanking the entire Irish economy. There are no other possible actions. If the UK wants a hard border we can't really force them to keep it open.

listermint

downcow wrote: »

Off thread and I don’t want in trouble so briefly.
Shinners have been telling is that for 50 years. Gerry promised UI for 2016. It’s not happening.
And with regard to how people feel. The south of England does not own the UK Shetland has as much right to be in the UK as the city of London So you are on the wishful thinking stuff again.

The 'shinners' have basically said for want of a better term 'f' all for the last two years. Do you think that is by coincidence? For a party that usually has a heavy vocal position on everything. They are keeping incredibly stum. Don't you think.

Let's examine why that is ?

Because the dup are walking them right into a united Ireland and when I say walking I mean sprinting . The dup could not have played more back to back worse cards over the last two years if they got a trout to do their talking .

You know you are on to a loser when you have NI farmers unions in high level discussion with civil servants down south. And traditional middle class unionists really looking at their economic prospects into the future. I feel you know the writings on the wall but you don't want to throw shade at the party who brought it about. And newsflash it ain't your traditional enemy...

The enemy within aye...

Bit cynical

Christy42 wrote: »

Those are the only possible outcomes that guarantee a frictionless border aside from tanking the entire Irish economy. There are no other possible actions. If the UK wants a hard border we can't really force them to keep it open.

The thing is I think most people realise that the UK don't want a hard border either. They also don't want something that will tie their hands in future negotiations on other issues.


We will see how it pans out.

Panrich

Bit cynical wrote: »

The thing is I think most people realise that the UK don't want a hard border either. They also don't want something that will tie their hands in future negotiations on other issues.


We will see how it pans out.

It’s amazing that the fact they can have free trade deals or an open border is still not understood by the majority in the UK this late into the process.

FrancieBrady

Bit cynical wrote: »

The thing is I think most people realise that the UK don't want a hard border either. They also don't want something that will tie their hands in future negotiations on other issues.


We will see how it pans out.

The impression is not that they don't want a hard border...they don't much care if there is one or not. If they did, they'd have seen it coming before the referendum. Politicians are paid to see this stuff after all.

downcow

Borderhopper wrote: »

Thanks for replying but I would appreciate less of the sarcasm. I have never disrespected anyone on this thread, least of all yourself, and it was a genuine question.

What would you feel would be an acceptable alternative? If a viable system was proposed by the U.K. thrn I'm sure both the EU and Ireland would give it serious consideration, but nothing has been. The approach seems to be "trust is Ireland, it'll be fine". This isn't acceptable. When the dust settles, who compels the U.K. to keep their promises? As others have said before, the U.K. decided to leave, let's hear their ideas.

It is not a cheap bargaining ploy to consider seriously the return of violence. What happened in Derry did not happen in a vacuum, and took a fair degree of planning. I wasn't exaggerating that previously peace supporting republicans are openly questioning what it was all for, when rights hard won are easily taken away. I don't think we're far from the point where mainstream republicanism decides that the political experiment hasn't worked.

As I said before, it doesn't take everyone to tip it into violence. Just enough

Apologies. You sound sincere. I feel I have been bombarded by continual anti NI stuff from people wearing blinkers, so I have read too much into your welcome back. And no I wasn’t away just warned

Here is my thought to your question.
Everyone is talking about ‘the deal’ but I think most of the dealing is still to be done. If we head into negotiations with the backstop agreed we will get a serious caning from the Eu for being naughty and leaving. We will have given away all negotiating power.
I heard some on radio today describe it as like going into a showroom to negotiate the purchase of a new car and locking the door and giving the key to the salesman and telling him you can’t leave until you’ve bought the car.
This is the fear of the backstop.
And as a few posters are pointing out the government cannot be trusted so to get the deal they want they will be happy to sacrifice NI to permanent separation.
So you ask what deal I want.
It’s simple. If there is no backstop then Eu and UK go into negotiations needing each other and they will get a good deal for both. And NI can’t be sacrificed

listermint

downcow wrote: »

Apologies. You sound sincere. I feel I have been bombarded by continual anti NI stuff from people wearing blinkers, so I have read too much into your welcome back. And no I wasn’t away just warned

Here is my thought to your question.
Everyone is talking about ‘the deal’ but I think most of the dealing is still to be done. If we head into negotiations with the backstop agreed we will get a serious caning from the Eu for being naughty and leaving. We will have given away all negotiating power.
I heard some on radio today describe as going into a showroom to negotiate the purchase of a new car and locking the door and giving the key to the salesman and telling him you can’t leave until you’ve bought the car.
This is the fear of the backstop.
And as a few posters are pointing out the government cannot be trusted so to get the deal they want they will be happy to sacrifice NI to permanent separation.
So you ask what deal I want.
It’s simple. If there is no backstop then Eu and UK go into negotiations needing each other and they will get a good deal for both. And NI can’t be sacrificed

Just to be clear.

There is no negotiating power anymore. Its gone whatever you think you had or have doesn't exist.

WTO isn't an option the whole country will be caned. Northern Ireland more than anywhere as he subvention keeping it going will be halfed.

Project fear? You think an English government is going to pump billions into NI when they will be struggling through a recession . Because that's what's coming. And as I said before a UI will be the next step.


None more blind than those that will not see.

At this point it's an incredible achievement to retain the notion that there is some hand to be played something left up the sleeve.

murphaph

downcow wrote: »

Tbh if feel it is nonsense. I am not cheering brexit. I am picking the best of two less than wonderful options.
Your right I am opposed to the backstop for same reason you guys go bananas any time there is mention of the slightest check at you French border.
We are not interested in being like England tbh that’s a pretty naive suggestion given the fantastic diversity across England I don’t know which bit you think we are trying to copy. We want to remain in a union with the other diverse regions of the UK.
And then your argument completely falls down when you tells us how you know the future voting habits of NI public at a time of flux. I am super confident that you don’t need to worry about your fear of a UI it’s not happening. It would be like turkeys voting for Xmas. I have many friends in south who envy our free prescriptions free doc appts etc etc. Do you realise the swing that would be required. The last serious polls put those wanting UI we under 25%. So relax and don’t you be worrying

The NHS will be eviscerated by Brexit. Can't you see that? Trinkets for NI from London will be a thing of the past.

Seth Brundle

downcow wrote: »

Apologies. You sound sincere. I feel I have been bombarded by continual anti NI stuff from people wearing blinkers, so I have read too much into your welcome back. And no I wasn’t away just warned

There have been no anti-EU posts to my recollection. Maybe you could point out one or two.

downcow wrote: »

So you ask what deal I want.
It’s simple. If there is no backstop then Eu and UK go into negotiations needing each other and they will get a good deal for both. And NI can’t be sacrificed

So if there's no backstop despite the UK committing internationally to one, where does that put them in terms of trade negotiations? Do they get the upper or lower hand?
How will the EU "need" the UK?
Who is trying to sacrifice NI and in what way in your version events?

downcow

listermint wrote: »

Just to be clear.

There is no negotiating power anymore. Its gone whatever you think you had or have doesn't exist.

WTO isn't an option the whole country will be caned. Northern Ireland more than anywhere as he subvention keeping it going will be halfed.

Project fear? You think an English government is going to pump billions into NI when they will be struggling through a recession . Because that's what's coming. And as I said before a UI will be the next step.


None more blind than those that will not see.

At this point it's an incredible achievement to retain the notion that there is some hand to be played something left up the sleeve.

Well if you are right sure when we arrive into this UI we will have arrived in a land of milk and honey and will prosper along with you and even francie will be happy.

Bit cynical

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The impression is not that they don't want a hard border...they don't much care if there is one or not. If they did, they'd have seen it coming before the referendum. Politicians are paid to see this stuff after all.

What I would say is that while they don't want a hard border if at all possible, they are willing to accept it if the consequence, in their view, of accepting the backstop is worse, regrettable though a hard border would be. We can't afford no deal either but our calculation informing our strategy is that brexit without a deal will be so bad for them that they will accept whatever conditions are placed in order to get some sort of deal. This is what we are hoping will work. I have never really agreed with this approach but, as pointed out by others, we are stuck with it now.

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

Well if you are right sure when we arrive into this UI we will have arrived in a land of milk and honey and will prosper along with you and even francie will be happy.

You sound so sincere.

Just figured out something so will be ignoring your obvious attempts to troll an educational and important thread.

Strazdas

Bit cynical wrote: »

I think the DUP are only part of it. It was generally highly contentious in Westminster. I don't think for Ireland it was in bad faith, at least initially, but the EU, I think hopped on to it with suspicious enthusiasm, imo. Commissioner Hogan said he had never seen anything like the support it got.

The backstop came about because of May's red lines. The EU proposed that NI be in a special customs union and GB could be free to do whatever it wanted, including sign trade deals, but May said 'No'.

The idea of the UK being in a UK wide customs union with a backstop came from the British themselves.....the EU were reluctant to go down this route and were actually ruling it out early last summer.

CelticRambler

downcow wrote: »

I heard some on radio today describe it as like going into a showroom to negotiate the purchase of a new car and locking the door and giving the key to the salesman and telling him you can’t leave until you’ve bought the car.

Sounds like a typical off-target Brexiteer analogy. A better one would be going into the dealership with a 30-year-old Ford Escort, locking the door, giving your keys and log-book to the salesman, telling the salesman you want a 100% exchange for the new Audi on the forecourt, and if he doesn't give you what you want, you're going to walk home.

downcow wrote: »

If there is no backstop then Eu and UK go into negotiations needing each other and they will get a good deal for both. And NI can’t be sacrificed

What does the UK have to offer that the EU needs?

L1011

I think we've reached the points of the milder Leavers having to run "It's all going to be OK, they said it's all going to be OK..." through their head all day, but they know it isn't and are just saving face. We see it on this thread anyway.

We've got some accounts functions done in the UK in work. I asked what they intend to do come March 30th when we can't even do data transfers to them and the answer basically implied that I'll be given a credit card and unlimited overtime to get a full replication of the accounts IT system set up, while they hire anyone who has ever seen a calculator to duplicate the roles. Might be able to buy that new car after all!

Christy42

CelticRambler wrote: »

downcow wrote: »

I heard some on radio today describe it as like going into a showroom to negotiate the purchase of a new car and locking the door and giving the key to the salesman and telling him you can’t leave until you’ve bought the car.

Sounds like a typical off-target Brexiteer analogy. A better one would be going into the dealership with a 30-year-old Ford Escort, locking the door, giving your keys and log-book to the salesman, telling the salesman you want a 100% exchange for the new Audi on the forecourt, and if he doesn't give you what you want, you're going to walk home.

downcow wrote: »

If there is no backstop then Eu and UK go into negotiations needing each other and they will get a good deal for both. And NI can’t be sacrificed

What does the UK have to offer that the EU needs?

If it relies on the backstop not being agreed than the only thing possible would be the welfare of those around the border (both sides) as it would not provide anything else that the EU might care for. Of course this assumes that the UK cares little for those on its side of the border that their livelihood is being traded away. The UK will have other far larger issues at that point though so it is doubtful whether it would give much leverage.

That may not be sacrificing the lines on a map but it will be sacrificing the welfare of a lot of people in Northern Ireland. Especially around the border.

A nation that committed to keeping the border open they shouldn't threaten to close it as trade leverage.

trellheim

Here is my thought to your question.
Everyone is talking about ‘the deal’ but I think most of the dealing is still to be done. If we head into negotiations with the backstop agreed we will get a serious caning from the Eu for being naughty and leaving. We will have given away all negotiating power.
I heard some on radio today describe it as like going into a showroom to negotiate the purchase of a new car and locking the door and giving the key to the salesman and telling him you can’t leave until you’ve bought the car.
This is the fear of the backstop.
And as a few posters are pointing out the government cannot be trusted so to get the deal they want they will be happy to sacrifice NI to permanent separation.
So you ask what deal I want.
It’s simple. If there is no backstop then Eu and UK go into negotiations needing each other and they will get a good deal for both. And NI can’t be sacrificed

The Backstop was agreed by the UK Government freely both in the tunnel to get to the WA and the December 2017 agreement - they had every chance to say no at any stage. Dont you dare put this up as the backstop suddenly being foisted upon the UK

briany

There's a big problem with the debate going on in the UK - the divide is around 50/50, but neither side seem to believe that the other side should have any say in their respective preferred scenarios. Remain shouldn't say simply to stay in the EU. Remain should say to stay in the EU and push for reforms in the institution, and block further treaties of integration unless the EU make some concessions to that end.

In political history, I don't think ignoring large minorities of the voting populace has ever worked out well. If ever it has, it was surely an exception to the rule.

And what's funny is that all the talk of violence on the streets is about Leavers not getting their way, as if to say Remainers, on the other hand are totally placid. Well, if there is no physical violence from Remainers, there will be violence at the ballot box, next UK GE. Absolutely crazy of the the Leave wing Conservative party to cling onto power and badly risk rendering their party unelectable for god knows how long.

fash

prawnsambo wrote: »

This is kind of obvious. Didn't think it needed saying tbh. I have only discussed the backstop in the context of a deal because, well, d'uh. Afterwards, is another story, but events may well have overtaken us at that stage.

But for clarity, if the UK crash out, they will be in no position to dictate any terms. They will have repudiated a negotiated settlement and refused to pay their dues. There will be little appetite to engage, as any talks will be so protracted as to be irrelevant in the short term.

After crash out the current 3 options (no brexit, May's deal, no deal) become May's deal or no deal.
The supporting numbers in UK parliament shift in that case to May's deal.

Edit to add: obviously the WA would need to be amended to reflect the new reality of the UK being a non EU member.

Zubeneschamali

prawnsambo wrote: »

Parts of me (small admittedly) would like to see the hammer fall on the hardest of hard brexiters with a crash out, but I'm mostly ashamed of those parts

To adopt a Tory tone, perhaps a Short, Sharp Shock is what the British public needs to teach them that the EU is really a thing they need. No point in mollycoddling them with special deals and soft Brexits. Let them swim on their own with the sharks for a few months, and then we might see a more reasonable tone in the next talks.

Russman

fash wrote: »

After crash out the current 3 options (no brexit, May's deal, no deal) become May's deal or no deal.
The supporting numbers in UK parliament shift in that case to May's deal.

Edit to add: obviously the WA would need to be amended to reflect the new reality of the UK being a non EU member.

Obviously we don’t know for sure just how it will play out in a no deal scenario, but if it really goes badly for the UK (as most suspect) surely there’s every chance the EU could say “......no worries lads, our diaries are pretty full just now, we’re available for talks this time next year though, you can tell us all about it then........”
I can’t see the EU just shrugging it’s shoulders and agreeing there’s now one option less and carrying on, there’s bound to be residual anger/ill feeing among at least some of the 27, not least ourselves if NI really gets caned in the aftermath.

Zubeneschamali

downcow wrote: »

I am super confident that you don’t need to worry about your fear of a UI it’s not happening. It would be like turkeys voting for Xmas.

The turkeys in England have already voted for Christmas, and they are dragging you with them.


When NI has soaked up a 12% hit and the Republic is still growing at 4%, a United Ireland is going to look to a lot of folks North of the Border as a way out of the turkey shoot.

Russman

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

To adopt a Tory tone, perhaps a Short, Sharp Shock is what the British public needs to teach them that the EU is really a thing they need. No point in mollycoddling them with special deals and soft Brexits. Let them swim on their own with the sharks for a few months, and then we might see a more reasonable tone in the next talks.

I think it’s coming to that. How short the shock will be is open to debate. I’m guessing at least until winter. Although when people have to go to Blackpool rather than Benidorm in the summer, it might focus a few minds.

Zubeneschamali

downcow wrote: »

Those terrible northerners

This is somewhat off topic, but I'd just like to explain to downcow that folks down South who think "those terrible northerners" are not necessarily being sectarian. Many would include the Catholic Nationalists too.

Zubeneschamali

Bit cynical wrote: »

There will be no open border to preserve. New solutions will have to be found. That will require flexibility. The old "we're not budging" will not work from either side.

Yes, it will. It isn't a game of chicken, chicken ends when one side blinks or there is a crash. But the crash is not the end of Brexit, it is only Day One.


Shortly after Hard Brexit and a hard border, PM Corbyn will be back in Brussels looking for something like a Norway deal. And the EU agenda will look like:

1) Give us our 40 billion.
2) Guarantee EU citizens rights.
3) About that hard border.


And he will be in no position to say Not Budging, even if he wanted to.

Zubeneschamali

Seth Brundle wrote: »

No deal is the default. It cannot be removed from the table.

Yes, it can, May explained how in her speech the other day. They simply pass a motion that says if a deal is not agreed on March 21st, the Government shall withdraw the A50 notice.


So the default changes from No Deal to No Brexit.

Zubeneschamali

oscarBravo wrote: »

when the UK comes crawling back looking for a deal, there's one ready and waiting.

Of course then the UK will be in a far, far worse negotiating position, and the EU would be well within its rights to say that deal is no longer on the table, jackasses. You are now a third country, and somewhere behind Malaysia in the queue for a deal.

Calina

Bit cynical wrote: »

The thing is I think most people realise that the UK don't want a hard border either. They also don't want something that will tie their hands in future negotiations on other issues.


We will see how it pans out.

The UK wants to control their own borders. The English in particular. They don't shut up about immigration, foreigners, freedom of movement. They also don't give a toss about Northern Ireland.

The only reason they 'don't want a border' is they know that if they said otherwise, Ireland would veto any agreement at all. They don't care about Northern Ireland. They actually want a nice hard border around Great Britain. But they also don't want to take the economic hit.

The entire discussion in the UK has been keeping the foreigners out but still taking their money.

So the claiming they don't want a border in Ireland is a lie only because they are stuck with NI - ironic I will agree - and need Ireland to agree to enabling the UK to continue taking the money.

The backstop holds the UK to its lie that they don't want a hard border in Ireland. That is why they don't like and want to defang it.

It isn't the only problem. The WA crystallises the reality that keep foreigners out but still take all their money will not actually happen. But the backstop is handy because they can attack Ireland for it. For tabloid level soundbites it is great.

But the truth is much more complex about Brexit. They seem not to be able to handle it.