Brexit discussion thread VII (Please read OP before posting)

bobmalooka

RobMc59 wrote: »

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Who normally carries out arrests at sea? Men in row boats?

Haven't they got anything better to do than arrest a few poor fishermen-their families were probably worried sick.

No ruling the waves to keep our naval service busy, policing them lawfully will have to do.

Christy42

RobMc59 wrote: »

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Who normally carries out arrests at sea? Men in row boats?

Haven't they got anything better to do than arrest a few poor fishermen-their families were probably worried sick.

Not actually an answer to the question. Should we have a list of laws people are allowed break? What boat should they have used?

A boat went out and stopped illegal fishing. They don't have a specific boat for each type of crime.

Do you disagree with people getting arrested in other countries by police with guns for minor offenses?

Sam Russell

RobMc59 wrote: »

Haven't they got anything better to do than arrest a few poor fishermen-their families were probably worried sick.

Well, they* were out in the Med saving refugees for a while, so yes they have been doing other things. However, their main job is fishery protection duties.

They also keep an eye out for drug smuggling.


*not that particular ship.

CelticRambler

RobMc59 wrote: »

Haven't they got anything better to do than arrest a few poor fishermen-their families were probably worried sick.

In what way is the crew of the LÉ Orla in the Irish Sea acting any differently to the crew of HMS Mersey in the English Channel. Surely it is an over-reaction on the part of the UK government to send a warship with a 20mm cannon and two general purpose machine guns to pick up a few poor immigrants in a rubber dinghy?

The relevant Brexit point in all of this is that "rules is rules" and it's going to come as quite a shock to many British importers, exporters, passport-holders and others who have had trouble-free exchanges with the rest of the world on the basis of their EU membership when they fall foul of the new rules. And - as the recently published impact assessment shows - they will fall foul of the rules, because so many think that "no deal" means "no change" ...

As I've speculated before, I think the worst fallout from Brexit will be when this fact hits the travelling public. Dog-owners who have to find (and pay for) a boarding kennel at short notice because they can't take their pooch to France because they didn't realise that the rules have changed; lovers becoming decoupled on their romantic getaway because one of them forgot they weren't an EU citizen anymore and didn't renew their visa waiver; the student who can't go back to the summer camp where they've worked for the last few years because they no longer have freedom of movement.

Giveaway

CelticRambler wrote: »

In what way is the crew of the LÉ Orla in the Irish Sea acting any differently to the crew of HMS Mersey in the English Channel. Surely it is an over-reaction on the part of the UK government to send a warship with a 20mm cannon and two general purpose machine guns to pick up a few poor immigrants in a rubber dinghy?

USS COLE.
Also several instances of the NGO vessels in the med losing control to the rescued

Sam Russell

CelticRambler wrote: »

In what way is the crew of the LÉ Orla in the Irish Sea acting any differently to the crew of HMS Mersey in the English Channel. Surely it is an over-reaction on the part of the UK government to send a warship with a 20mm cannon and two general purpose machine guns to pick up a few poor immigrants in a rubber dinghy?

It is not the gunnery on these ships that make them suitable for chasing errant trawlers or rubber dinghies filled with unfortunate migrants, it is the trained crew who know very well how to deal with the circumstances of each mission.

Look how the Irish crews handled their missions in the Med and rescued so many who would/could have died without them. The way they used two ribs, one either side, to distribute the life jackets from both sides to prevent to occupants capsizing the dinghy by rushing to one side.

RobMc59

CelticRambler wrote: »

In what way is the crew of the LÉ Orla in the Irish Sea acting any differently to the crew of HMS Mersey in the English Channel. Surely it is an over-reaction on the part of the UK government to send a warship with a 20mm cannon and two general purpose machine guns to pick up a few poor immigrants in a rubber dinghy?

The relevant Brexit point in all of this is that "rules is rules" and it's going to come as quite a shock to many British importers, exporters, passport-holders and others who have had trouble-free exchanges with the rest of the world on the basis of their EU membership when they fall foul of the new rules. And - as the recently published impact assessment shows - they will fall foul of the rules, because so many think that "no deal" means "no change" ...

As I've speculated before, I think the worst fallout from Brexit will be when this fact hits the travelling public. Dog-owners who have to find (and pay for) a boarding kennel at short notice because they can't take their pooch to France because they didn't realise that the rules have changed; lovers becoming decoupled on their romantic getaway because one of them forgot they weren't an EU citizen anymore and didn't renew their visa waiver; the student who can't go back to the summer camp where they've worked for the last few years because they no longer have freedom of movement.

This has nothing to do with brexit as you well know and surely if the Taoiseach describes it as "a regrettable incident"and says the situation will be fixed that should be good enough-I understand the unionists throwing their penny worth in didn’t help but this is beginning to sound like sour grapes now.

FrancieBrady

RobMc59 wrote: »

Haven't they got anything better to do than arrest a few poor fishermen-their families were probably worried sick.

'Haven't they got real crims to catch and not be doing me for tax'. :rolleyes:

CelticRambler

Giveaway wrote: »

USS COLE.

Well, if you're going to pick random examples from history, then you've got to accept the "Marita Ann" as a justification for the Irish navy's intervention. They could have been trawlers filled with Ulster Unionists getting ready for the loyalist bombing campaigns in Dublin that some boards.ies say is going to happen post re-unification .... :rolleyes:

But there's no need (and no place) for such conspiracy fantasies when a simple, admittedly boring, rules-based explanation will do. And again, that's where the Brexiteers seem to be lacking in understanding. They didn't - and still don't - understand EU rules; they don't appear to understand WTO rules; and if they understand the rules surrounding election/referendum campaigning, they certainly haven't respected them. But in the end, they will have to live by them.

CelticRambler

RobMc59 wrote: »

This has nothing to do with brexit as you well know and surely if the Taoiseach describes it as "a regrettable incident"and says the situation will be fixed that should be good enough

In itself, no, this incident has nothing to do with Brexit - but it is an example of what's ahead in a no-deal world. Both governments will, no doubt, say that a Hard Border is regrettable, but it won't change the situation on the ground, and if Trump gets his new trade deal with a desperate UK, Ireland will enforce the rules to keep British chicken and beef out of our market.

Leroy42

Very interesting interview with Barnier across a number of news outlets today.

He repeats the mantra that the WA is not being reopened but if the UK want more notes in line with Tusks and Juncker's letters then that is something they can work on.

One bit stood out for me. Barnier was asked why they would risk a catastrophic no deal rather than reopen the WA. He replied that it was going to be catastrophic, just difficult and something they were prepared for. It would be worse for the UK.

Of course it's a bit of bravado, he is talking to the EU rather than the UK after all, but no deal impact on EU is the central plank of the the UK plan at this point so to hear it so easily sidestepped should be disconcerting to the UK.

It is also clear that the attempts to pressurise Ireland to concede on the backstop, which were in full flow only a matter of a week or two ago, have notably fallen silent.

black forest

After the rumours yesterday about Barniers interview with the German newspaper `Die Welt´ the content is online now. This interview was at the same time given to El Mundo, La Stampa and Les Echos. First the version of Stefanie Bolzen, the London correspondent of `Die Welt´:

https://twitter.com/stefaniebolzen/status/1101761375054036992?s=21

Extension would have to be agreed by EU Council, i.e. won’t happen before March 21. Needs anonymity of EU27.

Barnier refused giving exact form of document ‘This is currently negotiated. Substance has priority to legal format’

Above she most probably means unanimity. Essentially nothing new. But given the time table this will be a very close run.

Assurance could be ‚document like letter by Tusk/Juncker’ jointly agreed with written assurance by UK gov ‘which together would have stronger force’

So only a non binding assurance and clarification but no official change of the backstop or opening of the WA. Nothing else could be expected.

In the same vain are Barniers answers to Pablo Rodriguez, El Mundo, Spain:

https://twitter.com/suanzes/status/1101772896660344832?s=21

Some ideas: is it still possible to approve and ratify the WA before March 29? "No, no". Even if May gets a "yes" an extension will be needed.  "It would be called motivated, technical extension (..). If it takes two months for the procedure, it would be justified.

So this would be the small solution and could be granted. Even if it is only for technical reasons.

We now care about the substance, the content. That is the priority and we work with the British on the content, the guarantees, the trust elements to reinforce. The legal nature of this document is a question that will come later.“

Nothing new. Just cosmetics to please the hardliners.

Additionally the german „Der Spiegel“ has published an interview with Sir Ivan Rogers. He was the UK Embassador to the EU till he resigned in 2017. His clear words leave nothing to the imagination. Zero unicorns.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/ivan-rogers-on-brexit-what-surprises-me-is-the-extent-of-the-mess-a-1255789.html

DER SPIEGEL: Sir Ivan, did you expect such a political mess when you resigned two years ago?
Ivan Rogers: I knew that it would be a long, tortuous and potentially conflictual process. That doesn't surprise me. What does surprise me is the extent of the mess and the fact that four weeks before the deadline, the political class is unable to come to any serious conclusion about what kind of Brexit they want. Of course, Brexit is a revolutionary moment, but I have never seena political crisis like this in my professional career.

DER SPIEGEL: The Europeans didn't expect that.
Rogers: They found that quite shocking. The way Theresa May prioritized that very early on indicated to the Europeans that we would be going much further out of the European Union than Norway and Switzerland, or even Turkey, which has a customs union agreement with the EU. In all honesty, I don't think she fully understood what a dramatic rupture that would have been. Since then, she has tried to edge things back. But her problem is: Having started with a hardline position, every time she's moved a little bit back, the right wing of her party cries betrayal. I think other prime ministers could have done it in a different fashion.

DER SPIEGEL: What is your view of the role the EU has played in the negotiations. Do you think they trying to "punish" the UK as many Brexiteers claim?
Rogers: I don't. If you deliberately leave the club, it has automatic consequences, and some of them are unpleasant. Of course there is a risk: For the British public, who has no reason to understand every detail, it looks as if the Europeans have set up a process to maximize the British pain. I don't think they have.

DER SPIEGEL: How long will it take to sort out the future relationship?
Rogers: Much longer than many people think. The planned trade deal is not "the easiest in human history," as Liam Fox has claimed. It's not easy to solve for one simple reason: This is the first trade deal in history where partners are seeking to get further apart. All trade deals I've ever worked on were about getting closer together and dismantling barriers to trade. We are now deliberately re-erecting barriers, seeking a thinner relationship than the one we have. We like the free trade with Europe, but not the European institutions. Well, that's not on offer. That's why the next step of the negotiations will be conflictual again. The Europeans will say: There must be a reason why you wanted to leave and diverge from our model, please tell us what degree of divergency you want and why. You only need to say it that way to realize that this will not take months, but years.

There is not much to add to his analysis.

So there is a possible `technical´ extension till end of June. Every other extension needs a UK partition in the EU elections. If this does not happen it is quite clear that there will be no further extension. Which means an automatic drop out of the UK. Exactly the thing TM created to get her deal through HoC on the 12th of March just a few month later.

mickoneill31

Honda had plans for electric vehicle manufacture in Swindon before their pull out.

https://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/news/17471496.honda-reveals-it-had-plans-to-make-electric-cars-in-swindon-before-plant-closure/?ref=twtrec

Kinda knocks the diesel argument on the head. I wonder what other aspects may have been a factor.

Calina

Leroy42 wrote: »

It is also clear that the attempts to pressurise Ireland to concede on the backstop, which were in full flow only a matter of a week or two ago, have notably fallen silent.

UK attempts, you mean?

I think vibes from the US may have had an impact there. Charm offensive on that front now too.

Calina

RobMc59 wrote: »

This has nothing to do with brexit as you well know and surely if the Taoiseach describes it as "a regrettable incident"and says the situation will be fixed that should be good enough-I understand the unionists throwing their penny worth in didn’t help but this is beginning to sound like sour grapes now.

So why are you banging on about the ship involved?

You seemed to be particularly concerned anout NI boats but the Irish Navy pick up others for illegal fishing. The sour grapes are on your side.

Midlife

Amazing. So Davies said that the two years leading up to Brexit could be spent agreeing Free Trade deals with the Us and China whihc would make them part of the biggest trading bloc in the world.

1: Britian was never allowed to negotiate trade deals while it was a member of the EU so it could neven actually happen

2: America sent their terms yesterday. It's an appalling offer according to most. Unrestricted access for US goods to Britian. British goods will not all be allowed into the US.

3: The US deal forbids them striking a similar deal with China

Nice one lads.

An Ciarraioch

Full Barnier interview (in French) here - clarifies that any backstop reassurances would be in an interpretative document, but no time limit or unilateral withdrawal will be contemplated. A technical extension is already necessary, but a lengthier one requires a meaningful purpose. Only member states can settle citizens rights, but Brussels urges a reciprocal agreement. Finally, Brexit seen as a negative distraction, preventing the resolution of more pressing issues.

https://www.lesechos.fr/monde/europe/0600817531525-brexit-pour-michel-barnier-il-y-a-un-chemin-pour-parvenir-a-un-accord-2249006.php

RobMc59

Calina wrote: »

So why are you banging on about the ship involved?

You seemed to be particularly concerned anout NI boats but the Irish Navy pick up others for illegal fishing. The sour grapes are on your side.

Well yes-I'm only concerned with Irish and NI boats and don’t like to see conflict between them-maybe I'm a naive fool.

Sam Russell

RobMc59 wrote: »

Well yes-I'm only concerned with Irish and NI boats and don’t like to see conflict between them-maybe I'm a naive fool.

If there is a crash out, then any Irish motorist crossing the border will require a green card, and without one will be treated as being without insurance and subject to draconian enforcement, including confiscation of the vehicle and heavy fines. Today, a green card is not needed, and it is possible to cross the border many times inadvertently.

You wont get away with the probation act up there then.

Charles Babbage

Sam Russell wrote: »

If there is a crash out, then any Irish motorist crossing the border will require a green card, and without one will be treated as being without insurance and subject to draconian enforcement, including confiscation of the vehicle and heavy fines. Today, a green card is not needed, and it is possible to cross the border many times inadvertently.

You wont get away with the probation act up there then.

The need to carry a green card on the island of Ireland was abolished in 1960 or so, long before the EU.

- have those regulations actually been rescinded, or did the EU regs just add exra places on top.
- they can easily reinstate such a regulation

RobMc59

Sam Russell wrote: »

If there is a crash out, then any Irish motorist crossing the border will require a green card, and without one will be treated as being without insurance and subject to draconian enforcement, including confiscation of the vehicle and heavy fines. Today, a green card is not needed, and it is possible to cross the border many times inadvertently.

You wont get away with the probation act up there then.

We're back over in August via holyhead and I imagine that will apply for all- don't know what I'll have to do regarding my driving licence but as an eternal optimist I live in hope!

prawnsambo

mickoneill31 wrote: »

Honda had plans for electric vehicle manufacture in Swindon before their pull out.

https://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/news/17471496.honda-reveals-it-had-plans-to-make-electric-cars-in-swindon-before-plant-closure/?ref=twtrec

Kinda knocks the diesel argument on the head. I wonder what other aspects may have been a factor.

The diesel argument was never a runner anyway. Swindon's production is 94% petrol.

reslfj

reslfj wrote: »

Re 3)
Fishmen might think it's hard, cold and stormy to catch the fish. It is however relatively easy to catch the fish.
What really matters to the fishing industry is market assess to a large well paying market. This requires frictionless borders without read tape, delays and without 12+ % tariffs.

It is really that simple

The EU has demanded that the CFP be 100% preserved post Brexit for any trade deal to be agreed. The CFP will be renamed - reciprocal access - but it will it will be the same CFP quotas etc.
Without the de facto CFP any FTA will simply not ratify in more EU27 countries.

Lars

I think, I should have provided a link to an EU paper. This a one of the first with an explicit statement - 7.i (page 3 bottom).

"In this context, existing reciprocal access to fishing waters and resources should be maintained."

https://www.euractiv.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2018/03/European-council-Art.50-23-March-2018-Draft-Guidelines.pdf

If you think this is only a draft and negotiations may change it - remember how the EU always has come out on top in all previous Brexit negotiations.

Lars

Not sure if anybody highlighted this US pressure point in any US negotiations with Britain. The power disparity is really, really going to fúck them over. And it seems the UK accepting lower standard US agricultural imports is something the US will insist upon. If they are successful in this, watch British farmers who have to subscribe to much higher EU standards be undercut until they pressurise their government to lower standards outside the EU. It will then be a very dark day for anybody in Britain who cares about food quality and animal welfare. So much for "freedom", when it puts the health of a people/country at the mercy of a far more powerful country like this.

Fears over chlorine-washed chicken and hormone-fed beef are "myths", according to the US ambassador to the UK.

In the Daily Telegraph, Woody Johnson urged the UK to embrace US farming methods after Washington published its objectives for a UK-US trade deal.

EU rules currently limit US exports of certain food products, including chicken and beef - but Mr Johnson wants that to change in the UK after Brexit.... Meanwhile, Dr Emily Jones, who is an associate professor of public policy at the Blavatnik School of Government at the University of Oxford, also said the issue was likely to be a sticking point for the US.

"I think the US won't buy it in negotiations with the UK," said Dr Jones, referring to the UK's insistence on maintaining its current standards.

"It's wanted, for a very long time, the EU to harmonise with US regulations and approaches to the production of food and it's exactly what it'll ask of the UK as well."

BBC: UK-US trade deal: Envoy attacks 'myths' about US farming

J Mysterio

All through this horrendous process, we have had deluded eejits telling us that, at the last minute, the EU will cave and offer all the things the UK want.

Instead, we are at the last minute, and the EU is actually saying, 'we might need to give you a bit more time (to save yourself from oblivion)'.

EU chief Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier has indicated he does not believe the UK will have enough time to approve British prime minister Theresa May’s withdrawal deal by the scheduled exit date of March 29th.

Mr Barnier suggested a “technical extension” of up to two months may be needed.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/uk/brexit-barnier-doubts-whether-uk-will-leave-eu-on-schedule-1.3812513?mode=amp

Capt'n Midnight

reslfj wrote: »

I think, I should have provided a link to an EU paper. This a one of the first with an explicit statement - 7.i (page 3 bottom).

"In this context, existing reciprocal access to fishing waters and resources should be maintained."

https://www.euractiv.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2018/03/European-council-Art.50-23-March-2018-Draft-Guidelines.pdf

If you think this is only a draft and negotiations may change it - remember how the EU always has come out on top in all previous Brexit negotiations.

Lars

The UK has already allowed the Faroe Islands to keep their existing non-reciprocal access to UK waters.

So yeah I expect the UK to yield on this one too.

Capt'n Midnight

J Mysterio wrote: »

All through this horrendous process, we have had deluded eejits telling us that, at the last minute, the EU will cave and offer all the things the UK want.

We still are sorting out the temporary Withdrawal Agreement.


The real Brexit negotiations are yet to start, just in case any deluded eejits think this is the End.

It's not even the End of the Beginning.

Akrasia

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

The UK has already allowed the Faroe Islands to keep their existing non-reciprocal access to UK waters.

So yeah I expect the UK to yield on this one too.

The tories absolutely hammered the miners in the 80s when it suited them. They will have no qualms about using the Scottish fishermen when they're useful and then casting them aside

reslfj

Akrasia wrote: »

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

reslfj wrote: »

I think, I should have provided a link to an EU paper. This a one of the first with an explicit statement - 7.i (page 3 bottom).

"In this context, existing reciprocal access to fishing waters and resources should be maintained."

https://www.euractiv.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2018/03/European-council-Art.50-23-March-2018-Draft-Guidelines.pdf

If you think this is only a draft and negotiations may change it - remember how the EU always has come out on top in all previous Brexit negotiations.

Lars

The UK has already allowed the Faroe Islands to keep their existing non-reciprocal access to UK waters.

So yeah I expect the UK to yield on this one too.

.....
They will have no qualms about using the Scottish fishermen when they're useful and then casting them aside

The Faroe Islands is not an EU member. The EU27 has actively assisted the UK to roll over existing EU trade deals and divide trade quotas (TRQs) between EU and UK - though with a somewhat limited success to now.

Access to British waters for fishers from the Faroe Islands is in itself very different from an EU-UK trade deal, where fish is exported to the UK.

It's the EU27 in its demands to a future UK-EU trade agreement, that has linked and locked trade and reciprocal access to fishing waters.

Lars

Capt'n Midnight

Akrasia wrote: »

The tories absolutely hammered the miners in the 80s when it suited them. They will have no qualms about using the Scottish fishermen when they're useful and then casting them aside

Or Unionists

https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/lords/1921/dec/14/address-in-reply-to-his-majestys-most

I was in earnest. What a fool I was. I was only a puppet, and so was Ulster, and so was Ireland, in the political game that was to get the Conservative Party into power. And of all the men in my experience that I think are the most loathsome it is those who will sell their friends for the purpose of conciliating their enemies,

So not much has changed a century later.