Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

ThePanjandrum

McGiver wrote: »

Why? Because for all Ireland economy to function frictionlessly and no physical border to exist, EU membership is required for both NI and RoI, or more specifically both NI and RoI to be in a regulatory alignment and both in the SM as well as the CU. This was all assumed to continue when the GFA was signed. The GFA is predicated on EU membership of both jurisdictions. Brexit completely disrupts the predicament and is almost impossible to achieve without breaking the GFA.

Basically, the only feasible Brexit option is a Norway style Brexit with CU alignment for NI. Or NI only backstop. There's no other solution possible.

Your reasoning fails you here. Neither Northern Ireland nor the Republic being in the EU would also satisfy the border problem. You seem to have forgotten this.

Stop moaning ffs

jm08 wrote: »

They say nothing happens in the US without the say-so of the three 'I's. Irish, Italian and Israelis/jews.


A good example as to the kind of support that the Irish-American caucus can drump up is on the recent vote in both congress and the senate where only one person voted against giving the excess Australian visas to Ireland. Paul Ryan (Rep). who was leader of the senate sponsored that Bill.


Richard Neal, Chairman of the Ways & Means Committee (which scrutinise all trade agreements) was brought up by his grandmother and aunt who are from Northern Ireland. He was involved in the Peace Process and was here recently with Nancy Pelosi. Next to the Israelis, Ireland is the most powerful group in the US and it can deliver a huge vote. Thats how Clinton got involved with the Peace Process - he was after the Irish-American vote.

Ryan voted against that?

Hope we all remember that next time he’s banging on about his Irish heritage.
Loathsome individual anyway.

Charles Babbage

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Therefore, as a border between Northern Ireland and either of the other two parties would breach the Agreement, the solution is to have a border between Ireland and the EU.

The solution is for Britain to respect the GFA and stay in the Single Market so no border is needed.

marno21

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Ryan voted against that?

Hope we all remember that next time he’s banging on about his Irish heritage.
Loathsome individual anyway.

Paul Ryan was the one doing the most pushing behind the bill. He was highly supportive of it.

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Arkansas) was the one who blocked it.

jm08

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Ryan voted against that?

Hope we all remember that next time he’s banging on about his Irish heritage.
Loathsome individual anyway.

Ryan is decent enough (for a Republican!). I don't think he liked the Trump kind of politics and probably why he got out. Wouldn't be surprised if he is a future Presidential candidate.

jm08

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Your reasoning fails you here. Neither Northern Ireland nor the Republic being in the EU would also satisfy the border problem. You seem to have forgotten this.

What the backstop does is facilitate the operation of an All-Ireland economy and the 140+ areas of co-operation. The border down the Irish Sea is only for animal health and food checks which is happening now with the full approval of the late Rev. Ian Paisley.



Last weeks, food stuffs contaminated with African Swine Fever were detected in Northern Ireland which would have probably come through GB and were not detected there.


https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/african-swine-fever-traces-found-in-meat-seized-entering-northern-ireland-38304726.html

Peregrinus

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Why not? The Belfast Agreement is about Northrrn Ireland and its relationship with Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom which are the only other parties to the agreement.

If a hard border with Ireland would breach the Agreement then so would a hard border with mainland Britain and a sea border would come within this definition.

The EU excluding Ireland is not a party to the Agreement so that a hard border between any of the parties and the EU does not breach the Agreement. Hence, a hard border between the United Kingdom and France does nor Breach the Agreement.

Therefore, as a border between Northern Ireland and either of the other two parties would breach the Agreement, the solution is to have a border between Ireland and the EU.

No, no, no. The solution is to conduct Brexit in a way that does not require a border either between NI and GB or between NI and RoI. Which is very much in line with what people were told they would get by the Leave campaigns; a Brexit which did not hamper the UK's ability to trade internationally. And which is perfectly feasible and attainable, and entirely consistent with the referendum result. And which would attain the UK's stated objective of "no hard border", and allow it to honour its guarantees. Everyone's a winner!

The problem here is the (post-referendum) decision to go for a hard Brexit. A hard Brexit is impossible without either undermining the GFA, or violating irish sovereignty by demanding changes to Ireland's relationship with the EU (which, to be fair, HMG has never been so stupid as to suggest).

Once hard brexiters have decided that that the GFA must be undermined, the least worst option is to choose the course which does less harm to the GFA, which is increased controls on the GB/NI border, which is in fact the preferred option in NI, and of course in RoI. Hard brexiters who resist this are presumably motivated by the desire to undermine the GFA to the greatest extent possible.

Calina

Ireland had no say in the Brexit so a Brexit which compels Ireland to change its trading arrangements with the EU is out of the question.

The UK bought Brexit. The UK pays. This means they do not get to say Ireland segregates from the single market to facilitate their needs. It means the UK stays in the SM and CU and VAT system so that the UK complies with its obligations.

Nody

Well back in the global world UK is getting a reality check by Canada as they refuse to roll over the CETA agreement due to Boris promise of zero tariffs in case of crash out; who'd have thought other countries don't want to sign an equal reduction in tariffs deal if you promise zero tariffs to everyone?

One of Liam Fox’s trade envoys has quit in protest that the government’s no-deal Brexit policy threatens the demise of an existing trade deal with Canada worth £800m.

Andrew Percy attacked the “cack-handed” move to scrap or slash tariffs on almost all imports if the UK crashes out of the EU – blaming it for Ottawa’s refusal to “roll over” its existing deal with the EU.

The Conservative MP felt “patronised” by the international trade secretary when he warned him the announcement would backfire, The Independent understands, walking away after almost two years in the Canada role.

Canada made clear its resistance to a rollover after the UK announced, in March, that tariffs would be axed “temporarily” on 87 per cent of imports, after a no-deal Brexit.

The move was designed to stop shoppers being hit by soaraway prices, but the threat to UK jobs from undercutting was branded “a sledgehammer for our economy” by the CBI.

Canada’s government noted the proposal would “provide all WTO [World Trade Organisation] partners, including Canada, with duty-free access for 95 per cent of tariff lines”.

And a spokesperson warned: “Post-Brexit, any future trade arrangement between Canada and the UK would be influenced by the terms of the withdrawal agreed between the UK and the EU, as well as any unilateral UK approaches.”

Sounds like; oh I don't know the countries lining up to bend UK over and take what it wants exactly as warned but that could not be the case since we've been told everyone needs UK after all...

VinLieger

Nody wrote: »

Well back in the global world UK is getting a reality check by Canada as they refuse to roll over the CETA agreement due to Boris promise of zero tariffs in case of crash out; who'd have thought other countries don't want to sign an equal reduction in tariffs deal if you promise zero tariffs to everyone?
Sounds like; oh I don't know the countries lining up to bend UK over and take what it wants exactly as warned but that could not be the case since we've been told everyone needs UK after all...

Once again their public pandering to the brexit base kicks them in the teeth. Its like they still dont realise the EU and the rest of the world can also read twitter or the mail/express etc

murphaph

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Why not? The Belfast Agreement is about Northrrn Ireland and its relationship with Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom which are the only other parties to the agreement.

If a hard border with Ireland would breach the Agreement then so would a hard border with mainland Britain and a sea border would come within this definition.

The EU excluding Ireland is not a party to the Agreement so that a hard border between any of the parties and the EU does not breach the Agreement. Hence, a hard border between the United Kingdom and France does nor Breach the Agreement.

Therefore, as a border between Northern Ireland and either of the other two parties would breach the Agreement, the solution is to have a border between Ireland and the EU.

So the border is Ireland's problem, not the UK's.

...or Brexit is fundamentally incompatible with the GFA because the only way to implement it without damaging the GFA is to compel another sovereign state to leave the EU against its expressed wishes.

You guys did not think this through enough before the referendum. That is the UK's problem.

IAmTheReign

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo wrote: »

I wouldn't want to put my faith in the Democrats - despite German and Irish being the largest and second-largest self-reported ancestry groups in the United States. Think African Americans are third.

We have very little clout in Washington unfortunately. We have a St. Patrick's Day date and that's it.

You see Irish names pop up all the time. Generals, politicians, governors ect. ect. But they have no sincere connection with Ireland. Maybe 100 years ago it'd be different.

In fairness the St. Patricks Day thing is huge. What other country of only 4 million people gets a guaranteed invitation to the White House to meet with the president every single year?

US politicians may not have a sincere connection to Ireland but that's not really whats important. Their voters do, and politicians want to keep their voters happy. Being tough with Britain and supporting Ireland wins them easy votes.

Enzokk

Yesterday we were going to have the EU change the backstop and give in to the UK by way of compromise, today the EU is preparing a package to help offset the damage that no-deal Brexit will do to Ireland.

EU prepares huge aid package for Ireland

The European Commission is drawing up a multibillion-pound aid package for Ireland to offset the economic damage of a no-deal Brexit, The Times understands.

The bloc would “spend whatever was necessary” to support the Irish government through any disruption of trade, a senior EU diplomat said.

European leaders have privately told Boris Johnson that he risks scuppering any prospect of averting a no-deal Brexit by making “totally unrealistic” demands over the Irish backstop.

EU diplomats are understood to have made contact with senior figures close to Mr Johnson early in the campaign and urged him to show “restraint” in setting out his Brexit strategy before entering Downing Street.

As for the EU backing down, well this is not going to happen according to the article.

However, they expressed deep concern that he has hardened his rhetoric in recent days and last week explicitly ruled out any deal that included any form of the present backstop. One said that “dark clouds” had descended after Mr Johnson made his comments during the final debate of the campaign. “This is not simply a business deal that can be unpicked because a new chief executive comes in,” the diplomat said.

“If Europe is seen to give in on this then what message does it send to Trump on trade? What message does it send to Putin on security? For the EU’s own preservation, no deal is preferable than being seen to back down.”

So we have the EU preparing to help us offset some of the damage no-deal will cause and not backing down against the stance of Johnson. Johnson has boxed himself into a corner here, as Tony Blair seems to see as well,

Writing in The Times today Tony Blair says that Mr Johnson appears to have “boxed himself into a no-deal Brexit”. The former Labour leader adds: “The most astonishing thing about Johnson’s position on Brexit is his apparent failure to understand why Theresa May failed . . . The Johnson position is now that Europe should remove the backstop — ‘delete it’ as he says — and have all the border issues dealt with in the future negotiation.

“For Europe to agree to this, it would have to renege on its commitment to Ireland, reopen the guarantee accepted by the UK government that the Irish border would be open for people and goods without friction, and give to Johnson what Europe conspicuously refused to give to May. I see no prospect whatsoever of that happening. None.”

So troubled waters ahead for Johnson from Tuesday. Either he takes the country down the road to no-deal and blows up parliament in his quest to do it, or he backs down and is taken down by the Brexit wing of his party and the Brexit Party at the next General Election. This sideshow to Brexit is some entertainment, just too bad we are being held hostage to it.

*Article is behind paywall, but you can register for free and I was able to read the whole article. It allows you a few articles per month on the Times website.

trellheim

Does anyone have examples of the EU backing down ? Norway ? Switzerland ? anybody ?

Presumably the UK know this.

Therefore I expect huge pressure almost immediately on Leo to cave on something, anything to have something they can trumpet.

Since David Davis has almost publicly said that the negotiating gloves are going to come off - not sure what that means but judge for yourself

lawred2

trellheim wrote: »

Does anyone have examples of the EU backing down ? Norway ? Switzerland ? anybody ?

Presumably the UK know this.

Therefore I expect huge pressure almost immediately on Leo to cave on something, anything to have something they can trumpet.

Since David Davis has almost publicly said that the negotiating gloves are going to come off - not sure what that means but judge for yourself

Almost every utterance from these uber Tories is in macho big man big talk terms... everything is seen as a school yard fight...

These people need to seriously grow up.

And so do all those listening to such puerile crap.

Tell me how

trellheim wrote: »

Does anyone have examples of the EU backing down ? Norway ? Switzerland ? anybody ?

Presumably the UK know this.

Therefore I expect huge pressure almost immediately on Leo to cave on something, anything to have something they can trumpet.

Since David Davis has almost publicly said that the negotiating gloves are going to come off - not sure what that means but judge for yourself

That's why Coveney did so well yesterday. He was very clear and adamant that the WAvis agreed and closed. He said directly that just because Britain says it must be renegotiated is not the case.

The audacity of Davis to spout nonsense like this after he was the UK negotiator is like something David Brent would say.

Stop moaning ffs

Ian Duncan Smith yesterday saying ‘the EU is a master at hard nose negotiations’.
James O Brien made the point that’s a damn good reason not to leave. Never mind have to negotiate against them.

20silkcut

trellheim wrote: »

Does anyone have examples of the EU backing down ? Norway ? Switzerland ? anybody ?

Presumably the UK know this.

Therefore I expect huge pressure almost immediately on Leo to cave on something, anything to have something they can trumpet.

Since David Davis has almost publicly said that the negotiating gloves are going to come off - not sure what that means but judge for yourself

What will they do to pressure Varadkar??

As Leo says himself he is the EU.
The EU is him.

VinLieger

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Ian Duncan Smith yesterday saying ‘the EU is a master at hard nose negotiations’.
James O Brien made the point that’s a damn good reason not to leave. Never mind have to negotiate against them.

Iain Duncan Smith is a joke, he still wont admit any jobs have been lost due to Brexit

Leroy42

Was listening to Stephen Nolan on BBC5L last night, around 11.30, and he had Chris Mason on along with a supporter of Hunt and Jonhson (MP's).

The Johnson guy kept going on saying that UK and Ireland should simply have bi-lateral talks to deal with the NI border issue and that the EU should stay out of it. Claimed that as a sovereign nation Ireland should not be allowing the EU to take control.

I won't go through the whole thing, he also stated that alternative technology wasn't available right now, but it showed, yet again, that the UK totally fail to understand what it is they are dealing with. They simply cannot understand the reason for the EU, why the EU simply won't give them a trade deal.

If that is the mindset that it is not surprising that they see No Deal a a credible threat as they really do see that each country within the 27 will break off to look after their own interests.

BonnieSituation

trellheim wrote: »

Does anyone have examples of the EU backing down ? Norway ? Switzerland ? anybody ?

Presumably the UK know this.

Therefore I expect huge pressure almost immediately on Leo to cave on something, anything to have something they can trumpet.

Since David Davis has almost publicly said that the negotiating gloves are going to come off - not sure what that means but judge for yourself

Katya Adler would probably have evidence of the EU blinking at the last minute. She'd hardly just make it up.

Leroy42

VinLieger wrote: »

Iain Duncan Smith is a joke, he still wont admit any jobs have been lost due to Brexit

I keep saying this, but it staggers me the amount of air time he is given. He is a failed party leader, a failed minister and nothing he has said has come to pass in regards to Brexit.

When he claims the EU will budge, why don't they ask him why they didn't budge in March, or April and why they have changed nothing at all since last November.

trellheim

What will they do to pressure Varadkar??

As Leo says himself he is the EU.
The EU is him.

UK knows(believes/act of faith) that if Leo gives in then a deal will be done. ( this would cause an almost immediate GE here I'd say)

Stop moaning ffs

trellheim wrote: »

UK knows(believes/act of faith) that if Leo gives in then a deal will be done. ( this would cause an almost immediate GE here I'd say)

Think it’s been explained to you before that negotiations are closed. Leo can’t ‘give in’ on anything. Legally or functionally. It’s the EU with Ireland as part of it that Britain is dealing with.
He can’t go rogue off reservation and give the UK anything. It’s not within his gift.

And why would he?
Cos some clueless politicians in Britain keep squaking in their news papers?

Please

Lackadaisical

IAmTheReign wrote: »

In fairness the St. Patricks Day thing is huge. What other country of only 4 million people gets a guaranteed invitation to the White House to meet with the president every single year?

US politicians may not have a sincere connection to Ireland but that's not really whats important. Their voters do, and politicians want to keep their voters happy. Being tough with Britain and supporting Ireland wins them easy votes.

Speaking as someone who's fairly familiar with Irish-America and Irish American politicians, the other thing to remember is that unlike those of us on Emerald Isle itself, a lot of Irish Americans have a very mythological view of Ireland and a caricature of England (Britain) that is something along the lines of how you might see C. Montgomery Burns (Mr Burns of the Simpsons), with a touch of Cromwell and a mishmash of stories about how badly their ancestors were treated.

The British also tend to forget that the Americans did actually fight a revolution against them and I have found on a few occasions in meetings where some English person has made a stupid comment like referring to the US as "The colonies" or suggesting that they should hand themselves back to HRH and apologise tends to be met with about as much humor as saying the same thing in Dublin might.

The likes of Rees-Mogg, Johnson and quite a few others tend to confirm that stereotype and it will really not play out very well with Irish America and even non-Irish America.

The other side of it is that the US is split down the middle and for every Trump supporter, you've a people who cannot stand this kind of politics and would lump Brexit straight into the same category and right now, it's those people who control the house and have huge media influence.

Add to that that many Democrats (and even some Republicans) would tend to see the GFA as somewhat of a massive success of American foreign policy. The Clintons in particular would have personal involvement in it and there's a huge cohort of very establishment Irish American and allied politicians who would see it similarly.

A lot of the US establishment would also have seen the EU as having been a positive result of US foreign policy in Europe after WWII. It effectively is a product of the Marshall Plan and was built to some degree in the image of a European version of a United States. So, the UK attempting to take a sledge hammer to the EU will go down extremely badly with a lot of the US establishment, regardless of Trump thinks of it, the EU is very much part of the stable "Western" world order and espouses many of the same values and ideals as the US, albeit in a less interventionist and more peacefully idealistic kind of way. It's the US' biggest trade partner and that relationship has been enormously important to both sides of the Atlantic.

Trump's era in office will come to an end, and the UK will be left dealing with centrist American politics again and it isn't necessarily going to respond as enthusiastically as they think.

Even Trump is surrounded by right wing Irish Americans and I would suspect that if push came to shove on a topic that was putting Ireland at risk, many of those would probably fall into an "America First" but pro-Irish position a long time before they would support the Tories.

I just think the Tories could massively overplay their hand with the US on this. There are some parallels between Brexit and US populism, but there are some fairly stark differences too.

I'd also add that Trump smells weakness and will use it as a negotiating position in any trade deal / hotel deal .. (same thing to him.) He's not your friend. He's a salesman and it will very much be America (or Trump) First.

Harry Palmr

Alan Duncan resigns from government. So that's three assuming Gauke and Phil Hammond have followed through.

Also and I'm not sure if or how this might effect things but a Tory MP Charlie Elphicke has been charged with a crime - serious one at that.

trellheim

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Think it’s been explained to you before that negotiations are closed. Leo can’t ‘give in’ on anything. Legally or functionally. It’s the EU with Ireland as part of it that Britain is dealing with.
He can’t go rogue off reservation and give the UK anything. It’s not within his gift.

And why would he?
Cos some clueless politicians in Britain keep squaking in their news papers?

Please

I know exactly where the negotiations are.

If you think negotiations are closed you are on a different planet. People saying things doesnt make it true. Diplomacy carries on.

Some facesaver will be attempted ( or, indeed, not found).

Leo does not lead the EU side of the negotiating team, thats Barnier's job, true enough , but misses the point . If the Irish say "we're happy without the backstop, and the GFA looks good to us" then time limit of 5 years , agree to work towards mutual solution, or whatever, EU agrees to open it.

Now I agree this is unlikely BUT massive pressure is about to be applied. I would say Foreign Affairs and the Government have a playbook for this whole scenario.

Saying things are closed leaves you open to endplays , all scenarios need consideration.

reslfj

20silkcut wrote: »

What will they do to pressure Varadkar??

As Leo says himself he is the EU.
The EU is him.

"The EU is him."

No way.

The EU27 is all 27 countries and they decided and continue to decide what is the mandate for Michel Barnier the EU negotiator.

As long as Ireland acts with prudence - as its politicians has masterly done up to now - and position itself in front of the other 26 EU members it can have a great say.

But make no mistake. Ireland is not the EU27. In EU outer border and trade questions - it's the EU and the EU alone that calls the shots.

Lars

Stop moaning ffs

trellheim wrote: »

I know exactly where the negotiations are.

If you think negotiations are closed you are on a different planet. People saying things doesnt make it true. Diplomacy carries on.

Some facesaver will be attempted ( or, indeed, not found).

Leo does not lead the EU side of the negotiating team, thats Barnier's job, true enough , but misses the point . If the Irish say "we're happy without the backstop, and the GFA looks good to us" then time limit of 5 years , agree to work towards mutual solution, or whatever, EU agrees to open it.

Now I agree this is unlikely BUT massive pressure is about to be applied. I would say Foreign Affairs and the Government have a playbook for this whole scenario.

Saying things are closed leaves you open to endplays , all scenarios need consideration.

Are we consuming different media perhaps?
Everything I’ve read both on here and in papers has the Eu and us saying the WA is closed. The backstop is going nowhere. There will be no opening it and no renegotiations.

The only person I’m seeing saying there’ll be a new deal is Johnson.
Who thinks he can do three years of work in three months?

I know who I believe and it’s isn’t Johnson.

Where are you reading there’ll be further negotiations? And where is it said Leo will be forced to change position?

Lackadaisical

UK commentators only see this from a UK perspective, but if you think of it from the EU's point of view, the way the UK is behaving is almost like as if say Russia were to start demanding that the EU throw Finland or Estonia under a bus to ensure free flow of trade between it and the EU.

I find the UK seems to want to be treated as if it were an important on-going member, while throwing all sorts of aggressive shapes at the EU and using rhetoric that is extremely threatening to the EU itself and to one of the founder members of the Eurozone.

If the EU were to throw Ireland under a bus, it would immediately raise huge questions about its willingness to stand behind other smaller and vulnerable members with big neighbours. I mean why would the Nordic countries even bother to be members, if they were all subject to being cast aside should there be a trade deal with Russia?

Why would Greece or Cyprus remain members? Would the EU place Turkey ahead of them because it has 90m+ people?

It would leave the Balkan members nervous about how the EU might deal with both Serbia and Turkey, would it abandon them?

Likewise, all of the eastern countries that were formally under Soviet influence would be left scratching their heads.

Effectively by throwing Ireland under a bus, the EU could be writing its own epitaph and I think it is acutely aware of that, so I don't see it happening.

What I see happening in the next few months is the UK facing a very hard negotiation where the EU will simply not blink and will let the UK bang its head off the wall until it eventually comes around to a compromise.
As it stands, the EU doesn't really have to do anything at all other than sit there and let the UK rant and rave like a toddler throwing a tantrum. Eventually, it will calm down and pragmatism will be restored.