Brexit discussion thread XII (Please read OP before posting)

CelticRambler

Bit cynical wrote: »

The main danger to the CTA has generally come from the EU side.

Once again, you seem to be disconnected from historical reality: the main danger to the CTA has always (not generally) been the Westminster government, most recently in the early 2000s, when reform of the CTA was blocked only by Northern Irish unionists, who didn't particularly like the idea of being asked to prove their national identity when travelling to "the mainland". It's only 11 years since the British government was defeated (from within) in its latest attempt to shut down the CTA.

Well, guess what: Johnson has shown that he's okay with F**k Northern Ireland as a policy, so ...

Peregrinus wrote: »

But it would be hugely politically difficult within the UK. Unlike the beneficiaries of EU free movement rules who are settled in the UK, the beneficiaries of the CTA have votes. And there are a very large number of them. Not to mention the absolute sh!tstorm that would break out in NI if the UK attempted to control entry and exit of people over the land border with the Republic. I think the UK would rather put up with a leaky migration system than take all that on.

I reckon the CTA is safe. And, to the extent that it isn’t safe, that’s entirely the result of choices made or to be made, and actions taken or to be taken, by the UK.

... I don't think the CTA is safe at all. Those NI votes count for nothing in Westminster, and the England-resident Irish voters are a politically mixed bunch who probably won't be affected very much any way, thanks to grandfathered rights, dual citizenship and being sufficiently in tune with English news to know what they need to do to get settled status.

Peregrinus

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I don't think the UK will threaten to abolish the CTA completely, I expect some threat to the status of the Irish in the UK - perhaps some sort of register for permission to work or reside.

I know this will be impractical and damaging for the UK, and I don't think they will actually do it, but they are complete bluffers and seem to think threats to injure themselves and us are a brilliant negotiating tactic.

This is all short term anyway, it is a matter of time before they cave and take whatever deal the EU is offering same as Johnson did with the WA.

I exepct nothing of this kind. It would be astonishing, catastrophic, Mark Francois-level stupidity.

Zubeneschamali

Peregrinus wrote: »

I exepct nothing of this kind. It would be astonishing, catastrophic, Mark Francois-level stupidity.

Stupid, yes, but it will not be catastrophic, since I expect the EU to call their bluff and then they'll cave, averting any real catastrophe.

But they aren't going to leave any threat of self-harm unused, the bottom of every barrel will be scraped before they fold.

Igotadose

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

P.s: f@#k business!
https://europe.autonews.com/automakers/nissan-warns-about-future-european-plants-brexit-weighs

One of the many unintended consequences of Brexit; what happens to businesses that aren't doing well, when you add an unnecessary Brexit to their plate? They do worse. In the case of Nissan, they might shut down European manufacturing per that article, even in Spain.

robinph

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Stupid, yes, but it will not be catastrophic, since I expect the EU to call their bluff and then they'll cave, averting any real catastrophe.

But they aren't going to leave any threat of self-harm unused, the bottom of every barrel will be scraped before they fold.

As the largest non-UK born part of the population, and with full rights in the UK as exactly the same as UK nationals it would be monumentally stupid to go after the Irish like that. They would need to pick off all the other undesirables with the wrong colour skin and even funnier accents first.

sondagefaux

Micromanagement. Eustice = Agriculture Minister, Batters = head of the NFU (National Farmers Union).

Lisa O'Carroll @lisaocarroll

NEW Eustice says he will be pressing cabinet to put agriculture workers on the shortage occupation list...

and to satisfy farming demand for 70,000 not 10,000 workers.

Batters: We are going to lose these businesses if we don't get this assurance [re workers] [soon] #NFU2020

https://mobile.twitter.com/lisaocarroll/status/1232588554410381312

Nody

Peregrinus wrote: »

I exepct nothing of this kind. It would be astonishing, catastrophic, Mark Francois-level stupidity.

I'd disagree and not because I disagree with your opinion on the stupidity but because we tend to judge it from our viewpoint. We discuss Brexit and we view from a position of logic and intellectual view, we say the Brexit vote was emotional rather than intellectually driven etc. And all of that is true; but that needs to be extended to the Boris government as well; the people in it that are hardcore brexiteers are feeling it's right; not that it's intellectually right. That is why we get emotional speeches about "breaking free" etc. while we deride them to give us some facts on the benefits instead.

Now, with that out of the way; I could easily see the CTA ending in many ways in practice without out officially calling it quits. For example direct all Irish to the "third party" queue, check ID on everyone coming off the boats from NI, challenge people with Irish IDs or demand IDs to be latest X years old (as revenge for EU ending the UK passports earlier due to the 6 month rule), have a certain security chip or something along those line, require registration online "for their safety" to keep track on them etc. In short there are many ways an ideological and emotionally driven Brexit government can go after Ireland without officially ending the CTA simply to put Ireland "in it's place for opposing it's betters". And they may well start doing it after the FTA (if any) have been signed; revenge is after all best served cold.

RobMc59

Peregrinus wrote: »

I exepct nothing of this kind. It would be astonishing, catastrophic, Mark Francois-level stupidity.

Please don't mention that pompous little twit

ancapailldorcha

RobMc59 wrote: »

Please don't mention that pompous little twit

Please don't post insults.

Bit cynical

Peregrinus wrote: »

No, he never did. Only certified fruit-loops in the Brexit movement have ever suggested such a thing. Still, as I pointed out above, if they have difficulty enforcing their new migration rules against EU/EEA citizens, the possibility may rear its head.

But there's no leverage in them doing this as by the time they are implementing their migration rules, the negotiations have concluded.

ancapailldorcha

Mod: Serious posts only please. A post has been deleted.

Bit cynical

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Everything you say seems to indicate a disconnect from EU decision-making processes and Ireland's place in making that decision.

As you stated correctly, we are in the EU.

But what I wrote was: WE ARE THE EU!

I think it is important not to get hung up on forms of words. I have never suggested at any point that we are not full members of the EU or in any way separate from it.

robinph

moritz1234 wrote: »

SNIP.

That they didn't try to limit the UK rights of Irish passport holders when they were viewed as being the blowing stuff up people, I can't see there being any appetite to do so now. This is actual voters and and full British citizens you would now be talking about, not some foreigners who speak a different language.

Irish citizens are considered 100% as if they were UK citizens in the UK, except they now hold a different coloured passport.

Bit cynical

Peregrinus wrote: »

You forgot “for this reason there has never been any pressure on Ireland to join Schengen”. The EU likes the CTA; it always has done. The CTA does the kind of things that the EU think are good things to do. The reference in the WA was inserted simply to confirm that the current state of affairs will continue, precisely because the EU is happy with it. It’s mainly there so that the UK will understand that the EU will not, in any circumstances, assist them in operating migration controls between the UK and Ireland.

I think it is probably more accurate to say that the CTA is tolerated by the EU and will probably continue to be tolerated even with the UK gone.

As to what the EU "likes", that is a different matter but maximizing the extent of Schengen is something the EU engages in. New members, for example, are required to work towards joining it as part of their accession treaty. It is similar to the Eurozone in this respect.

Well, that presumes that the EU would prefer Ireland to be in Schengen rather than in the CTA, which I see no evidence of.

robinph

Bit cynical wrote: »

I think it is probably more accurate to say that the CTA is tolerated by the EU and will probably continue to be tolerated even with the UK gone.

And with the UK gone and subsequently breaking up there will just be more CTA's setup between the new states in whatever form they are split.

Scotland may want independence from England, but they are not going to want any restriction of movement between one side of Hadrians Wall and the other any more than across the Irish Sea.

Bit cynical

robinph wrote: »

And with the UK gone and subsequently breaking up there will just be more CTA's setup between the new states in whatever form they are split.

Scotland may want independence from England, but they are not going to want any restriction of movement between one side of Hadrians Wall and the other any more than across the Irish Sea.

Yes, I could see an exception being made in the case of Scotland. It may not be a requirement to join Schengen in this instance. But, again, this would be a case of the EU tolerating a CTA rather than liking it.

sondagefaux

Bit cynical wrote: »

Yes, I could see an exception being made in the case of Scotland. It may not be a requirement to join Schengen in this instance. But, again, this would be a case of the EU tolerating a CTA rather than liking it.

Newly joined member states are theoretically obliged to join Schengen.

If a member state (without an opt-out) doesn't make sufficient preparations to enable it to join Schengen, it's not allowed to join Schengen.

If Scotland didn't want to join Schengen, it could simply do nothing, its 'punishment' would be not being allowed to join Schengen.

sondagefaux

robinph wrote: »

And with the UK gone and subsequently breaking up there will just be more CTA's setup between the new states in whatever form they are split.

Scotland may want independence from England, but they are not going to want any restriction of movement between one side of Hadrians Wall and the other any more than across the Irish Sea.

Hadrian's Wall is entirely in England...

Bit cynical

sondagefaux wrote: »

Newly joined member states are theoretically obliged to join Schengen.

If a member state (without an opt-out) doesn't make sufficient preparations to enable it to join Schengen, it's not allowed to join Schengen.

If Scotland didn't want to join Schengen, it could simply do nothing, its 'punishment' would be not being allowed to join Schengen.

Yes, like joining the Euro, it can be postponed indefinitely though politically it may not be acceptable even to have the requirement even to eventually join Schengen and give up whatever CTA they have arranged with rUK (assuming a majority emerges for independence). Similarly with the Euro which also does not require immediate membership. These things were discussed during the last independence debate.

Leroy42

So I see that Defra has confirmed that farmers will lose out on the EU funds and that the Uk will not cover the shortfall.

So industry can expect more costs and more delays. Farmers as well. The general population will suffer the biggest lose of their rights in forever (lack of FoM).

And still not one outline of a plan of how this will benefit anybody at all.

briany

Leroy42 wrote: »

So I see that Defra has confirmed that farmers will lose out on the EU funds and that the Uk will not cover the shortfall.

So industry can expect more costs and more delays. Farmers as well. The general population will suffer the biggest lose of their rights in forever (lack of FoM).

And still not one outline of a plan of how this will benefit anybody at all.

I think the plan is for Boris to do to the farmers what Thatcher did to the miners.

ancapailldorcha

Leroy42 wrote: »

So I see that Defra has confirmed that farmers will lose out on the EU funds and that the Uk will not cover the shortfall.

So industry can expect more costs and more delays. Farmers as well. The general population will suffer the biggest lose of their rights in forever (lack of FoM).

And still not one outline of a plan of how this will benefit anybody at all.

It was never the plan to make anyone who isn't a spiv better off. It was to use every dirty trick in the book along with inventing a few new ones to entice the Great British voting public to vote against their own interests so that the likes of Jacob Rees-Mogg a few easy million.

This is what the remainers, myself included didn't appreciate until the Leave vote and two wins for the Conservatives (well one, anyway). Facts don't matter when a debate is conducted using feelings and facts are undermined. The election campaign aside, nobody has pretended for a very long time that Brexit would benefit the country.

briany wrote: »

I think the plan is for Boris to do to the farmers what Thatcher did to the miners.

I would disagree. The plan for Johnson, insofar as I can discern that such a plan exists is to wrap this up quickly and quietly and hopefully convince the press not to make a stink when Danish trawlers appear in British waters. I could be wrong of course. It's been known to happen. It might be the Schadenfraude talking but any farmer who voted for Brexit and/or the Conservative party has only themselves to blame and it's high time they saw the results of that, good or ill.

Of course, I'm still here looking at a career change thanks to a certain poster here but I've a potential escape plan to Limerick in the works should the worst come to it. I love this country but there's only so much self-inflicted damage one can tolerate before considering one's own best interests.

Nody

briany wrote: »

I think the plan is for Boris to do to the farmers what Thatcher did to the miners.

Nah; they simply want to make sure they got the right type of farmers:

“Some farmers may decide to stop farming altogether and use the payment to contribute to their retirement or move to another sector,” added Defra.

“This should facilitate restructuring, creating opportunities for existing businesses to expand and new entrants to join the industry.”

And as the future payments will be to keep things green rather than growing stuff the aristocracy will happily buy that farm land and do sod all with it to have the state pay them for the bother. And besides; if the farmers are gone you got a strong case to bring in that chlorinated chicken and hormone treated beef "to give the buyers choice" when they complain it's to expensive as only the premium farmers will survive.

Leroy42

Good thread (IMO) on the thinking behind the government approach to the trade talks.

https://twitter.com/DmitryOpines/status/1232585277358694400

I think he is right. The aim, along the lines of Trump which Johnson already stated would do a great job, is to create the sense of panic with the EU that the UK will do the unthinkable (leave without a deal) ie make them think you are just crazy enough to do it.

But failing that, the win win is that if that doesn't work, the groundwork has already been started to ensure that any failure to reach a deal is purely because the EU wouldn't agree to anything and that UK sovereignty is not for sale. Thus any hardships are totally at the fault of the EU.

So far, this is working remarkaby well. We have just witnessed Johnson get a big majority on the back on getting a deal with included the splitting up of the union (in trade terms) which he stated no PM could or should ever agree to.

Nody

Leroy42 wrote: »

Good thread (IMO) on the thinking behind the government approach to the trade talks.

https://twitter.com/DmitryOpines/status/1232585277358694400

I think he is right. The aim, along the lines of Trump which Johnson already stated would do a great job, is to create the sense of panic with the EU that the UK will do the unthinkable (leave without a deal) ie make them think you are just crazy enough to do it.

But failing that, the win win is that if that doesn't work, the groundwork has already been started to ensure that any failure to reach a deal is purely because the EU wouldn't agree to anything and that UK sovereignty is not for sale. Thus any hardships are totally at the fault of the EU.

So far, this is working remarkaby well. We have just witnessed Johnson get a big majority on the back on getting a deal with included the splitting up of the union (in trade terms) which he stated no PM could or should ever agree to.

Possibly domestically but from an EU side they are actually increasing the requirements and wording in response making the chance of a no deal that much higher.

Bit cynical

Nody wrote: »

And as the future payments will be to keep things green rather than growing stuff the aristocracy will happily buy that farm land and do sod all with it to have the state pay them for the bother.

Though reforms of the EU's CAP have also tended to move from production towards stewardship of the land e.g. the single farm payment.

Leroy42

Nody wrote: »

Possibly domestically but from an EU side they are actually increasing the requirements and wording in response making the chance of a no deal that much higher.

But domestically is all that matters. What does Johnson care how they are perceived in Brussels or Berlin, he doesn't get any votes from that, in fact it would appear quite the opposite in that the more he can make it out that he is fighting against the terrible EU the better he will actually do domestically.

You will have noticed that there is literally no one, no any MP's, not Farage, not the media, still positing that there are any actual benefits to Brexit. Far from getting Brexit done, far from the easiest trade deal, far from global Britain, all talk now is how terrible the EU are behaving and how Johnson must stand firm and not give in.

Imreoir2

Leroy42 wrote: »

But failing that, the win win is that if that doesn't work, the groundwork has already been started to ensure that any failure to reach a deal is purely because the EU wouldn't agree to anything and that UK sovereignty is not for sale. Thus any hardships are totally at the fault of the EU.

So far, this is working remarkaby well. We have just witnessed Johnson get a big majority on the back on getting a deal with included the splitting up of the union (in trade terms) which he stated no PM could or should ever agree to.

It is working well in England, but if trade talks end in failure then it is very likely to fast track the breakup of the UK. The no-deal groundwork they are relying on does not exist in either Scotland or NI, the populations in both firmly believe that the UK government is making a hash of the whole thing and if/when they fail and try to sell No Deal as being noble resistance to the evil EU, the people of Scotland and NI won't buy it.

It is really amazing that the British Government would act so recklessly, almost forcing Scotland and NI out of the union.

RobMc59

Imreoir2 wrote: »

It is working well in England, but if trade talks end in failure then it is very likely to fast track the breakup of the UK. The no-deal groundwork they are relying on does not exist in either Scotland or NI, the populations in both firmly believe that the UK government is making a hash of the whole thing and if/when they fail and try to sell No Deal as being noble resistance to the evil EU, the people of Scotland and NI won't buy it.

It is really amazing that the British Government would act so recklessly, almost forcing Scotland and NI out of the union.

You're assuming that Scotland will vote to leave the UK.Their fishermen are much more protective of the fishing grounds around Scotland than the rest of the UK and that alone could a showstopper imo. Its common knowledge here in the UK that the EU are salivating over the UK fishing grounds.

Frank Bullitt

https://twitter.com/talkRADIO/status/1232618719249129474

Christ...almighty.

Will it ever stop?