Brexit discussion thread XIII (Please read OP before posting)

Seth Brundle

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

What about going from south to north? Might that require a green card also?

Nate

Have a read of what I posted a short while ago ^^^

View

breezy1985 wrote: »

Would it make much difference whether we were in our out of Schengen. You would need a passport or similar to fly anyway so unless you swam to France or there is some other part of it I don't understand.

Are we any clearer on what happens the Northern border come January. Is the border on the Irish sea happening as things stand?

Yes it would as we, and our fellow EU citizens, would not be subject to passport (or national ID) checks when travelling between Ireland and the rest of the EU whether by air or sea, except in rare circumstances.

In other words, instead of operating a CTA with a non-EU country, we would operate a CTA (Schengen) with our fellow EU countries and the four EFTA countries (a total of 26 with there being four more legally obliged to join it).

View

trellheim wrote: »

Folks I went off and checked the insurance thing.

According to NI Govt a Green Card will be required for NI Motorists to drive in the ROI from 01 Jan 21 see



https://www.gov.uk/guidance/driving-in-the-eu-from-1-january-2021

that will cause some flap up north if its not already

There have been four and a half years in which - unlike the two other remain voting regions in the UK - the NI Assembly’s politicians acting on behalf of the people of NI could have sent negotiators off to Brussels and/or Dublin and at least try and negotiate new arrangements with the EU (and/or a new domestic constitutional status) for themselves. They have had plenty of time to do so but didn’t bother.

If they weren’t willing to even try doing so then it is ludicrous that our government spends its time and energy tying itself up in knots about this.

Seth Brundle

View wrote: »

Yes it would as we, and our fellow EU citizens, would not be subject to passport (or national ID) checks when travelling between Ireland and the rest of the EU whether by air or sea, except in rare circumstances.

In other words, instead of operating a CTA with a non-EU country, we would operate a CTA (Schengen) with our fellow EU countries and the four EFTA countries (a total of 26 with there being four more legally obliged to join it).

...and therefore needing to erect a passport border on the island of Ireland between the EU and the UK.

Itssoeasy

roosterman71 wrote: »

The British immigrants seem to have just realise that their holiday home lifestyle in the south of Spain is going to require some extra paperwork

Furious British expats blast EU's new post-Brexit travel rules which will ban them from spending more than three months at a time at their holiday home from January

I just read the article and was coming here to post about. brexit and leaving the EU has consequences shocker. They seem to want to have their cake and eat it. And they need to blame their own government and the whole brexit mess for the last five years. They voted to leave so sorry.

Infini

Leroy42 wrote: »

Unfortunately we cannot say that will not happen. The UK, through the IM bill, have signalled that they have no intention of abiding by the WA.

If they fail to secure a deal such that the impact of a sea border if reduced to avoid it being an issue, then they will renege on the agreement and then a border will be required.

I'll be honest as far as I'm concerned the IM Bill is pretty much a guarantee that there will be a no deal. We could potentially see a deal yet but honestly this government after 4 years of constant bluster, bile, deceit and lies deserves and rightly has it coming to reap what it sows and be hit with the full consequences of a no deal. They NEED to get their comeuppance, I can forgive the British people for being foolish but not those in charge who should and would know better and especially those who wanted this for their own greed.

Truth is the only way this will ever get sorted is sadly through a no deal, the UK as an entity is fundamentally broken because of FPTP and disproportionate English influence and honestly these problems will only ever get resolved when the country's forced to confront the ugly rot and consequences of their folly that brought them low in order to move on. Otherwise we will just see this slow burn for many more years.

Seth Brundle wrote: »

But the media are already blaming the EU for the effects of Brexit. This will be the narrative going forwards...

https://twitter.com/StevePeers/status/1333394401670914051

As the old saying goes to them "You won get over it". Those publications helped the conservatives pushed the incompetence, failures and systemic shortcomings of the British system of goverment onto the EU and helped paint them as a scapegoat for many years. Some of these deserve to be shutdown or seriously reigned in for practically publishing lies and essentially helping to gaslight their own people. Publishing the Truth should always be respected but those who push malignent agendas to undermine their own country arent worthy of it.

End of the day they duped the Brits into voting against their own interests and their own government made them third class citizens through their own incompetence and bluster IMO. They lose any right to complain about it to the EU when their own government is the one who made it happen.

View wrote: »

Yes it would as we, and our fellow EU citizens, would not be subject to passport (or national ID) checks when travelling between Ireland and the rest of the EU whether by air or sea, except in rare circumstances.

In other words, instead of operating a CTA with a non-EU country, we would operate a CTA (Schengen) with our fellow EU countries and the four EFTA countries (a total of 26 with there being four more legally obliged to join it).

We should join Shengen eventually but honestly this will only ever be possible in the event of a United Ireland, the border is an artificial one and honestly we'd never allow a physical border to be erected again after so many people died because of it. It actually is a pain that we are getting lumped in with the British when travelling to certain parts of Europe even though we're EU citizens right now but the only manageable controls that will ever be possible on this island in the future will be at Ports and Airports hence why I belive a UI is the only thing that will have us joining the Schengen zone someday.

View

Seth Brundle wrote: »

...and therefore needing to erect a passport border on the island of Ireland between the EU and the UK.

That would be up to the U.K. and/or NI governments to decide, once they are presented with the fait accompli of us announcing we are joining Schengen.

If they want, they could have NI opt-in to the Schengen area, just as they opted-in the two (British) Sovereign Base Areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia (in Cyprus) into using the Euro, to avoid the hassle of changing currencies on that island.

If they don’t choose to do that, then the people of NI have the option of exercising their rights under the GFA and of opting-out of the U.K.

And, if they aren’t prepared to do either of those, then we - the majority on this island - don’t need to go around refusing to work toward the Schengen goal of the EU Treaties in order to facilitate people who choose to make life difficult for us and who regard our independence with scorn.

View

Infini wrote: »

I'll be honest as far as I'm concerned the IM Bill is pretty much a guarantee that there will be a no deal. We could potentially see a deal yet but honestly this government after 4 years of constant bluster, bile, deceit and lies deserves and rightly has it coming to reap what it sows and be hit with the full consequences of a no deal. They NEED to get their comeuppance, I can forgive the British people for being foolish but not those in charge who should and would know better and especially those who wanted this for their own greed.

Truth is the only way this will ever get sorted is sadly through a no deal, the UK as an entity is fundamentally broken because of FPTP and disproportionate English influence and honestly these problems will only ever get resolved when the country's forced to confront the ugly rot and consequences of their folly that brought them low in order to move on. Otherwise we will just see this slow burn for many more years.



As the old saying goes to them "You won get over it". Those publications helped the conservatives pushed the incompetence, failures and systemic shortcomings of the British system of goverment onto the EU and helped paint them as a scapegoat for many years. Some of these deserve to be shutdown or seriously reigned in for practically publishing lies and essentially helping to gaslight their own people. Publishing the Truth should always be respected but those who push malignent agendas to undermine their own country arent worthy of it.

End of the day they duped the Brits into voting against their own interests and their own government made them third class citizens through their own incompetence and bluster IMO. They lose any right to complain about it to the EU when their own government is the one who made it happen.



We should join Shengen eventually but honestly this will only ever be possible in the event of a United Ireland, the border is an artificial one and honestly we'd never allow a physical border to be erected again after so many people died because of it. It actually is a pain that we are getting lumped in with the British when travelling to certain parts of Europe even though we're EU citizens right now but the only manageable controls that will ever be possible on this island in the future will be at Ports and Airports hence why I belive a UI is the only thing that will have us joining the Schengen zone someday.

There is little prospect of a United Ireland happening in the foreseeable future unless there is a really major political earthquake there (and as Brexit was a big political earthquake it’ll need to be really, really major).

As such, you are just handing a permanent veto to the majority in NI, and hence the U.K. government, over our decisions. That is what we done to date and, unsurprisingly, no one in the U.K. took seriously the idea that the NI border might be a problem for them - instead they counted on us going out of our way to avoid honouring our commitment as an EU member to Schengen.

McGiver

View wrote:

If they want, they could have NI opt-in to the Schengen area...

Is this legally possible?
Are there any other non-eu countries part of the Schengen apart from microstates Monaco, San Marino and Vatican?

Northern Ireland could be perceived as a much larger version of Monaco, technically. I.e. an enclave surrounded by another EU country from there sides and sea on the fourth side.

L1011

McGiver wrote: »

Is this legally possible?
Are there any other non-eu countries part of the Schengen apart from microstates Monaco, San Marino and Vatican?

Northern Ireland could be perceived as a much larger version of Monaco, technically. I.e. an enclave surrounded by another EU country from there sides and sea on the fourth side.

Iceland, Norway and Switzerland (which still has a customs border)

View

McGiver wrote: »

Is this legally possible?
Are there any other non-eu countries part of the Schengen apart from microstates Monaco, San Marino and Vatican?

Northern Ireland could be perceived as a much larger version of Monaco, technically. I.e. an enclave surrounded by another EU country from there sides and sea on the fourth side.

Yes. The four EFTA countries are part of Schengen in addition to the microstates you mentioned.

Widdensushi

View wrote: »

That would be up to the U.K. and/or NI governments to decide, once they are presented with the fait accompli of us announcing we are joining Schengen.

If they want, they could have NI opt-in to the Schengen area, just as they opted-in the two (British) Sovereign Base Areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia (in Cyprus) into using the Euro, to avoid the hassle of changing currencies on that island.

If they don’t choose to do that, then the people of NI have the option of exercising their rights under the GFA and of opting-out of the U.K.

And, if they aren’t prepared to do either of those, then we - the majority on this island - don’t need to go around refusing to work toward the Schengen goal of the EU Treaties in order to facilitate people who choose to make life difficult for us and who regard our independence with scorn.

It's not that simple, as no deal is going, we need a hard border, I can see no other option, as for the latter, be careful what you wish for, that's more complicated than the brexit negotiations.

View

Widdensushi wrote: »

It's not that simple, as no deal is going, we need a hard border, I can see no other option, as for the latter, be careful what you wish for, that's more complicated than the brexit negotiations.

While it may be a total pain in the rear to have one, putting up a hard border really isn’t that complicated (engineering wise). The annoying bit about borders is usually the queue at them, rather than the crossing itself once you reach the front of the queue.

Had we put one up a few decades ago (eg if we had opted to join Schengen when it was set up), I doubt anyone today would be calling for us to leave it, even if our refusal to do so inconvenienced Brexiters.

Seth Brundle

View wrote: »

While it may be a total pain in the rear to have one, putting up a hard border really isn’t that complicated (engineering wise). The annoying bit about borders is usually the queue at them, rather than the crossing itself once you reach the front of the queue.

Had we put one up a few decades ago (eg if we had opted to join Schengen when it was set up), I doubt anyone today would be calling for us to leave it, even if our refusal to do so inconvenienced Brexiters.

You appear to have forgotten the problems we had in the past when we had a border on this island which is surprising because their effect was shown in the media for years.

Widdensushi

View wrote: »

While it may be a total pain in the rear to have one, putting up a hard border really isn’t that complicated (engineering wise). The annoying bit about borders is usually the queue at them, rather than the crossing itself once you reach the front of the queue.

Had we put one up a few decades ago (eg if we had opted to join Schengen when it was set up), I doubt anyone today would be calling for us to leave it, even if our refusal to do so inconvenienced Brexiters.

Any idea what it would cost, initially and per year?

View

Seth Brundle wrote: »

You appear to have forgotten the problems we had in the past when we had a border on this island which is surprising because their effect was shown in the media for years.

We still have a border on this island. It hasn’t gone away. Nor will it unless a majority in NI - of whatever combination - vote it away. That’s up to the people of NI to decide and they are the main people that have to live with the consequences of their decisions.

It isn’t our responsibility to tie ourselves up in knots over it when they aren’t even remotely interested in exploring possibilities - even on a hypothetical basis - such as opting into Schengen (while otherwise remaining British) or opting out of the U.K.

View

Widdensushi wrote: »

Any idea what it would cost, initially and per year?

Offhand, no, but there are examples, such as the Lithuania - Russia border where they were putting up a 130km border fence which was to cost them €30 million back in 2017, most of which was to come from the EU’s Schengen Border Fund.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-38635737

The cost here would obviously be higher as the border is longer.

The cost per year would largely be a multiple of the number of crossings on the border. More crossings means more personnel manning them and a higher annual bill for them. There would obviously have to be a political/economic decision made about how many crossings to have once the major national primary and secondary roads have been covered.

Strazdas

Widdensushi wrote: »

It's not that simple, as no deal is going, we need a hard border, I can see no other option, as for the latter, be careful what you wish for, that's more complicated than the brexit negotiations.

One of the main reasons the peace process 1994-98 came into being and the GFA was signed was because of the removal of British army posts and of the border itself.

You would want to be certifiably insane to start building the border again. It would be like Angela Merkel announcing she was rebuilding a border with East Germany.

Peregrinus

View wrote: »

Offhand, no, but there are examples, such as the Lithuania - Russia border where they were putting up a 130km border fence which was to cost them €30 million back in 2017, most of which was to come from the EU’s Schengen Border Fund.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-38635737

The cost here would obviously be higher as the border is longer.

The cost per year would largely be a multiple of the number of crossings on the border. More crossings means more personnel manning them and a higher annual bill for them. There would obviously have to be a political/economic decision made about how many crossings to have once the major national primary and secondary roads have been covered.

This is a bizarre calculation. The actual cost of policing the border is trivial compared to the economic impact of border controls. And that's before we consider the social and (in Ireland especially) political impacts.

Peregrinus

roosterman71 wrote: »

The British immigrants seem to have just realise that their holiday home lifestyle in the south of Spain is going to require some extra paperwork

Furious British expats blast EU's new post-Brexit travel rules which will ban them from spending more than three months at a time at their holiday home from January

As might be expected, the Daily Mail can't cover this story without simultaneously lying about it. These aren't "new rules"; these are the rules that have been in place since before the EU referendum. The only things that have happened since there are (a) the UK voted to brexit; (b) the UK government subsequently decided that it was the Will of the People that brexit must be conducted in a way which involved leaving the Single Market and ending freedom of movement; (c) Brexiters (and the Daily Mail) cheered this to the echo; and (d) it has finally dawned on somebody in the UK to look at the long-standing rules that the UK has decided to subject itself to. These are those rules.

So everything "new" that has happened here was the unforced, unilateral choice of the UK, or of someone in the UK.

It's freedom of movement that gives people the right to stay in other EU member states for more than 90 days; the UK chose to end freedom of movement; UK citizens have accordingly been relieved of the intolerable oppressive burden of having the right to stay for more than 90 days in EU member states; and the Daily Mail is reporting outrage that the policy that it campaigned so long and so loudly for the UK government to implement is being implemented by the UK government.

declanflynn

Another 15000 jobs gone in the UK, that brings the total job losses to almost 440,000 because of Brexit.
On the bright side there should be enough empty units on british high streets for food banks to set up to feed their people.

listermint

declanflynn wrote: »

Another 15000 jobs gone in the UK, that brings the total job losses to almost 440,000 because of Brexit.
On the bright side there should be enough empty units on british high streets for food banks to set up to feed their people.

Rashford is going to be busy in 2021. Might have to hang up his boots

ArmaniJeanss

Peregrinus wrote: »

As might be expected, the Daily Mail can't cover this story without simultaneously lying about it. These aren't "new rules"; these are the rules that have been in place since before the EU referendum.

In defence of the DM I don't think they meant 'new' in that sense.
It was more in the sense of "I'm moving the kids to a new school" or "I have a new girlfriend". There's no implication in those sentences that the school or girl didn't previously exist.
The article acknowledges that they are already existing rules, and that what's 'new' is that they will apply to people from the UK.

It is obviously difficult not to get a huge feeling of schadenfreude reading the article, with the level of exceptionalism and entitlement displayed by some of those interviewed. Though probably worth bearing in mind that 'ex-pats' seem to have generally been a remain majority.

dogbert27

The rules always existed, it just never affected their daily lives as citizens of the EU. Now they are citizens of a country outside of the EU they will see that their daily lives are being affected and while the ex-pats may have been on the remain side, did they actually return to vote or did they assume that the people back home wouldn't be daft enough to actually vote leave?

prawnsambo

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

How do Brexiteers feel about being ruled by Etonians and unelected elites? could it possibly be that the problems UK have stem from its complicated and un republican roots, which at their very core are still based on an old feudal system and lack of constitution for the modern day?

You may have answered your own question there. It seems to me that the class system in the UK is still as strong as ever and it's ingrained in both ends of the spectrum. James O'Brien refers to the 'doff cap, tug forelock' mentality and many people seem inordinately obsequious to anyone with a 'Lord' or a 'Sir' in front of their names.

CelticRambler

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

I wonder what this would mean for "A house in the sun" property fetish type TV shows so popular on UK cable TV, one would assume there would also now be tax and legal implications in buying a property in EU by UK citizens.

It'd just add another twist to the drama - Dwayne & Tracey from Essex who didn't realise Brexit meant Brexit; Trevor getting divorced from Thérèse and about to lose his conjugal right to remain; Mark and Mandy, who burnt their bridges and no long meet the UK's requirements for residency so have no choice but to stay in their half-built hovel ...

ambro25

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

I wonder what this would mean for "A house in the sun" property fetish type TV shows so popular on UK cable TV, one would assume there would also now be tax and legal implications in buying a property in EU by UK citizens, EU is really tightening up money laundering regulations and property (as Londoners would know) is a perfect vehicle for all sorts of nefarious laundering needs.

The way things are looking and going for Brits...

...my money is on a reboot of Auf Wiedersehen Pet before end 2021.

New visa rules announced.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-55133506

New immigration rules will be "simple and flexible", ministers have promised, as the UK's points-based post-Brexit system prepares to go live.

From Tuesday most foreign nationals, including from the European Union, who want to work in the UK from 1 January will have to apply online for a visa.

Those seeking a skilled worker visa will need a job offer, to be proficient in English and earn at least £25,600.

Free movement from and to the EU will come to an end on 31 December.

Things are starting to fall into place.

fly_agaric

Strazdas wrote: »

You would want to be certifiably insane to start building the border again. It would be like Angela Merkel announcing she was rebuilding a border with East Germany.

It is not the same because this border still exists.

Physical manifestations disappeared due to the peace process (removal of the security elements) and the shared UK/Irish membership of the EU allowing for free flow of goods (no customs/import checks required).

NI is another country and majority of the population in NI want it to continue that way. IMO unlike the East Germans they (Unionists) may quite like the idea of a hardening border (if they don't have to live near it)!

Pretending otherwise is denying reality. Similar to Irish government (IMO), you are not fully accepting the inevitable end consequences of current UK/Irish policy (UK hard Brexit, UK reneges on NI protocol, Ireland remains fully in the EU) for that border. There's no "out" here and something has to give in the end.

CrabRevolution

Peregrinus wrote: »

As might be expected, the Daily Mail can't cover this story without simultaneously lying about it. These aren't "new rules"; these are the rules that have been in place since before the EU referendum. The only things that have happened since there are (a) the UK voted to brexit; (b) the UK government subsequently decided that it was the Will of the People that brexit must be conducted in a way which involved leaving the Single Market and ending freedom of movement; (c) Brexiters (and the Daily Mail) cheered this to the echo; and (d) it has finally dawned on somebody in the UK to look at the long-standing rules that the UK has decided to subject itself to. These are those rules.

So everything "new" that has happened here was the unforced, unilateral choice of the UK, or of someone in the UK.

It's freedom of movement that gives people the right to stay in other EU member states for more than 90 days; the UK chose to end freedom of movement; UK citizens have accordingly been relieved of the intolerable oppressive burden of having the right to stay for more than 90 days in EU member states; and the Daily Mail is reporting outrage that the policy that it campaigned so long and so loudly for the UK government to implement is being implemented by the UK government.

It's an interesting insight into the psyche of brexiters. They have long argued that EU membership involves too many unfair and arduous rules (that they can rarely if ever name). Yet somehow they also reckon that the EU should involve fewer rules for non members.

They seem to have honestly bought into the belief that the EU is a group of states who joined together for the purpose of imposing arduous rules upon themselves for no reason, and that Brexit is a simply a matter of opting out of these arbitrary and unfounded rules while keeping the benefits of the EU.