Brexit discussion thread XIII (Please read OP before posting)

Lemming

ElJeffe wrote: »

The ambulance would be using the hard shoulder with lights and sirens on in an emergency.

CelticRambler wrote: »

In an emergency, yes; but it's not an emergency - it's just sitting there in the traffic, in the outside lane, with the paramedics clocking up hours looking at the rear end of the car in front. If/when a call comes in, it'll still have to navigate it's way out of that traffic, down to the next exit, and will not be racing down the hard shoulder at 120km/h. It's this kind of creeping inefficiency that'll be characteristic of service provision in post-Brexit British life.

That ambulance was sat on the inner lane with the lane to its left blocked; it wont be going anywhere if the traffic to its left can't move anywhere to begin with. Use of the hard shoulder also presumes that nobody is making use of it at that moment in time either. There also isn't really a hard shoulder near Holyhead anyway ...., and closer in towards the port/town what little there is becomes a kerb so two lanes and that's your lot.

In short; that video shows an absolute sh1t show regards traffic planning.

I know that drive to Holyhead fairly well and that video is both shocking and yet I am also not surprised either. I had - briefly - entertained a thought that the powers-that-be might have had applied a modicum of planning regards Holyhead but alas that video proves that to not be the case whatsoever. Stacking trucks also proves difficult when approaching Holyhead West-bound given that access to the port is via the right-hand lane and the whole "getting into the port" is a major bottle neck anyway.

Thargor

Interesting thread, imagine voting for people this obviously corrupt, what is wrong with them?

https://twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1339688685575557121

trellheim

yagan wrote: »

Actually Britain withdrew the CTA to the Irish Sea during WWII and the decade after, meaning that all from NI had to produce valid travel IDs moving within the UK, so checks are not without precedent.

In all fairness I did know this and had forgotten; but I do not think it alters the equation. My point was some sort of CTA would be agreed in the hypothetical of a United Ireland as a quid pro quo, and this was a barrier to Schengen adoption as we could not do so, as the UK would never adopt Schengen in my view. Hence WA and Brexit leading us to here.

(edit : in the event of a UI it would not be the UK any more but GB, but the point remains)

(slightly OT)

Larbre34

Thargor wrote: »

Interesting thread, imagine voting for people this obviously corrupt, what is wrong with them?

https://twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1339688685575557121

The so-called United Kingdom is effed, every which way, thats whats wrong with them. They are in a populist volcano.

Ireland has its moments, but I thank Christ I'm not British.

Strazdas

Larbre34 wrote: »

The so-called United Kingdom is effed, every which way, thats whats wrong with them. They are in a populist volcano.

Ireland has its moments, but I thank Christ I'm not British.

This writer in the Guardian tried to explore what 'English nationalism' is this week. Her conclusion is that it is something nasty and ugly, exclusively white with strong racist undertones.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/dec/15/english-nationalism-champion-no-10

BonnieSituation

lawred2 wrote: »

They are loyal to doing the opposite of what they think is in the interests of others

As the saying goes, loyalists will never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

listermint

Must be a lot of them trying to heap into the Stirling it's strengthened alot. Which can only mean there was alot of people buying in.

CelticRambler

More likely to do with Eurozone customers getting their last GBP orders in before the risk of having to pay customs duties. Overall, the movement is pretty minor.

Jizique

CelticRambler wrote: »

More likely to do with Eurozone customers getting their last GBP orders in before the risk of having to pay customs duties. Overall, the movement is pretty minor.

I think we are closer to a no-deal (albeit possibly accidental) than at the start of the week. Reading Tony Connelly, a number of new issues have surfaced - state aid, fishing (ownership, crewing and where catch is landed); UK has agreed on a few principles it seems but appears to be unwilling to commit to writing it down.

Jizique

Jizique wrote: »

I think we are closer to a no-deal (albeit possibly accidental) than at the start of the week. Reading Tony Connelly, a number of new issues have surfaced - state aid, fishing (ownership, crewing and where catch is landed); UK has agreed on a few principles it seems but appears to be unwilling to commit to writing it down.

A verbal agreement from the UK is worthless.

Sam Russell

Deleted User wrote: »

A verbal agreement from the UK is worthless.

FYP

The UK have shown that they view agreements as fairly flexible, not just now but for always.

Following the Scottish referendum, the maxi devolution promised never happened.

The farmers CAP payments appear to have evaporated. The Regional funds promised to Wales and Cornwall have evaporated. But plenty of funding for the chums.

The IMB was brought in to contravene international law, and in particular the WA. (Deliberately).

The treatment of the Windrush generation tells you all you need to know about their long term commitments. I hope EU citizens get treated properly.

The UK have always been perfidious.

paul71

Sam Russell wrote: »

FYP

The UK have shown that they view agreements as fairly flexible, not just now but for always.

Following the Scottish referendum, the maxi devolution promised never happened.

The farmers CAP payments appear to have evaporated. The Regional funds promised to Wales and Cornwall have evaporated. But plenty of funding for the chums.

The IMB was brought in to contravene international law, and in particular the WA. (Deliberately).

The treatment of the Windrush generation tells you all you need to know about their long term commitments. I hope EU citizens get treated properly.

The UK have always been perfidious.

And yet in spite of this overwhelming evidence people come on to the thread and say that people here are insulting the UK.

Sam Russell

paul71 wrote: »

And yet in spite of this overwhelming evidence people come on to the thread and say that people here are insulting the UK.

That was a brief list. I am sure, with a little research, a much more comprehensive list could be drawn up. It is not as if it would take long to list a long list.

Professor Moriarty

Sam Russell wrote: »

That was a brief list. I am sure, with a little research, a much more comprehensive list could be drawn up. It is not as if it would take long to list a long list.

The epitome of British perfidy is the Internal Market Bill. While in the midst of "good faith" negotiations with their "European friends", they introduced a bill that gave the middle finger to Ireland and the EU, jeopardised the GFA and broke international law.

Sam Russell

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

The epitome of British perfidy is the Internal Market Bill. While in the midst of "good faith" negotiations with their "European friends", they introduced a bill that gave the middle finger to Ireland and the EU, jeopardised the GFA and broke international law.

Which I found unbelievable that the EU did not immediately collapse the talks until the UK withdrew the whole bill. How could any negotiations be conducted in good faith with a party that behaved with blatant bad faith.

Instead they continued with the talks, even though the UK then said that they would insert the offending bits into the finance bill (because the HoL cannot modify a money bill).

A Gov founded on perfidy.

Brussels Sprout

Did I imagine it or is tomorrow another pseudo-deadline? Something to do with the last date possible that one of the EU institutions would need before ratifying a deal before New Year?

View

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Interestingly, Ireland will be joining the SIS II Schengen police database on New Year's Day, just as the UK leaves - of course, info would presumably be shared if a European national suspected of a crime was thought to have moved between the two countries, but even that would presumably be significantly less access than the UK would have enjoyed up to now:

https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/1218/1185318-eu-security-system/

Were Ireland to pass information from the SISII database to the U.K. it would be completely illegal.

If the U.K. wants access to SISII it is free to agree a deal with the E.U. like Norway and Switzerland did.

ElJeffe

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

Did I imagine it or is tomorrow another pseudo-deadline? Something to do with the last date possible that one of the EU institutions would need before ratifying a deal before New Year?

Ignore all the soft deadlines. Jan 1st is all that matters.

Lumen

ElJeffe wrote: »

Ignore all the soft deadlines. Jan 1st is all that matters.

This kind of attitude really annoys me. It implies that EU should disregard all of its rules in order to accommodate British brinkmanship.

The patience and restraint shown by EU negotiators and politicians is extraordinary.

If the EU adopted the same kind posturing and rhetoric they've been subjected to they'd be threatening Britain with famine and reminding them publicly of their long term decline into geopolitical and economic irrelevance.

Jizique

Lumen wrote: »

This kind of attitude really annoys me. It implies that EU should disregard all of its rules in order to accommodate British brinkmanship.

The patience and restraint shown by EU negotiators and politicians is extraordinary.

If the EU adopted the same kind posturing and rhetoric they've been subjected to they'd be threatening Britain with famine and reminding them publicly of their long term decline into geopolitical and economic irrelevance.

Can you imagine the english attitude if France was leaving?

moon2

Lumen wrote: »

This kind of attitude really annoys me. It implies that EU should disregard all of its rules in order to accommodate British brinkmanship.

Can you point to any rules which have been ignored to date?

There's already been extensive discussion on what it would take to, in a rule abiding way, provisionally authorize a deal starting on Jan 1st and also to fully ratify a deal. There are still psthways to get a deal enacted before January 1st but at this stage there are literally only 2 options, and one option closes tomorrow.

If nothing changes then Monday will leave us with one final way to get a deal enacted on Jan 1st - provisional application of the deal.

PeadarCo

ElJeffe wrote: »

Ignore all the soft deadlines. Jan 1st is all that matters.

The 1st of January only matters in the sense that it means it's potentially the start of a period of a no deal between the EU and UK. However it's not the deadline for the talks. I'd be of the view talks will continue until there is a deal even if that deal isn't agreed this year. The UK arguably needs a deal and while the EU doesn't need the deal to same extent a deal would be in the EUs interest long term.

A no deal doesn't bother the EU too much given the European Parliaments stance. The other thing to remember as Fintan O Toole points out in the Irish Times today is that on every substantive point over the last 4 years the UK has conceded. Given how much weaker the UK will be in a no deal situation that's not going to change. So the first of January doesn't really matter in terms of the trade deals from the EUs point of view. Talks will continue even if a deal is not agreed. The only thing that will really change is that the UK will be in an even weaker negotiation position as the consequences hit home.



https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/fintan-o-toole-ireland-should-go-along-with-fiction-that-uk-s-brexit-damage-limitation-is-victory-1.4439427?mode=amp

yagan

Even if the UK promises to remain aligned from January 1st without a ratified agreement each EU member will be turning UK traffic back if there's no binding insurance cover etc...

As EU officials will be on the ground in NI it's not as issue there and the average Tory voters cares zilch about the 500 km border in Ireland. Battleship Britain defying the EU plays far better for the Tories than trifling with NI unionists who in the past were holding Britain back from sunny uplands.

For us the real next tangible risk will be if Loyalist make good on their intimations about customs checks at NI ports being legitimate targets. Ironically if there are attempts on EU officials in NI then that will only divert all NI-GB traffic via Dublin and Rosslaire.

Strazdas

PeadarCo wrote: »

The 1st of January only matters in the sense that it means it's potentially the start of a period of a no deal between the EU and UK. However it's not the deadline for the talks. I'd be of the view talks will continue until there is a deal even if that deal isn't agreed this year. The UK arguably needs a deal and while the EU doesn't need the deal to same extent a deal would be in the EUs interest long term.

A no deal doesn't bother the EU too much given the European Parliaments stance. The other thing to remember as Fintan O Toole points out in the Irish Times today is that on every substantive point over the last 4 years the UK has conceded. Given how much weaker the UK will be in a no deal situation that's not going to change. So the first of January doesn't really matter in terms of the trade deals from the EUs point of view. Talks will continue even if a deal is not agreed. The only thing that will really change is that the UK will be in an even weaker negotiation position as the consequences hit home.



https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/fintan-o-toole-ireland-should-go-along-with-fiction-that-uk-s-brexit-damage-limitation-is-victory-1.4439427?mode=amp

Trade experts have been saying this week that the decision to leave the SMCU is such a disastrously bad one that Brexit UK will be forced to start backtracking and to reverse course (but it will do immense damage to their economy in the meantime).

Brussels Sprout

Let me see If I have this straight:

The EU Single market, which the UK is a member of until Jan 1st, has the following 4 freedoms:

1. people
2. goods
3. services
4. capital

Regardless of the outcome of talks the UK will be leaving the single market and therefore losing these 4 freedoms.

The current talks are instead about ensuring that the trade of goods between the EU and the UK will be done in a tariff-free manner. In the event of No-Deal tarriffs will be applied on goods at WTO rates.

Regardless of whether there is a deal or not, goods will be subject to customs checks between the EU and UK (with the exception of on the island of Ireland - goods will instead be checked between Northern Ireland and Great Britain)

Is that all correct?

Strazdas

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

Let me see If I have this straight:

The EU Single market, which the UK is a member of until Jan 1st, has the following 4 freedoms:

1. people
2. goods
3. services
4. capital

Regardless of the outcome of talks the UK will be leaving the single market and therefore losing these 4 freedoms.

The current talks are instead about ensuring that the trade of goods between the EU and the UK will be done in a tariff-free manner. In the event of No-Deal tarriffs will be applied on goods at WTO rates.

Regardless of whether there is a deal or not, goods will be subject to customs checks between the EU and UK (with the exception of on the island of Ireland - goods will instead be checked between Northern Ireland and Great Britain)

Is that all correct?

Yes to everything

But tariffs are only the start of it. Delays at borders and hundreds of millions of customs declarations are going to cause chaos for their economy, their industries and importers and exporters.

ancapailldorcha

Strazdas wrote: »

Yes to everything

But tariffs are only the start of it. Delays at borders and hundreds of millions of customs declarations are going to cause chaos for their economy, their industries and importers and exporters.

The other thing is non-tariff barriers. EU member states and businesses can lobby for regulations designed to favour them and now the British voice, previously so influential will be absent.

CelticRambler

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

Regardless of the outcome of talks the UK will be leaving the single market and therefore losing these 4 freedoms.

The current talks are instead about ensuring that the trade of goods between the EU and the UK will be done in a tariff-free manner. In the event of No-Deal tarriffs will be applied on goods at WTO rates.

This is a point that many - especially in the GB media - seem to be missing. To a certain extent, ElJeffe is correct in that the only date that really matters is Jan 1st but not because it's a deadline for trade talks - they can (and will) go on for decades. Rather 23:00 GMT December 31st, 2020 is the end of the transitional period. At 23:01 GMT, every British passport holder and every GB-based business becomes third country citizens or legal entities, with all the limitations and obligations that arise from that.

Whether or not ShinyWidgetsOfWessex, Ltd can continue to sell shiny widgets to widget-collecting French and Germans is relatively unimportant, as there will always be ways to trade across international borders. It's the loss of those four freedoms and all the indirect benefits that stem from them that will have the greatest impact on the lives of ordinary British folk, many of which they won't realise until an EU official somewhere tells them the can't do what everyone else in Europe does, because of, you know, "this Brexit thing" ...

CelticRambler

Strazdas wrote: »

Brexit UK will be forced to start backtracking and to reverse course ...

Speaking of backtracking:

UK govt's Animal & Plant Health Agency wrote:

From 1 January 2021 Great Britain (GB) will become a third country with respect to the EU Pet Travel Scheme. On 3 December 2020 the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed (PAFF) of the EU voted in favour of giving Great Britain and the Crown Dependencies Part 2 listed status for the purposes of non-commercial pet travel after the Transition Period. This listed status will be formally adopted by the EU in due course. As a consequence, the requirements for travel between GB and the EU will change. source (pdf)

Quietly, when no-one was looking, they applied for listed status and were granted it, but only as a Part 2 country (to take their place alongside, e.g. Australia, Taiwan, Jamaica, Argentina ... ) and with that, the EU Pet Travel Scheme - designed, built and beta-tested in Britain - ceases to apply to British pet owners. Still, I'm sure they'll be delighted with their new Australia-style agreement, that requires nothing more than a visit to an Official Veterinarian 10 days before each journey, to be issued with a time-limited Animal Health Certificate in the language of the country of their point of entry into the EU. Part 2 Listing has the one and only advantage of not requiring a confirmatory blood test (at an EU-approved lab) in respect of the rabies vaccination.

So much better than those silly blue pet passports that'd let you whizz off to the continent any time you wanted. :pac:

tanko

Brexit is like giving all your money to Boris from Microsoft tech support who rings you up out of the blue and promises to fix your computer.