Brexit discussion thread XIV (Please read OP before posting)

CelticRambler

Leroy42 wrote: »

Now of course the piece is aimed squarely at the domestic audience, but what I don't get is how they think this is going to help them in their negotiations with the EU. SUrely the EU will read this, see just how desperate Frost is, and can now (if they are so minded) extract quite a price for any movement.

I would think (hope) that every time the people in Brussels read this kind of carry-on they will remember back to the days in 2015-2016 when the Irish delegation pointed out that the GB government had neither a clue nor a care about what went on in NI, and they should be pinned down on the subject in the first stage of the withdrawal process.

I know it's too much to hope that the people in Westminster would realise that every time they reinforce the image that the Irish (north and south of the border) have had them dancing to an Irish tune for the last five years.

Sam Russell

I was in M&S in Blackrock (Dublin) yesterday and was astonished to find British sausages (clearly marked as British complete with the Union flag) on sale. I thought such foods were banned from our shores since the 1st of Jan this year.

How can this be, or is it that M&S are just ignoring the rules?

Should the food standards people be in inspecting their stock and make sure it is not just a labelling issue - M&S just using their old M&S wrappers for the Roscrea sausages they have sourced to replace their contraband products and that the same Roscrea sausages currently fill the British Supermarkets in Brussels as the British products are banned from there.

I wonder if M&S are breaking the rules - not just EU rules, but M&S rules.

Christy42

Sam Russell wrote: »

I was in M&S in Blackrock (Dublin) yesterday and was astonished to find British sausages (clearly marked as British complete with the Union flag) on sale. I thought such foods were banned from our shores since the 1st of Jan this year.

How can this be, or is it that M&S are just ignoring the rules?

Should the food standards people be in inspecting their stock and make sure it is not just a labelling issue - M&S just using their old M&S wrappers for the Roscrea sausages they have sourced to replace their contraband products and that the same Roscrea sausages currently fill the British Supermarkets in Brussels as the British products are banned from there.

I wonder if M&S are breaking the rules - not just EU rules, but M&S rules.

Would Ní sausages not be classed as Union Jack ones and be allowed down south? No idea if they are or not but it is the first thing that comes to mind.

lawred2

joeysoap wrote: »

Overall this is quite a standard trade agreement, with limited economic value

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jun/04/uk-strikes-trade-deal-norway-iceland-liechtenstein-liz-truss

Target audience is not reading the guardian

Sam Russell

Christy42 wrote: »

Would Ní sausages not be classed as Union Jack ones and be allowed down south? No idea if they are or not but it is the first thing that comes to mind.

If they were NI sausages, then it shows how tone deaf M&S are.

dogbert27

Sam Russell wrote: »

I was in M&S in Blackrock (Dublin) yesterday and was astonished to find British sausages (clearly marked as British complete with the Union flag) on sale. I thought such foods were banned from our shores since the 1st of Jan this year.

How can this be, or is it that M&S are just ignoring the rules?

Should the food standards people be in inspecting their stock and make sure it is not just a labelling issue - M&S just using their old M&S wrappers for the Roscrea sausages they have sourced to replace their contraband products and that the same Roscrea sausages currently fill the British Supermarkets in Brussels as the British products are banned from there.

I wonder if M&S are breaking the rules - not just EU rules, but M&S rules.

British would definitely be wrong as it is Great Britain and Northern Ireland so there is a differentiation there.

You didn't look at origin and packaging address by any chance?

Gerry T

dogbert27 wrote: »

British would definitely be wrong as it is Great Britain and Northern Ireland so there is a differentiation there.

You didn't look at origin and packaging address by any chance?

Well people in NI are British, their not from Britain but my understanding is all UK people are British, but I could be wrong. And the Union Jack is also covered by NI, so if the sausages were made in NI saying UK & British wouldn't be wrong.

dogbert27

Gerry T wrote: »

Well people in NI are British, their not from Britain but my understanding is all UK people are British, but I could be wrong. And the Union Jack is also covered by NI, so if the sausages were made in NI saying UK & British wouldn't be wrong.

Great Britain relates to the whole island that makes up Scotland, Wales and England.

Britain refers to just England and Wales.

Act of Union in 1801 created the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.

After 1922 this became the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

The United Kingdom itself is a sovereign state and the people of Northern Ireland who want to can be citizens of the United Kingdom but this does not make them British.

ambro25

Sam Russell wrote: »

I was in M&S in Blackrock (Dublin) yesterday and was astonished to find British sausages (clearly marked as British complete with the Union flag) on sale. I thought such foods were banned from our shores since the 1st of Jan this year.

How can this be, or is it that M&S are just ignoring the rules?
(...)

I don’t believe that they are banned.

It’s just that they need to have all the paperwork done and correct for exporting to the EU27, and there’s one rather tall mountain of it since 1st Jan.

I was watching a short documentary by ARTE (EU-French-German TV channel) uploaded on YouTube over the weekend, following that pro-Leave British (Welsh) woman exporter of seafood to the EU, and the hoops and jumps that she now goes through for continuing to export her prawns and stuff to e.g. Spain.

We’ve talked about her in the thread weeks and months ago and, clearly, she’s exporting fresh seafood to the EU again, under a ‘new normal’...a very painful and costly one, by the looks.

Interesting and well-made short doc, worth finding and watching. Can’t link it now/here, sorry.

Strazdas

Leroy42 wrote: »

What an odd opinion piece from Frost in the FT. He admits that 'we' (he means himself and Johnson) didn't understand what they were signing and hadn't done any actual review of the impact of the NIP and the WA as a whole.

https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1401541479345098754

His solution, unsurprisingly, if that the EU needs to abandon the SM rules it is spent 40 years progressing to help him and Johnson out of the hole they have dug themselves, the people of NI, and indeed the UK as a whole, out of.

Now of course the piece is aimed squarely at the domestic audience, but what I don't get is how they think this is going to help them in their negotiations with the EU. SUrely the EU will read this, see just how desperate Frost is, and can now (if they are so minded) extract quite a price for any movement.

'You want us to bend the rules to help you out? OK NI is immaterial, so in return, we want full and unfettered and unlimited access to UK fishing waters'.

Interesting to hear though that most EU capitals see Frost himself as the problem. A loudmouth and a troublemaker - they think the Irish Protocol is perfectly workable, but that he is just stirring things because he is a hardcore Brexiteer and in bed with the worst people.

ArmaniJeanss

ambro25 wrote: »

I was watching a short documentary by ARTE (EU-French-German TV channel) uploaded on YouTube over the weekend, following that pro-Leave British (Welsh) woman exporter of seafood to the EU, and the hoops and jumps that she now goes through for continuing to export her prawns and stuff to e.g. Spain.

We’ve talked about her in the thread weeks and months ago and, clearly, she’s exporting fresh seafood to the EU again, under a ‘new normal’...a very painful and costly one, by the looks.

Interesting and well-made short doc, worth finding and watching. Can’t link it now/here, sorry.

It's here.
https://www.arte.tv/en/videos/100300-034-A/brexit-borders/
It's 30 minute long, so not exactly bite-sized viewing. Quite interesting though.

Gerry T

dogbert27 wrote:

The United Kingdom itself is a sovereign state and the people of Northern Ireland who want to can be citizens of the United Kingdom but this does not make them British.

After 1922 this became the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Act of Union in 1801 created the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.

Britain refers to just England and Wales.

I totally agree with all that

dogbert27 wrote:

Great Britain relates to the whole island that makes up Scotland, Wales and England.

But aren't all uk citizens British. As well as Scottish, Welsh, English, Northern Irish respectively.

Sam Russell

Gerry T wrote: »

But aren't all uk citizens British. As well as Scottish, Welsh, English, Northern Irish respectively.

NI citizens can be British or Irish or both, but the rest are British unless they arrived on the Windrush.

Igotadose

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

It's here.
https://www.arte.tv/en/videos/100300-034-A/brexit-borders/
It's 30 minute long, so not exactly bite-sized viewing. Quite interesting though.

And, like so many, faced with Project Real, can't admit mistakes. "I still believe long-term it's a good thing." Well, good luck with that.

Sam Russell

Igotadose wrote: »

And, like so many, faced with Project Real, can't admit mistakes. "I still believe long-term it's a good thing." Well, good luck with that.

That is like the long serving Chinese Foreign Minister, Chou en Lai, when asked in 1970 about his thoughts on the outcome of the French Revolution said "It is too early to tell!"

Remember Mogg said it will take 50 years for the benefits to show. Or as Keynes said "In the long run, we are all dead!" I think more than a decade is too long for a political view.

A lost decade is too easy for failed politicians to achieve.

ArmaniJeanss

Igotadose wrote: »

And, like so many, faced with Project Real, can't admit mistakes. "I still believe long-term it's a good thing." Well, good luck with that.

The last two minutes is actually a wee bit sad, although obviously self-inflicted.

She is having to sell her second business, a herd of dairy cows, in order to support the shellfish export business. That's clearly a card she can only play once, and I'm not sure she realises that there isn't going to be any change in the circumstances that have led to the shellfish business needing propping up.

Regardless, a woman who is clearly the epitome of an 'outdoors' person is committing herself to sitting miserably in front of a computer screen filling in forms for half the day every day, possibly for the remaining two decades of her working life.

I think there was more than a hint in the last two minutes (the guff about the whole world needing to co-operate with each other, and the fadeout "I don't know") that the penny is slowly dropping with Nerys.

CelticRambler

Gerry T wrote: »

Well people in NI are British, their not from Britain but my understanding is all UK people are British, but I could be wrong. And the Union Jack is also covered by NI, so if the sausages were made in NI saying UK & British wouldn't be wrong.

The people can identify as British, but their sausages (and their cows ) are Irish. The citizenship concession made to the unionist community is essentially the same as that offered to the residents of other colonies of the Empire, e.g. born and reared in Hong Kong, never set foot in England, but still granted British citizenship because of "history".

The concession doesn't extend to stuff made in Hong Kong by people holding British passports ... no more than anything I grow or make here in France is "Irish" just because I have an Irish passport and a few thousand posts on boards.ie. :pac:

Strazdas

Sam Russell wrote: »

That is like the long serving Chinese Foreign Minister, Chou en Lai, when asked in 1970 about his thoughts on the outcome of the French Revolution said "It is too early to tell!"

Remember Mogg said it will take 50 years for the benefits to show. Or as Keynes said "In the long run, we are all dead!" I think more than a decade is too long for a political view.

A lost decade is too easy for failed politicians to achieve.

To admit that Brexit is a failure would be too painful for many. Would mean most people on the Leave side exposed as liars and crooks, right wing press exposed as liars, having to admit that 17m people were conned (or wanted to be conned) etc.

It's actually less traumatic for them to cling to the fantasy that Brexit is a great idea, but is being hindered by nasty people on the outside (anyone who isn't a Brexiteer basically).

Igotadose

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

The last two minutes is actually a wee bit sad, although obviously self-inflicted.

She is having to sell her second business, a herd of dairy cows, in order to support the shellfish export business. That's clearly a card she can only play once, and I'm not sure she realises that there isn't going to be any change in the circumstances that have led to the shellfish business needing propping up.

Regardless, a woman who is clearly the epitome of an 'outdoors' person is committing herself to sitting miserably in front of a computer screen filling in forms for half the day every day, possibly for the remaining two decades of her working life.

I think there was more than a hint in the last two minutes (the guff about the whole world needing to co-operate with each other, and the fadeout "I don't know") that the penny is slowly dropping with Nerys.

Yeah, Brexit was always about unintended consequences. Nerys sells her cows, all the workers that deal with them gone, less available meat, higher prices, less demand for feed from producers.... I can see her either starting up business in France or Germany (20% of SME's mentioned as having business in Europe to avoid customs hassles.)

The Sheep, Inc. lads still seem to be in business, nice web site, expensive clothing. I would've expected them to make some changes as their business model is getting hammered per the documentary, but maybe things have improved since, or maybe they're planning to pull up stakes.

Nerys felt obligated to her family and community (the fishermen.) That'll only pay the rent for awhile.

Piehead

Igotadose wrote: »

And, like so many, faced with Project Real, can't admit mistakes. "I still believe long-term it's a good thing." Well, good luck with that.

Daft lass. If someone like that who is dealing with the bureaucracy day after day and having to fund the costs out of her pocket can’t see it’s a bad thing then the cult is complete.

eire4

Sam Russell wrote: »

NI citizens can be British or Irish or both, but the rest are British unless they arrived on the Windrush.

A technical point and I may not be corrected but I thought they were subjects not citizens. Is that wrong?

Leroy42

It's actually incredible that Frost can write an op ed effectively saying that the deal is terrible and they didn't realise what they were signing up to, and yet hardly a ripple of discontent in the UK media or from opposition parties.

Everyone just seems to either A) blame the EU (I guess being sovereign actually means others can make you sign deals) or just shrug and say sure it is what it is.

Jizique

Leroy42 wrote: »

It's actually incredible that Frost can write an op ed effectively saying that the deal is terrible and they didn't realise what they were signing up to, and yet hardly a ripple of discontent in the UK media or from opposition parties.

Everyone just seems to either A) blame the EU (I guess being sovereign actually means others can make you sign deals) or just shrug and say sure it is what it is.

I think you underestimate the desire to just “get Brexit done” among the English; few really ever want to hear it mentioned again

Sam Russell

eire4 wrote: »

A technical point and I may not be corrected but I thought they were subjects not citizens. Is that wrong?

That used to be the case many years ago (I can't remember when it changed) but they are definitely citizens, not subjects.

Strazdas

Leroy42 wrote: »

It's actually incredible that Frost can write an op ed effectively saying that the deal is terrible and they didn't realise what they were signing up to, and yet hardly a ripple of discontent in the UK media or from opposition parties.

Everyone just seems to either A) blame the EU (I guess being sovereign actually means others can make you sign deals) or just shrug and say sure it is what it is.

The actual replies under the FT piece slated Frost into the ground.

In a functioning democracy, the press would hold Frost up to ridicule and take him to task for his claims. It should never be the role of the press to act as cheerleaders for a government, even when it's making a total mess of things. Interestingly though, I've seen him taking flak even from right wing press readers : the pro-regime propaganda no longer working perhaps?

eire4

Sam Russell wrote: »

That used to be the case many years ago (I can't remember when it changed) but they are definitely citizens, not subjects.

Thanks for the clarification. I was not sure exactly what the status currently was other then they seem to have fairly complicated system.

Sam Russell

eire4 wrote: »

Thanks for the clarification. I was not sure exactly what the status currently was other then they seem to have fairly complicated system.

I think the critical date is 1st Ja 1983. Subjects cannot normally expect to get residence in the UK, whereas citizens have full rights.

It is complicated as they have routinely tightened the rules over the last 70 odd years as they have tried to prevent Empire and Commonwealth British subjects having residency rights in Britain through becoming a citizen.

Capt'n Midnight

The European Commission will decide whether to grant Data Adequacy next month.

https://www.theregister.com/2021/06/03/uk_data_protection_eu_parl/

a second resolution adopted last week by MEPs on the Schrems II case urges the Commission to monitor the use of mass surveillance in the US and other third countries, including the UK, and not to adopt an adequacy decision with the US unless meaningful reforms to surveillance programmes are introduced.
..
the price of failing to obtain an adequacy decision for UK business estimated at up to £1.6bn in compliance alone.

So the UK could tidy up lose ends and close loopholes in surveillance and data protection and digital rights

OR

it could put Dido Harding* in charge of the NHS at a time they are handing over confidential patient data to the private sector :eek:

For viewers in the UK the deadline to opt out is 23 June

NHS Digital does not sell data. It does however charge those who want to access its data for the costs of making the data available to them.


*Dido has presided over major disasters like TalkTalk data leaks, the UK's £37Bn track and trace system and is married to the Prime Minister's Anti-Corruption Champion who wants to scrap the NHS

ClosedAccountFuzzy

They’re being sold or are convincing themselves that barrier free trade existed to other European countries before the single market. It didn’t.

There were huge, and often insurmountable, trade and technical barriers.

Quite often to simply sell products required setting up subsidiary companies in your target markets, complex logistics, endless mounds of bureaucracy etc.

The Single Market and the EU ended that. That’s what the EU primarily is.

Before the single market and the steps towards building it as it grew together, many of these products weren’t sold outside their home markets very much. Consumer choice was narrower (often much narrower.) Range of food products was less exciting. Many consumer goods were more expensive or not universally available.
People didn’t travel as much. Moving countries to the continent was full emigration, including having to apply for visas, work permits, study permits and residency etc. Having your qualifications or skills recognised wasn’t easy and could even be impossible. Etc etc etc

We are now seeing British mental gymnastics trying to blame the EU for the reality of global trade and the practicalities of moving between countries. The EU isn’t creating these issues. It’s the solution to those issues. That’s it’s raison d’etre.
The problems have always existed and were solved by EU membership.

If people, including serious commentators and politicians can’t even see that, this whole discussion is a waste of time and energy. Just denying reality and imagining pre-EU European free flowing trade that never existed is just pointless.

I can understand an ordinary member of the public or person who’s running a small business not being aware of this stuff. It’s like most of us aren’t aware of how mobile phone infrastructure or the internet works. It just works and we use it.

However, I have an expectation that journalists doing analysis, politicians driving policy and so on understand this stuff and aren’t misleading or jumping on bandwagons, but that has not been and continues not to be the case. They’re engaging what is at best a fantasy.

You also can’t really appeal to pragmatism and logic when the arguments being presented are just nationalism and a sort of optimistic, nostalgic fantasy that seems to have little basis in reality.

Strazdas

^^ A strange narrative has developed among the Brexiteers that everything was fine and dandy when it was just the EEC, but that the formation of the EU and the Single Market in the early 1990s was a negative thing and retrograde step. This completely ignoring the fact that the Single Market has been a huge success (and that the hated freedom of movement and ECJ was already part and parcel of EEC in the 1970s and 80s)