The Irish protocol.

Seth Brundle · 22-05-2021 12:00am

downcow wrote: »

You are missing my point (and ironically making my point)
There is an international border on the island of Ireland. Do you really not realise that?

Currently there is not a physical customs border at the border. There is no border there causing disruption of trade or movement of goods, services, money or people.
What your unionist friends are proposing is to move the customs border as proposed and signed off by your UK government, from the Irish sea physically onto the island, knowing full well that will result in restrictions to movement. This in turn will result in violence. These opponents to checks at Lawns are the same people who happily lived with physical checks between NI and GB since whenever. They are content blaming both Dublin and the EU for what their government has done. They were warned that Brexit would cause problems for NI and would likely result in checks on the Irish sea and yet still agreed to them.

So in summary, I am not making your point. There might well be a border between the EU and UK on the island but It is a virtual border that does not interfere with people's lives. Unionists want this to change so that it causes interference: something that most people find unacceptable. NI is lucky to now have a privileged position in terms of international trade a position many countries could only ever aspire to have. They can use this to finally make the place economically successful and wealthy for the people or they can remove this privilege and be an economic burden on the UK. However, would removing this elevated privilege be in the interests of the people of NI?

Ramasun · 22-05-2021 5:57am

The proposed zero tariff zero quota trade deal with Australia has appeared at a good time, maybe deliberately. NI farmers would have most to lose from direct competition with Australian producers but the protocol would protect them while still allowing them to export without restrictions to Australia. A timely example of tangible benefits to the protocol.

Lucy8080 · 22-05-2021 6:28am

downcow wrote: »

You are being shortsighted Tom. Once we get the checks on the Irish Sea minimised and clarity in everyone's minds where the international border is, then we can certainly take advantage of our unique position. This puts any chance of Irish unity off for generations

If only you had outlined that strategy to that Kid who caught fire to himself when trying to petrol bomb the P.S.N.I.

Is this strategy on a "need to know" basis when it comes to kids from your community?

I guess Ian Paisley jnr. was unaware of this too ,especially when he asked the Tories "What did we do to those members on the benches over there....."

The politicians you trust in N.I. and London are the people who argued for the circumstances that lead to this and then signed off the protocol. Edwin Poots has even helped to implement the protocol.

downcow · 22-05-2021 11:10pm

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Currently there is not a physical customs border at the border. There is no border there causing disruption of trade or movement of goods, services, money or people.
What your unionist friends are proposing is to move the customs border as proposed and signed off by your UK government, from the Irish sea physically onto the island, knowing full well that will result in restrictions to movement. This in turn will result in violence. These opponents to checks at Lawns are the same people who happily lived with physical checks between NI and GB since whenever. They are content blaming both Dublin and the EU for what their government has done. They were warned that Brexit would cause problems for NI and would likely result in checks on the Irish sea and yet still agreed to them.

So in summary, I am not making your point. There might well be a border between the EU and UK on the island but It is a virtual border that does not interfere with people's lives. Unionists want this to change so that it causes interference: something that most people find unacceptable. NI is lucky to now have a privileged position in terms of international trade a position many countries could only ever aspire to have. They can use this to finally make the place economically successful and wealthy for the people or they can remove this privilege and be an economic burden on the UK. However, would removing this elevated privilege be in the interests of the people of NI?

You are getting confused with checks and an international border.

And I don’t hear anyone saying to put a border in Ireland. You are dreaming that one up.

FrancieBrady · 22-05-2021 11:29pm

Lucy8080 wrote: »

If only you had outlined that strategy to that Kid who caught fire to himself when trying to petrol bomb the P.S.N.I.

.

This Lucy...bang on the money. They backed the wrong horse, now they'll sacrifice their young if they can

Seth Brundle · 23-05-2021 12:31am

downcow wrote: »

You are getting confused with checks and an international border.

And I don’t hear anyone saying to put a border in Ireland. You are dreaming that one up.

Both you and your unionist buddies want the removal of the border in the Irish sea.
Where do you propose that the border between the UK and the EU goes?

Peregrinus · 23-05-2021 3:34am

downcow wrote: »

You are getting confused with checks and an international border.

Are not you getting confused yourself? You say:

downcow wrote: »

We have to get away from any notion or reality of a border within the UK.

All there is at Larne is checks which you yourself shouldn't confuse with an international border. Presumably, then, it is perfectly clear that there is no border at Larne and the checks can stay there without in any way calling into question NI's position in the UK.

downcow · 23-05-2021 8:50am

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Both you and your unionist buddies want the removal of the border in the Irish sea.
Where do you propose that the border between the UK and the EU goes?

There is no border in the Irish Sea. The border is between the two international states.
I think you mean where do I want the checks?

downcow · 23-05-2021 8:56am

Peregrinus wrote: »

Are not you getting confused yourself. You say:

All there is at Larne is checks. Presumably, then, it is perfectly clear that there is no border at Larne and the checks can stay there without in any way calling into question NI's position in the UK.

[/quote]

Not a all.
We can play with words if you wish.
But if anyone is claiming there is an international border in the Irish Sea then you are a fanciful wishful thinking republican.
I accept you can call lots of things borders ie there is one between my county council and the neighbouring one. I suppose you could call the line at the tills in Tesco a border, as you need to pay for goods before crossing - but international border it is not

downcow · 23-05-2021 8:58am

Peregrinus wrote: »

Are not you getting confused yourself. You say:

All there is at Larne is checks. Presumably, then, it is perfectly clear that there is no border at Larne and the checks can stay there without in any way calling into question NI's position in the UK.

[/quote]

If a few of the checks were between Ireland and France, would that call into question Ireland’s position in the Eu ?

FrancieBrady · 23-05-2021 11:16am

downcow wrote: »

Not a all.
We can play with words if you wish.
But if anyone is claiming there is an international border in the Irish Sea then you are a fanciful wishful thinking republican.
I accept you can call lots of things borders ie there is one between my county council and the neighbouring one. I suppose you could call the line at the tills in Tesco a border, as you need to pay for goods before crossing - but international border it is not

The border between the EU and the UK is in the Irish Sea due to the anomaly created by partition and the subsequent GFA.

You live in a unique place downcow.

FrancieBrady · 23-05-2021 11:19am

downcow wrote: »

If a few of the checks were between Ireland and France, would that call into question Ireland’s position in the Eu ?

No, a few checks wouldn't.
There were checks between Ireland (both jurisdictions) and Britain while both were in the EU.

Seth Brundle · 23-05-2021 1:36pm

downcow wrote: »

There is no border in the Irish Sea.

Grand so. Maybe tell that to Poots and the DUP and thr Loyalists who keep referring to the checks as such (my recollection is that you also have referred to it as a border).
https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/politics/getting-rid-of-the-irish-sea-border-will-be-my-top-priority-says-edwin-poots-3238503?amp

downcow · 23-05-2021 4:37pm

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Grand so. Maybe tell that to Poots and the DUP and thr Loyalists who keep referring to the checks as such (my recollection is that you also have referred to it as a border).
https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/politics/getting-rid-of-the-irish-sea-border-will-be-my-top-priority-says-edwin-poots-3238503?amp

The point I am making is that it is a border in the same way as the till at Tesco. That needs removed/minimised and of course we will all talk it up to ensure that happens. It’s politics.
But the real border is on the island ie different currency, tax regimes, etc etc. A neighbouring republican friend yesterday told me car road tax in Roi was into four figures. Is that correct? He is a Republican that won’t be voting for an UI anytime soon listening to him.

I drive a pickup that is about £200 all other cars in the household are £30 each

Kermit.de.frog · 23-05-2021 4:54pm

downcow wrote: »

There is no border in the Irish Sea. The border is between the two international states.
I think you mean where do I want the checks?

NI remains in the single market for goods hence there is very much a border down the Irish Sea.

Seth Brundle · 23-05-2021 5:14pm

downcow wrote: »

The point I am making is that it is a border in the same way as the till at Tesco. That needs removed/minimised and of course we will all talk it up to ensure that happens. It’s politics.
But the real border is on the island ie different currency, tax regimes, etc etc.

The reason there are checks between NI and GB is purely because the UK decided to leave the EU (against the wishes of the majority in NI) and in addition, the UK will not align itself to EU standards. By taking this route they can reduce food quality standards, etc. This is of no benefit to the people if NI and in fact could lead to weak trade deals which negatively affect NI farmers and food producers.
There have always been checks between GB and NI. Unionists never objected to these but now that checks have been brought in as a result of decisions by the UK government, unionists are up in arms.
The unionist stance of wanting to follow GB down this road is not on the interests of the people of NI, at all. There is absolutely no benefit for NI to have its politicians take this stance.

Peregrinus · 24-05-2021 2:41am

I think you’re asserting a simplistic terminology that you yourself don’t consistently observe, downcow.

Obviously, the border between the United Kingdom and Ireland is the land border that runs from just outside Derry to just outside Newry. Nobody suggests otherwise and, if they did, they would be wrong. Northern Ireland is still fully a part of the United Kingdom. The NI Protocol does not change that. Nor could it, given the terms of the GFA.

But it doesn’t follow that there is no border in the Irish sea. You yourself point to different tax regimes as something that gives rise to borders. But of course customs tariffs are taxes, and there are different tariff regimes applying in NI and in GB. The checks on GB-NI goods traffic arise precisely because different tariff regimes apply; and tariffs may need to be paid on goods that are brought from one customs regime into the other; that is why the checks are often referred to as a “tariff border”.

Similarly it’s a legal border, because different legal regimes apply in England and Wales, in Scotland and in Northern Ireland; the borders between those parts of the UK represent the points at which one legal regime ceases to apply and another begins. This has been the case since the UK was created. And this is another reason for checks at the NI/GB border; goods entering NI are subject to a different legal regulatory regime than applies in GB; the NI/GB border is the border between those two legal regime.

The border has become more pronounced as the differences between the customs and regulatory regimes in NI and GB become sharper. This is not because of any change in the NI regimes; they are much as they ever were. It is mainly because of changes in the GB regime.

Is this an international border? If you think Scotland is a nation, England is a nation, etc then, obviously, yes. If you see the UK as a multinational state then it has several international borders within it.

But what the NI/GB border is not is a border between sovereign states. It’s a border between different parts of a state which is becoming more significant as tax, laws, etc diverge more than they used to.

View · 24-05-2021 9:29am

downcow wrote: »

If a few of the checks were between Ireland and France, would that call into question Ireland’s position in the Eu ?[/quote]

Checks between Ireland and France on anything other than a very short term basis and for very specific reasons would be completely incompatible with the EU Treaties.

If, as is currently the case, the NI protocol isn’t being worked, or proves unworkable, then Ireland will be faced with the choice of implementing a full land border or terminating our EU membership if we are unwilling to do the former.

downcow · 24-05-2021 12:42pm

Peregrinus wrote: »

I think you’re asserting a simplistic terminology that you yourself don’t consistently observe, downcow.

Obviously, the border between the United Kingdom and Ireland is the land border that runs from just outside Derry to just outside Newry. Nobody suggests otherwise and, if they did, they would be wrong. Northern Ireland is still fully a part of the United Kingdom. The NI Protocol does not change that. Nor could it, given the terms of the GFA.

But it doesn’t follow that there is no border in the Irish sea. You yourself point to different tax regimes as something that gives rise to borders. But of course customs tariffs are taxes, and there are different tariff regimes applying in NI and in GB. The checks on GB-NI goods traffic arise precisely because different tariff regimes apply; and tariffs may need to be paid on goods that are brought from one customs regime into the other; that is why the checks are often referred to as a “tariff border”.

Similarly it’s a legal border, because different legal regimes apply in England and Wales, in Scotland and in Northern Ireland; the borders between those parts of the UK represent the points at which one legal regime ceases to apply and another begins. This has been the case since the UK was created. And this is another reason for checks at the NI/GB border; goods entering NI are subject to a different legal regulatory regime than applies in GB; the NI/GB border is the border between those two legal regime.

The border has become more pronounced as the differences between the customs and regulatory regimes in NI and GB become sharper. This is not because of any change in the NI regimes; they are much as they ever were. It is mainly because of changes in the GB regime.

Is this an international border? If you think Scotland is a nation, England is a nation, etc then, obviously, yes. If you see the UK as a multinational state then it has several international borders within it.

But what the NI/GB border is not is a border between sovereign states. It’s a border between different parts of a state which is becoming more significant as tax, laws, etc diverge more than they used to.

Very eloquently put. Can’t disagree with any of it.
The UN is a good organisation to check out where international borders lie. I think they’ll clarify for you that the only border in the Irish Sea is the one between Roi and U.K.

Of curse you can refer to the sea between Larne and Stranraer as a border in the same way as the one between Cardiff and Bristol.

downcow · 24-05-2021 12:43pm

View wrote: »

If a few of the checks were between Ireland and France, would that call into question Ireland’s position in the Eu ?

Checks between Ireland and France on anything other than a very short term basis and for very specific reasons would be completely incompatible with the EU Treaties.

If, as is currently the case, the NI protocol isn’t being worked, or proves unworkable, then Ireland will be faced with the choice of implementing a full land border or terminating our EU membership if we are unwilling to do the former.[/quote]

There are currently permanent checks between France and Ireland so I have no idea what you are talking about.

Peregrinus · 24-05-2021 2:40pm

downcow wrote: »

Very eloquently put. Can’t disagree with any of it.
The UN is a good organisation to check out where international borders lie. I think they’ll clarify for you that the only border in the Irish Sea is the one between Roi and U.K.

Of curse you can refer to the sea between Larne and Stranraer as a border in the same way as the one between Cardiff and Bristol.

Good man. Thought I'd lost you there for a minute.

There is indeed a border between Cardiff and Bristol, what with Cardiff being in Wales and Bristol being in England, and different laws applying in the two countries. The England/Wales border is the line, on one side of which, English law applies and, on the other side of which, Welsh law applies.

Similarly there is a border between England and Scotland - a fact so well known that the district adjacent to the border has long been known as "Borders".

And there's a border between Northern Ireland on the one hand, and England and Scotland on the other. There always has been.

Right. These are domestic borders within the UK. The countries on both sides of these borders are within the UK. Nevertheless they are quite signficant borders. And over time they can vary in signficance. Right now the NI/GB border is becoming more significant because the UK government is making legal changes in England, Wales and Scotland which it is not making in NI, and the nature of these changes means that checks and other processes need to be applied on goods being shipped from England, Wales or Scotland to NI.

None of this changes the fact that NI remains in the UK, just as England, Wales and Scotland do. The changes being made in E, W and S do not apply in NI because, and only because, the sovereign Parliament at Westminster has decided that they should not, and has indeed approved the UK making internationally binding commitments that they will not. This has caused some, um, dismay in NI. But it doesn't mean that NI has ceased to be a part of the UK, any more than England, Wales or Scotland have; just that the UK is a more diverse state than it previously was.

View · 24-05-2021 4:50pm

downcow wrote: »

Checks between Ireland and France on anything other than a very short term basis and for very specific reasons would be completely incompatible with the EU Treaties.

If, as is currently the case, the NI protocol isn’t being worked, or proves unworkable, then Ireland will be faced with the choice of implementing a full land border or terminating our EU membership if we are unwilling to do the former.

There are currently permanent checks between France and Ireland so I have no idea what you are talking about.[/quote]

There are no permanent checks on goods and service between France and Ireland. Were there, it would be a breach of the EU Treaties the whole point of the single market is you don’t have them.

There are passport checks due to our idiotic insistence on acting as though we are still part of the Empire but, were these challenged in the CJEU, the verdict might be interesting since an open ended commitment to the CTA is incompatible with the commitment in the EU Treaties to the EU being a freedom of movement area.

Peregrinus · 25-05-2021 4:26am

View wrote: »

There are passport checks due to our idiotic insistence on acting as though we are still part of the Empire but, were these challenged in the CJEU, the verdict might be interesting since an open ended commitment to the CTA is incompatible with the commitment in the EU Treaties to the EU being a freedom of movement area.

We participate in the CTA rather than Schengen because we wish to keep the land border in Ireland open. The problem is not that we are acting "as though we are still part of the Empire"; rather, we are acting as though NI is — which is of course the case.

The Treaties, with their commitment to free movement, do not require Ireland to join Schengen. Free movement involves EU citizens having the right to move freely within the Union, but non-citizens don't have the same right. So a US citizen in France, say, doesn't have a Treaty right to move to Germany. Checks to ensure that people who avail of free movement rights are indeed EU citizens have always been compatible with freedom of movement.

Schengen goes beyond the Treaty guarantee of free movement in that it allows non-citizens to move freely between Schengen countries; it is this additional step which enables the removal of border controls on travellers. But there's no obligation in the Treaties on Ireland to allow this and, therefore, no obligation to join Schengen, and no basis for objecting to Ireland's Schengen opt-out.

The rationale for the opt-out is now the same as the rationale for the EU's strong support for an open border in Ireland during the Brexit talks; a recognition of the "unique situation on the island of Ireland". This is unlikely to be reversed any time soon.

Seth Brundle · 25-05-2021 8:58am

No alternative to Northern Ireland Protocol, EU says
Disruptions due to Brexit, not protocol, says von der Leyen

“There should be no doubt that there is no alternative to the full and correct implementation of the protocol,” Ms von der Leyen told a press conference after the conclusions were reached.

“It is important to reiterate that the protocol is the only possible solution to ensure peace and stability in Northern Ireland, while protecting the integrity of the European Union single market,” von der Leyen added.

“If we see problems today we should not forget that they do not come from the protocol but result from Brexit, that is the reason why the problems are there.”

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/no-alternative-to-northern-ireland-protocol-eu-says-1.4574611

downcow · 25-05-2021 10:23pm

View wrote: »

There are currently permanent checks between France and Ireland so I have no idea what you are talking about.

There are no permanent checks on goods and service between France and Ireland. Were there, it would be a breach of the EU Treaties the whole point of the single market is you don’t have them.

There are passport checks due to our idiotic insistence on acting as though we are still part of the Empire but, were these challenged in the CJEU, the verdict might be interesting since an open ended commitment to the CTA is incompatible with the commitment in the EU Treaties to the EU being a freedom of movement area.[/quote]

Not sure why you have been able to quote something to me that someone else has said ????? Not saying you meant to Looks like a glitch

downcow · 25-05-2021 10:26pm

Seth Brundle wrote: »

No alternative to Northern Ireland Protocol, EU says
Disruptions due to Brexit, not protocol, says von der Leyen

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/no-alternative-to-northern-ireland-protocol-eu-says-1.4574611

It’s positive that she has felt the need to say this.
It’s like when a football chairman needs to say ‘our manager has the full support of the board’. Usually a sacking follows lol. Cheered me up when I heard her at it.

Seth Brundle · 25-05-2021 10:34pm

downcow wrote: »

It’s positive that she has felt the need to say this.
It’s like when a football chairman needs to say ‘our manager has the full support of the board’. Usually a sacking follows lol. Cheered me up when I heard her at it.

She reflected the views of the 27 EU members who are in unison on the TCA and NIP.
It also seems to have irked the loyalist terrorist and criminal groups.

FrancieBrady · 25-05-2021 10:42pm

downcow wrote: »

It’s positive that she has felt the need to say this.
It’s like when a football chairman needs to say ‘our manager has the full support of the board’. Usually a sacking follows lol. Cheered me up when I heard her at it.

Problem for unionism is that it has talked itself into another strategic cul de sac. Nobody believes the 'causing great inconvenience/the people want the protocol gone stuff.

Seth Brundle · 25-05-2021 10:46pm

Francie & downcow (and any others in NI) - is the NIP affecting you personally now and if it is, how? Are you seeing delays or shortages in shops? Has your workplace been affected?

downcow · 25-05-2021 10:47pm

Seth Brundle wrote: »

She reflected the views of the 27 EU members who are in unison on the TCA and NIP.
It also seems to have irked the loyalist terrorist and criminal groups.

Surely you don’t have a problem with a simple statement that there will be instability in north if protocol is not removed??

The Irish protocol.

Comments