Irish Border and Brexit

FrancieBrady

Thomas__ wrote: »

In fact it´ll never be dropped cos SF will never take the oath of allegiance to the British Monarch which is the main and core reason for the Abesentionism from Westminster.

It's part of the reason. As I said earlier it isn't just a two finger reactionary policy.


http://www.judecollins.com/2017/06/defence-abstentionism-conscience-republican-donal-lavery/

Now, Colum Eastwood can’t even persuade too many Nationalist people to follow his political direction, yet he thinks he’s going to be able to twist the arm of any sovereign British government? The people in Derry no longer take him seriously, never mind the Establishment in London.

For to sit on the green benches is to align with the occupants of the green benches; becoming an integral part of their system and structures via fraternisation. It means accepting that a parliament in London has legitimacy over Irish affairs; it means a British government is given authority over the inalienable destiny of the Irish people; and it reinforces the mutilation of this island by caucusing in the House which colonised and divided it. Imagine a party, calling itself ‘’Irish’’ and ‘’Nationalist’’ – but standing candidates only to a British and European parliament.

If you go back for a moment to the 1918 General Election, when the Irish people voted overwhelmingly for abstentionist, Sinn Fein candidates put Ireland on the British government’s agenda and forced them to sit down and negotiate with people like Michael Collins – for they knew that there was no longer a legitimate basis for Britain governing Ireland.

Think for a moment to the time when the Japanese colonised China – would the Chinese people have recognised the renaming of cities along the lines of ‘Tokyo-Shanghai’? Would self-respecting Chinese people, assuming they were even permitted, have denied their right to be a separate nation by sending politicians to a parliament in Tokyo, which had slaughtered, raped and starved their population and where they held no influence? The Chinese would have said No!

The role of any leaders in those circumstances is to involve themselves in the internal constituent affairs of the communities they represent; emancipating the citizens they represent – making problems brought to them by their people into their own problems.

Thomas__

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Thomas__ wrote: »

In fact it´ll never be dropped cos SF will never take the oath of allegiance to the British Monarch which is the main and core reason for the Abesentionism from Westminster.

It's part of the reason. As I said earlier it isn't just a two finger reactionary policy.


http://www.judecollins.com/2017/06/defence-abstentionism-conscience-republican-donal-lavery/

Now, Colum Eastwood can’t even persuade too many Nationalist people to follow his political direction, yet he thinks he’s going to be able to twist the arm of any sovereign British government? The people in Derry no longer take him seriously, never mind the Establishment in London.

For to sit on the green benches is to align with the occupants of the green benches; becoming an integral part of their system and structures via fraternisation. It means accepting that a parliament in London has legitimacy over Irish affairs; it means a British government is given authority over the inalienable destiny of the Irish people; and it reinforces the mutilation of this island by caucusing in the House which colonised and divided it. Imagine a party, calling itself ‘’Irish’’ and ‘’Nationalist’’ – but standing candidates only to a British and European parliament.

If you go back for a moment to the 1918 General Election, when the Irish people voted overwhelmingly for abstentionist, Sinn Fein candidates put Ireland on the British government’s agenda and forced them to sit down and negotiate with people like Michael Collins – for they knew that there was no longer a legitimate basis for Britain governing Ireland.

Think for a moment to the time when the Japanese colonised China – would the Chinese people have recognised the renaming of cities along the lines of ‘Tokyo-Shanghai’? Would self-respecting Chinese people, assuming they were even permitted, have denied their right to be a separate nation by sending politicians to a parliament in Tokyo, which had slaughtered, raped and starved their population and where they held no influence? The Chinese would have said No!

The role of any leaders in those circumstances is to involve themselves in the internal constituent affairs of the communities they represent; emancipating the citizens they represent – making problems brought to them by their people into their own problems.

It´s a strong Nationalist angle for argumentation and it shows time and again that the long historical record of the mistreatment of Ireland by the English / British is still alive.

Red_Wake

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Red_Wake wrote: »

That's fair, for all my criticism of SF, they in no way contributed or instigated Brexit.

But that in no way excuses them from participating them from the debate. As a party on both sides of the border, they are in a unique position to the needs of all, and find common ground on which agreement can be built. Instead they'll lambast both sides for not finding a perfect solution, while contributing nothing themselves.

Were they not to abstain, the slight majority the Tories command [with DUP confidence and supply] would be even more tenuous within the HoC. I fully expect some Tories to refuse to back a Brexit deal[the number would vary on how good/bad the deal is], and SF taking their seats would make a collapse of Brexit all the more likely, whether or not they are listened to in the day to day voting which occurs in the HoC.

In a hung parliament, a small party can make a lot of headway for their own goals - the DUP have proven that, regardless of any of our opinions on their views.

Whatever you think of it 'abstensionism' is not going to be cast aside over a single issue.

If you look at the status of those who identify as Irish in northern Ireland 40 years ago and look at them now, you cannot say that their status has not dramatically improved.

When you accept that, then look at who, those who identify as Irish, consistently reward (with their votes) for that.

I don't in all honestly think you have a case based on that.

I think we'll have to agree to differ.

I don't want my elected politicians wasting their time canvassing and arguing on behalf of a country which expects so little of its own elected politicians, and I'll make that clear in any forthcoming election.

The Golden Miller

Red_Wake wrote: »

I think we'll have to agree to differ.

I don't want my elected politicians wasting their time canvassing and arguing on behalf of a country which expects so little of its own elected politicians, and I'll make that clear in any forthcoming election.

But their politicians do represent them. Another false equivalence from one of the sites most disingenuous posters. The southern governments supposed aspiration for unity has nothing to do with how nationalists vote in the UK election.

johnnyskeleton

Red_Wake wrote: »

I think we'll have to agree to differ.

Mod note:

Indeed, particularly since the topic is the Irish border not abstentionism. If anyone wishes to discuss the latter, please do so in a separate thread.

First Up

joeysoap wrote:

Aren't we subject to the same regulations? There's a seperate thread on boards about the delays at immigration at Dublin airport. Perhaps we should join Shengen?

If there is a border on the island of Ireland (and there might), we will join Schengen. The FTA with the UK is the only reason we haven't already.

murphaph

First Up wrote: »

If there is a border on the island of Ireland (and there might), we will join Schengen. The FTA with the UK is the only reason we haven't already.

I don't see us joining Schengen without NI (somehow). The levels of border control on an external Schengen border go far beyond what I believe we'll end up with (mostly customs) after Brexit.

It's a real pity. I'd love to see us joining but don't expect it'll happen.

sondagefaux

murphaph wrote: »

I don't see us joining Schengen without NI (somehow). The levels of border control on an external Schengen border go far beyond what I believe we'll end up with (mostly customs) after Brexit.

It's a real pity. I'd love to see us joining but don't expect it'll happen.

You're assuming the Common Travel Area between Ireland and the UK will survive Brexit.

If it doesn't (and if there's a customs border anyway, as there was between 1923 and 1993) there wouldn't really be much point in Ireland remaining outside of Schengen.

First Up

murphaph wrote:

I don't see us joining Schengen without NI (somehow). The levels of border control on an external Schengen border go far beyond what I believe we'll end up with (mostly customs) after Brexit.

Well we'll see. The Brexiteers insistence on controlling the UK's border is incompatible with free movement within the island of Ireland. Can you see the DUP continuing to support May's government if there is an attempt to put the border at the Irish Sea?

Something has to give.

Nody

First Up wrote: »

Well we'll see. The Brexiteers insistence on controlling the UK's border is incompatible with free movement within the island of Ireland. Can you see the DUP continuing to support May's government if there is an attempt to put the border at the Irish Sea?

Something has to give.

But on the flip side how is DUP suppose to sell a hard Irish border when they got people who're farming on both sides of the border currently? No matter how you try to set the border DUP ends up in an impossible position that will alienate part of their base.

First Up

Nody wrote:

But on the flip side how is DUP suppose to sell a hard Irish border when they got people who're farming on both sides of the border currently? No matter how you try to set the border DUP ends up in an impossible position that will alienate part of their base.

Agreed; something has to give. It will be interesting to watch.

KindOfIrish

joeysoap wrote: »

Aren't we subject to the same regulations? There's a seperate thread on boards about the delays at immigration at Dublin airport. Perhaps we should join Shengen?

No thanks. I prefer to spend few more minutes at immigration, than to open our borders to the whole world. EU/Shengen external border is almost non-existent now. Any one from Asia or Africa who are willing to take some risk can get there.

Jaggo

Nody wrote: »

But on the flip side how is DUP suppose to sell a hard Irish border when they got people who're farming on both sides of the border currently? No matter how you try to set the border DUP ends up in an impossible position that will alienate part of their base.

But the DUP have no MPs with constituencies on the border. It will be the nationalists who suffer more then the unionists.

steddyeddy

Jaggo wrote: »

But the DUP have no MPs with constituencies on the border. It will be the nationalists who suffer more then the unionists.

On the contrary it will be the unionists who will suffer more as the case for being in the union will slowly diminish as Brexit takes its toll.

johnnyskeleton

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Mod note:

Indeed, particularly since the topic is the Irish border not abstentionism. If anyone wishes to discuss the latter, please do so in a separate thread.

Mod note:

Several posts deleted. Dont make me tap the sign!

FrancieBrady

Jaggo wrote: »

But the DUP have no MPs with constituencies on the border. It will be the nationalists who suffer more then the unionists.

Arlene's constituency? She isn't an MP, but that isn't going to matter.
How does the leader of the DUP sell it?

InTheTrees

All the discussion about the border seems to put it in the hands of the UK but doesnt the EU have some say in it?

If there's no controls between the north and south then wont there have to be controls between ROI and the rest of the EU?

Junkyard Tom

InTheTrees wrote: »

If there's no controls between the north and south then wont there have to be controls between ROI and the rest of the EU?

Anything coming from or via the north gets queued at the airports, Rosslare or wherever and must be inspected? That could also have the consequence of shifting an awful lot of business from the north to the south to avoid the hassle.

'Oh dear, oh dear, the sound of pennies beginning to drop'.

VinLieger

InTheTrees wrote: »

All the discussion about the border seems to put it in the hands of the UK but doesnt the EU have some say in it?

If there's no controls between the north and south then wont there have to be controls between ROI and the rest of the EU?

Its the UK that have the problem with open borders not the EU.

Also Ireland along with the 26 other eu countries have to individually ratify the brexit agreement, do you see it getting a thumbsup from us if we have to do the UK's border work for them and have one between us and thw rest of the EU?

solodeogloria

InTheTrees wrote: »

All the discussion about the border seems to put it in the hands of the UK but doesnt the EU have some say in it?

If there's no controls between the north and south then wont there have to be controls between ROI and the rest of the EU?

Good evening!

I would argue the other way around. The UK Government are clear that they want to keep the border with the Republic open. To claim the UK want a hard border isn't true.

It depends on what trade and customs terms Brussels are willing to offer the UK. If there is a hard border it will be because of the EU insisting on it and not the other way around.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

swampgas

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

I would argue the other way around. The UK Government are clear that they want to keep the border with the Republic open.

It depends on what trade and customs terms Brussels are willing to offer the UK.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Which simply means they are clear that they want to have their cake and eat it too. Or that they are delusional. Or maybe both.

They want an open border with the EU but somehow still have limits on freedom of movement? How's that going to work?

They don't want to be in the customs union but want an open border with the EU in Ireland? How's that supposed to work?

To be frank it's the worst form of lip service to the GFA and NI, they "want" to keep an open border, sure, while at the same time everything they are doing is working to close it down.

Enzokk

solodeogloria wrote: »

You're missing the point. The UK want a third country free trade agreement with the European Union. They have been very clear about what they want despite all the claims they haven't been. Position papers have been published, the Great Repeal Bill is available online and priorities were set in the Lancaster House speech and the Article 50 letter.

It is up to the European Commission to decide what they can get in the negotiations given what they've asked for.
The border can't be resolved until trade and customs terms are made clear.

The UK wants the CTA to continue between Ireland. They want to restrict immigration. They want frictionless trade with the EU but they want to leave the customs union to negotiate their own trade deals. The things the UK wants are not compatible with what they can get.

You cannot have a border between the EU and the UK to limit immigration and have an open border between Ireland and the UK. How do you not see this?

The UK cannot have frictionless trade with the EU and leave the single market/customs union (those two are sort of tied together) and negotiate trade agreements that will hurt EU members trade with other countries.

So please stop telling us its the EU that has to decide what they want for the border. Its the UK that has to decide if it wants an open border between Ireland or not. That will decide what type of border there will be, not the fantasy land idea that the UK will have the CTA, GFA and SM/CU all preserved as is but being able to limit immigration and do their own trade deals.

solodeogloria

Enzokk wrote: »

So please stop telling us its the EU that has to decide what they want for the border. Its the UK that has to decide if it wants an open border between Ireland or not. That will decide what type of border there will be, not the fantasy land idea that the UK will have the CTA, GFA and SM/CU all preserved as is but being able to limit immigration and do their own trade deals.

Good evening!

If it wasn't claimed that the UK wants a hard border in Ireland then I wouldn't have to clarify this.

It isn't true to say that the UK wants a border and it is true to say that the border depends on what customs and trade arrangement that the European Commission will offer the UK.

I need to be honest and set the truth straight when people are being dishonest about the UK's position on the matter. You cannot conclude this matter until the trade terms are clear. The UK has put forward what it wants. It's up to the European Commission to out forward what it wants to offer.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

murphaph

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

If it wasn't claimed that the UK wants a hard border in Ireland then I wouldn't have to clarify this.

It isn't true to say that the UK wants a border and it is true to say that the border depends on what customs and trade arrangement that the European Commission will offer the UK.

I need to be honest and set the truth straight when people are being dishonest about the UK's position on the matter. You cannot conclude this matter until the trade terms are clear. The UK has put forward what it wants. It's up to the European Commission to out forward what it wants to offer.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

You will at least accept that the UK government had not one iota of the ultimate impact on the border and the GFA in general, before calling the referendum?

Capt'n Midnight

Joint Commitee on the Implementaton of the Good Friday Agreement
Brexit and the Future of Ireland
Unitng Ireland & Its People in Peace & Prosperity
August 2017

452 pages.

some discussion already over on https://sluggerotoole.com/2017/08/02/report-examining-brexit-and-a-united-ireland-launched/



page 22 has this interesting titbit

The economic analyses of a unified Ireland as an option are few on the ground. There
was economic analysis of a united Ireland based on the economic modelling of German
unification carried out in 2015 entitled ‘Modelling Irish Unification’. This report is available
in full in the online appendix to this section. However, it could now be considered to be out
of date due to Brexit. In the analysis, one of the modelling scenarios in the report
estimates a boost in the all island GDP of €35.6 billion over eight years with the North
benefitting significantly.

page 42 shows how NI gets a goodly chunk of the UK's EU funding

page 59 Women workers to be disproportionately affected by Brexit

Capt'n Midnight

Some energy news.

We will be getting LNG shipments from the US of up to 30% of our needs, reducing our dependence on imports via the UK.

In the US they are abandoning construction of two nuclear plants, economics and bankruptcy. This isn't good news for those in the UK counting on the new Moorside nuclear plant. Toshiba itself may go wollop over this. This may increase the UK's reliance on energy imports from the EU.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/sc-utilities-halt-work-on-new-nuclear-reactors-dimming-the-prospects-for-a-nuclear-energy-revival/2017/07/31/5c8ec4a0-7614-11e7-8f39-eeb7d3a2d304_story.html?utm_term=.5b5e2f120592

Santee Cooper, the junior partner in the reactor project with a 45 percent share, said shelving the project would save its customers nearly $7 billion in additional costs to complete it, which would have pushed the price to $11.4 billion on what was supposed to cost $5.1 billion to begin with. The project is also at least five years behind its original schedule.

sondagefaux

A nicely timed article for this thread.

https://www.irishcentral.com/homepage/brexit-border-battle-about-to-change-irish-british-relationship-forever

The article sets out four options:

a. Trump-style wall
b. special status for Northern Ireland, keeping it in the EU
c. the Irish Sea as the border
d. reunification of Ireland

The article's author:

Kevin Meagher is a former special adviser at the Northern Ireland Office and author of ‘A United Ireland: Why unification is inevitable and how it will come about’ published by Biteback.

Bit cynical

Enzokk wrote: »

So please stop telling us its the EU that has to decide what they want for the border. Its the UK that has to decide if it wants an open border between Ireland or not. That will decide what type of border there will be, not the fantasy land idea that the UK will have the CTA, GFA and SM/CU all preserved as is but being able to limit immigration and do their own trade deals.

The UK has already said that it would prefer a relatively open border between the North and the 26 Counties.

The problem is that although the UK is free to decide what sort of border it wants, Ireland remains a member of the EU and therefore must abide by decisions made at the EU level concerning what sort of border the EU deems appropriate.

When the UK leaves the EU, the Republic's border with the North becomes and EU frontier. It is Ireland's hope that the EU will allow Ireland to maintain a relatively open border but this is by no means certain. Ireland had hoped (like the UK) that trade negotiations run in parallel with other talks, however the EU has opted to only discuss trade after other issues have been settled. There is therefore no chance (as opposed to a slim chance) that when the UK leaves, there will be an FTA, which would be one of the minimum requirements for any sort of open border.

Therefore, on the day of brexit, Ireland will already have been ordered by the EU to build customs posts at the border regardless of whatever the UK and Ireland want. This may put Ireland in breach of the GFA.

It is true that the UK will have initiated things by leaving the EU, but not being in the EU does not in itself mean that they themselves are in breach of the GFA but rather Ireland's continuing membership of the EU means that Ireland will no longer be able to uphold its side of the agreement.

The Taoiseach was correct in saying that he would not build a border designed by brexiters; he'll design one designed by Brussels.

sondagefaux

Bit cynical wrote: »

The UK has already said that it would prefer a relatively open border between the North and the 26 Counties.

The problem is that although the UK is free to decide what sort of border it wants, Ireland remains a member of the EU and therefore must abide by decisions made at the EU level concerning what sort of border the EU deems appropriate.

When the UK leaves the EU, the Republic's border with the North becomes and EU frontier. It is Ireland's hope that the EU will allow Ireland to maintain a relatively open border but this is by no means certain. Ireland had hoped (like the UK) that trade negotiations run in parallel with other talks, however the EU has opted to only discuss trade after other issues have been settled. There is therefore no chance (as opposed to a slim chance) that when the UK leaves, there will be an FTA, which would be one of the minimum requirements for any sort of open border.

Therefore, on the day of brexit, Ireland will already have been ordered by the EU to build customs posts at the border regardless of whatever the UK and Ireland want. This may put Ireland in breach of the GFA.

It is true that the UK will have initiated things by leaving the EU, but not being in the EU does not in itself mean that they themselves are in breach of the GFA but rather Ireland's continuing membership of the EU means that Ireland will no longer be able to uphold its side of the agreement.

The Taoiseach was correct in saying that he would not build a border designed by brexiters; he'll design one designed by Brussels.

Which part of the GFA says there can't be customs controls along the border?

steddyeddy

Bit cynical wrote: »

The UK has already said that it would prefer a relatively open border between the North and the 26 Counties.

The problem is that although the UK is free to decide what sort of border it wants, Ireland remains a member of the EU and therefore must abide by decisions made at the EU level concerning what sort of border the EU deems appropriate.

When the UK leaves the EU, the Republic's border with the North becomes and EU frontier. It is Ireland's hope that the EU will allow Ireland to maintain a relatively open border but this is by no means certain. Ireland had hoped (like the UK) that trade negotiations run in parallel with other talks, however the EU has opted to only discuss trade after other issues have been settled. There is therefore no chance (as opposed to a slim chance) that when the UK leaves, there will be an FTA, which would be one of the minimum requirements for any sort of open border.

Therefore, on the day of brexit, Ireland will already have been ordered by the EU to build customs posts at the border regardless of whatever the UK and Ireland want. This may put Ireland in breach of the GFA.

It is true that the UK will have initiated things by leaving the EU, but not being in the EU does not in itself mean that they themselves are in breach of the GFA but rather Ireland's continuing membership of the EU means that Ireland will no longer be able to uphold its side of the agreement.

The point to remember is that the UK need to solve the border issue before trade talks can occur. This makes it their problem.