Brexit discussion thread IV

Leroy42

Hurrache wrote: »

So David Davis says the Irish government and the EU have exaggerated and oversimplified the border issue, and apparently you can go buy your drinks in Dublin using sterling.

What gets me is the interviewer doesn't simply pull him up on this blatant nonsense. I can only think that they think he is right.

I mean, simply saying "Hold on, when did Sterling become legal tender in the ROI? what exchange rate is it based on?"

But they all seemingly just let whomever they are interviewing say pretty much whatever they like. Marr's interview today was noticeable only because he asked some fairly standard questions, well standard to any normal interview but totally lacking in the Brexit debate.

Roanmore

Leroy42 wrote: »

What gets me is the interviewer doesn't simply pull him up on this blatant nonsense. I can only think that they think he is right.

I mean, simply saying "Hold on, when did Sterling become legal tender in the ROI? what exchange rate is it based on?"

But they all seemingly just let whomever they are interviewing say pretty much whatever they like. Marr's interview today was noticeable only because he asked some fairly standard questions, well standard to any normal interview but totally lacking in the Brexit debate.

Sophie Ridge has been very poor on challenging Brexit interviewees.
Can't remember where she was a few weeks ago doing a vox pop and asked a guy what he thought of Theresa May, he said she couldn't be any good as she was a woman and a woman shouldn't be Prime Minister.
She started laughing, thought it was hilarious. Never pulled him up on it.

Capt'n Midnight

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Half a billion pound a week to scuttle their own economy. Amazing how money can be found for madness like this but not to build infrastructure or improve frontline staff's wages

Puts the partially delivered one billion pound DUP bribe into context doesn't it ?

murphaph

judeboy101 wrote: »

Where can you buy your drinks in Dublin with pounds?

In a posh hotel bar with a terrible exchange rate you could. That's probably his only experience so to him the statement is possibly true...but does not reflect everyday reality.

Capt'n Midnight

RandomName2 wrote: »

Does anyone here know how we, and GB, solve the border issue with the Isle of Man? Is it that they're in a customs union despite not being in the EU?

Islanders can move freely within the CTA. Islander status means that you do not have the automatic right to live or work in Europe.


The Isle of Man, by virtue of its unique Customs and Excise Agreement with the United Kingdom and European law, is treated as part of the UK and European Union (EU) for Customs, Excise and Value Added Tax (VAT) purposes. So they'll get the same trade deal as the UK unless they reconsider their relationship with the UK.

Unlike Gibraltar they aren't undermining an EU neighbour with smuggling so might even get a Northern Ireland type fudge. This is the sort of tidying up that might warrant an extension to Article 50.


The Isle of Man does however have EU data adequacy , which the UK will loss if a deal isn't done.

Capt'n Midnight

murphaph wrote: »

In a posh hotel bar with a terrible exchange rate you could. That's probably his only experience so to him the statement is possibly true...but does not reflect everyday reality.

In UK Airports Bureau de change are worse.

Airport exchange rates have hit new lows, with the worst offender offering just €0.87 and $0.97 to the pound.

EdgeCase

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Even if one looks at Brexit through unionist eyes, it's hard to see how Foster is arguing for a soft Border - surely to have one, but be treated equally to the rest of the UK, the DUP should be pressing May to stay in the Customs Union, especially given the Westminster arithmetic? It is a legitimate criticism, however, to suggest that the Irish government should talk more to the Northern parties during the negotiations.

Well, if you think about it from the DUP's point of view, it's an opportunity to basically scrap the GFA while deflecting the blame for all of it to the Tories and probably Brussels and Dublin for their refusal to simply rollover.

Junkyard Tom

So BoJo claims he was assured that the backstop was only agreed upon to float HMS Britannia off the rocks in the Brexit process and wasn't agreed on in good faith?

Is it any wonder Mrs May's guilty feet got no rhythm?

Kermit.de.frog

I think Nadine Dorries' blog has been hacked?

In consultation with Boris, our partners in the D.U.P. and the E.R.G. I wish to state that we will insist on a friction-less solution to all security concerns and debate with our Irish colleagues the very real technical solution of building an electronic defense system using solar powered drones to deploy a massive block-chain spanning the 499km Irish border.

http://blog.dorries.org/

RandomName2

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Islanders can move freely within the CTA. Islander status means that you do not have the automatic right to live or work in Europe.


The Isle of Man, by virtue of its unique Customs and Excise Agreement with the United Kingdom and European law, is treated as part of the UK and European Union (EU) for Customs, Excise and Value Added Tax (VAT) purposes. So they'll get the same trade deal as the UK unless they reconsider their relationship with the UK.

Unlike Gibraltar they aren't undermining an EU neighbour with smuggling so might even get a Northern Ireland type fudge. This is the sort of tidying up that might warrant an extension to Article 50.


The Isle of Man does however have EU data adequacy , which the UK will loss if a deal isn't done.

Is there any reasonable reason why the UK wouldn't be able to obtain this same deal for themselves instead of just the crown dependencies?

lawred2

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Even if one looks at Brexit through unionist eyes, it's hard to see how Foster is arguing for a soft Border - surely to have one, but be treated equally to the rest of the UK, the DUP should be pressing May to stay in the Customs Union, especially given the Westminster arithmetic? It is a legitimate criticism, however, to suggest that the Irish government should talk more to the Northern parties during the negotiations.

Is the Irish government in such a position to have such talks?

The Pheasant2

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I think Nadine Dorries' blog has been hacked?



http://blog.dorries.org/

Haha that's gas...also slightly disconcerting that I can't even be certain that she has been hacked such is this shambles

LeinsterDub

RandomName2 wrote: »

Is there any reasonable reason why the UK wouldn't be able to obtain this same deal for themselves instead of just the crown dependencies?

Their own red lines.

Leroy42

Minister Hunt gave his speech at the Tory conference where he told the delegates that the UK were looking for a deep relationship with Europe because they remembered history. And that the EU should try to remember history too.

I know it for internal consumption, but the same could easily be said of the Salzborg summit. Why do they UK feel they can basically do and say whatever they want but the EU need to dance on eggshells?

Also, it strikes me as odd that the UK continually refer to the size of their economy as a reason why the EU need to give them a deal, yet whenever Brexit is questioned due to the hit on the economy they are happy to state that the economy is not the important point and sovereignty and taking back control is more important.

Capt'n Midnight

RandomName2 wrote: »

Is there any reasonable reason why the UK wouldn't be able to obtain this same deal for themselves instead of just the crown dependencies?

The EU has been very clear that NI with just 2.75% of the UK's population and separated by a sea crossing and backed by the Good Friday Agreement, with hundreds of crossing points into the EU and with recent history as a fricken war zone with 27,000 troops, 3,000 killings , insane amounts of smuggling and a lot of simmering tension can be cut a little slack compared to the rest of the country which has none of these issues.

On the UK side they still think the entire country should get special status.



Regarding EU data , just look up "the snoopers charter" , even the UK judiciary is against it.

Junkyard Tom

Leroy42 wrote: »

Minister Hunt gave his speech at the Tory conference where he told the delegates that the UK were looking for a deep relationship with Europe.

A 'deep relationship with Europe' is a euphemism for 'a consequences-free trade deal with the EU'. They can go whistle.

Leroy42

Yes I know, I just think it is extraordinary that they are still stuck in this internal dialogue, apparently unaware that the EU can hear them.

Boris's latest column basically says that they should not live up the December agreement, the backstop was wrong and they won't pay any settlement, yet the transition period is a good idea but only if they can do whatever they want during it.

this is an ex-minister touted as the next PM of the UK. Why would the EU place any faith in any deal, even if a deal was possible.

Add to that TM's frankly insane performance interview with Andrew Marr today. Even he called her out on making it a binary decision between Chequers and no deal, to which she had no answer save for repeating the mantra that Chequers is the only deal she wants,

Strazdas

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

A 'deep relationship with Europe' is a euphemism for 'a consequences-free trade deal with the EU'. They can go whistle.

It's a massive contradiction. The Brexiteers want a Europe of sovereign states and hard borders and 'controlled immigration' (ie. vastly reduced immigration) and yet carry on with trade as if nothing has happened.

Reduce integration, reduce cooperation, 'every country is an island' and yet the Single Market is supposed to work just as before.

An Ciarraioch

lawred2 wrote: »

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Even if one looks at Brexit through unionist eyes, it's hard to see how Foster is arguing for a soft Border - surely to have one, but be treated equally to the rest of the UK, the DUP should be pressing May to stay in the Customs Union, especially given the Westminster arithmetic? It is a legitimate criticism, however, to suggest that the Irish government should talk more to the Northern parties during the negotiations.

Is the Irish government in such a position to have such talks?

There's nothing preventing Coveney or Varadkar meeting Foster, if only merely to emphasise that the backstop would be purely an economic matter - that would be entirely separate from the broader EU-UK talks.

An Ciarraioch

Meanwhile, this Politico tweet suggesting the EU favoured an NI backstop vote has a "Dúirt bean liom go dúirt bean léi" air to it:

https://mobile.twitter.com/TomMcTague/status/1046485654190927872

Rain Ascending

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Meanwhile, this Politico tweet suggesting the EU favoured an NI backstop vote has a "Dúirt bean liom go dúirt bean léi" air to it:

https://mobile.twitter.com/TomMcTague/status/1046485654190927872

From a London perspective, there should be a certain logic to a NI backstop referendum in NI. Their claim is that the backstop has an unacceptable impact on the position of NI in the UK. Well the spirit of the GFA is that such a change in NI's status can only come about by consent. With the Assembly suspended, consent can be given only by referendum. The cover provided by a popular-vote-based mandate would get London off the hook of "no border in the Irish Sea" and help ease the path to a WA and the transition period they so desperately need.

From a Dublin/EU perspective, this only works if you are confident of winning such a vote. Otherwise, we end up with the mess of a hard border if the UK doesn't opt for something like EEA + CU ... and without any comeback, unlike in a no-deal scenario.

The DUP will surely try to tell everybody that such a referendum is a border poll and would win if they convince enough Unionists of that. I'd guess that for a no vote they'd need to sell the idea to over 80% of Unionist voters. So, such a backstop poll would really test the ability of Sinn Féin and Dublin to communicate with Unionists. Further, the attitude of London during the poll could also prove pivotal -- what messages they give about the consequences of no-to-backstop vote could have major impact on swing Unionist voters.

bilston

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Meanwhile, this Politico tweet suggesting the EU favoured an NI backstop vote has a "Dúirt bean liom go dúirt bean léi" air to it:

https://mobile.twitter.com/TomMcTague/status/1046485654190927872

I've thought this might be a possible solution before, however as someone responded the UK govt couldn't justify a referendum in NI and not Scotland. It could very well mean the literal end of the United Kingdom...which doubtless would be welcomed by many on this particular messageboard...but I just can't see the British govt (and certainly not a Tory govt) going down this route.

Imreoir2

bilston wrote: »

I've thought this might be a possible solution before, however as someone responded the UK govt couldn't justify a referendum in NI and not Scotland. It could very well mean the literal end of the United Kingdom...which doubtless would be welcomed by many on this particular messageboard...but I just can't see the British govt (and certainly not a Tory govt) going down this route.

It could easily be justified because the EU is not willing to extend a backstop arangement to Scotland. What would be the point of a referendum in Scotland to ask them if they want something that is not on offer? NI does not get a backstop because it voted for one, NI gets a backstop because the EU is willing to give it one.

Rain Ascending wrote: »

The DUP will surely try to tell everybody that such a referendum is a border poll and would win if they convince enough Unionists of that. I'd guess that for a no vote they'd need to sell the idea to over 80% of Unionist voters. So, such a backstop poll would really test the ability of Sinn Féin and Dublin to communicate with Unionists. Further, the attitude of London during the poll could also prove pivotal -- what messages they give about the consequences of no-to-backstop vote could have major impact on swing Unionist voters.

That would be a very dangerous tactic for Unionists, the arguement is currently being made by some Unionists in NI that a backstop would secure NI's place in the Union, both Aliance and I beleive the UUP support it. If the DUP linked a vote on the backstop to a vote on Unification and lost, which they well might, that could be agrued to be grounds for triggering an actual border poll.

Rain Ascending

bilston wrote: »

I've thought this might be a possible solution before, however as someone responded the UK govt couldn't justify a referendum in NI and not Scotland. It could very well mean the literal end of the United Kingdom...which doubtless would be welcomed by many on this particular messageboard...but I just can't see the British govt (and certainly not a Tory govt) going down this route.

Whatever about it leading to the literal end of the UK, there is a very simple argument against it being applied to Scotland -- Scotland has no equivalent of the GFA. The EU will definitely take that view and most definitely decline to offer the equivalent of the NI backstop to Scotland.

Incidentally, this is why I believe that the SNP will never support a WA pointing towards Canada+ with a NI backstop -- with that lack of EU support for a Scottish "backstop"-like arrangement, it doesn't help their case for Scotland to remain in the EEA nor (in the short to medium term) their case for independence.

EdgeCase

That lack of awareness is just part of the whole island-bubble mentality. They both forget that everyone else can hear them and that for many Europeans this is about as relevant as the Swiss and their endless issues with wanting to isolate themselves from the rest of Europe.

If you view Switzerland from say the French alpine border, their various tantrums are very relevant, if you move further afield like say Ireland we probably just go “oh that’s interesting” and flick on to the next story.

For a lot of other parts of Europe, that’s how Brexit is coming across. I know I was talking to someone in France who wasn’t even sure if the U.K. was in the EU i the first place.

But in England the assumption is that the entire continent is waiting with bated breath breath on yet another pompously titled speech or plan. Hopefully she doesn’t decide to make a speech in Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch in North Wales just to rub it in.

Econ__

RandomName2 wrote: »

Is there any reasonable reason why the UK wouldn't be able to obtain this same deal for themselves instead of just the crown dependencies?

Aside from all of the other reasons (and there are many) - Brexiteers would never vote for a UK-wide backstop as it would permanently tie them to the EU's regulatory and customs orbit. The backstop is a legally binding agreement with no unilateral exit clause.

So as Brexiteers would never vote for such an arrangement, it's a non starter.

Rain Ascending

Imreoir2 wrote: »

That would be a very dangerous tactic for Unionists, the argument is currently being made by some Unionists in NI that a backstop would secure NI's place in the Union, both Aliance and I beleive the UUP support it. If the DUP linked a vote on the backstop to a vote on Unification and lost, which they well might, that could be agrued to be grounds for triggering an actual border poll.

Whether dangerous or not, can you imagine the DUP running a back-stop referendum campaign any other way? After all, their current position is pretty close to that, i.e. they claim that the back-stop is equivalent to the annexation of NI by Brussels.

Peregrinus

There are a number of problems with an NI-only referendum about the backstop. Some have already been mentioned.

One major problem is this; a referendum inviting NI to choose between (a) a hard border with the Republic, and (b) increased controls on NI/GB trade is essentially saying to them “which, of two things that we already know you don’t want, do you want?” This would really drive home the disdain and disregard with which NI has been treated throughout the entire Brexit project. That can only be inflammatory.

Secondly, as others have already mentioned, what are the Scots going to think? It’s correct to say that the particular package on offer to NI is not on offer to Scotland, so a Scottish referendum on that exact package would be pointless. But Scotland is even remainier than Northern Ireland - the “Remain” margin over “Leave” in Scotland was 24% in 2016, and it has almost certainly gone up since - and if the UK would countenance a special deal for Scotland there are undoubtedly models which would appeal to Scotland that the EU would be keen to offer. So the Scots Nats would point out that Scotland was getting even sh!ttier treatment than NI - no consideration of any deal to accommodate Scotland’s interests and desires, and no say for Scotland in that decision.

ambro25

EdgeCase wrote: »

That lack of awareness is just part of the whole island-bubble mentality. They both forget that everyone else can hear them and that for many Europeans this is about as relevant as the Swiss and their endless issues with wanting to isolate themselves from the rest of Europe.

If you view Switzerland from say the French alpine border, their various tantrums are very relevant, if you move further afield like say Ireland we probably just go “oh that’s interesting” and flick on to the next story.

For a lot of other parts of Europe, that’s how Brexit is coming across. I know I was talking to someone in France who wasn’t even sure if the U.K. was in the EU i the first place.

But in England the assumption is that the entire continent is waiting with bated breath breath on yet another pompously titled speech or plan. Hopefully she doesn’t decide to make a speech in Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch in North Wales just to rub it in.

On the western edges of the Continent at least, these days Brexit is only mentioned -briefly at that- in relation to the ‘wins’ at the U.K.’s expense.

Recent example, and [url=
]another[/url].

It’s just business, nothing personal. And that’s business “as usual”, as well.

There’s a small part of bemusement at “les silly Brits“. But in the main, the angle is “what other services can we nab from them”?

Incidentally, for any reader who recalls my 2016 & 2017 posts about IP in the Brexit context, I was 100% right: looking both at Chequers and the no deal preparation notice (24/09 batch), the U.K. government has completely abandoned the U.K. IP profession & services in relation to its capacity to service European IP requirements of U.K. & overseas owners.

It’s not even trying to preserve some form of rights of audience in the EEA for U.K. IP professionals.

And lately, looks to be losing both access to the UPCA and the London-based UPC Court (central jurisdiction for litigating European patent infringement, 40+ years in the making, London court already built/fitted) to Milan. Paris will keep the 2nd UPC Court, we in Luxembourg will keep the UPC Appeal Court.

McGiver

Strazdas wrote: »

It's a massive contradiction. The Brexiteers want a Europe of sovereign states and hard borders and 'controlled immigration' (ie. vastly reduced immigration) and yet carry on with trade as if nothing has happened.

Reduce integration, reduce cooperation, 'every country is an island' and yet the Single Market is supposed to work just as before.

The irony is that there were/are certain immigration controls possible within the SM/EU framework, but the UK didn't even attempt to introduce them. E.g. Labour government didn't introduce provisional temporary labour market restrictions for workers from A8 countries in 2004 as Germany & Austria did (for 7 years!).