Brexit discussion thread VII (Please read OP before posting)

Havockk

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

This UK legislation slipped under the radar - largely deals with terrorism, but the manner in which it's written suggests any car, plane or boat either crossing the Border or travelling to GB could be stopped and searched at will:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/3/schedule/3/enacted

2An examining officer may question a person who is in the border area for the purpose of determining whether the person’s presence in the area is connected with the person’s entry into, or departure from, Northern Ireland.

Going to go down a charm in border areas. These people are not fit to run a bath.

Professor Moriarty

Strazdas wrote: »

Like most far right and right wing populist ideologies, Brexit is primarily a destructive ideology. It's all about tearing something down and having an enemy / scapegoats to hate on : not about building something new up.

Exactly. Burn the world and rule the ashes.

Capt'n Midnight

Havockk wrote: »

How many cod wars did the UK lose to Iceland?

IIRC Three in a row. So they get to keep the trophy.

RobMc59 wrote: »

Britain conceded in the cod wars because Iceland was threatening to stop NATO vessels,which includes submarines from using their waters as a route which pretty much meant the UK was over a barrel.

Please explain the other two.


Now consider that the UK just accepted the existing EU deal with the Faroe Islands , CBA looking it up but I'm guessing the Danes were pulling out the stops on that one, without receiving any concessions on the Faroese side. And it's presented as a UK win.

That deal puts 12 Tory seats at risk at the next election. It also undermines any creditability Michael Grove had left. Because fishing.

The UK has 113 larger trading partners out there who can use this as leverage. It could cost them billions in future trade negotiations.


Who in the UK benefits from that deal ?

And there's this too.
Shetlanders flirt with independence after Brexit vote

Scotland has around 60% of the EU's oil reserves and the second-largest volume of proven natural gas reserves, most of it located around Shetland.

The islands also land more fish than ports in England, Wales and Northern Ireland combined.

Brexit is a complete omnishambles.

The more you dig the worse it gets.

joeysoap

That will, if acted upon, effectively move the border 20 miles from the actual border. Without massive British army backup ( and there won’t be) there’s nobody that brave (or reckless) to stop cross border traffic on or near the border. The lady from Enniskillen excepted.

Capt'n Midnight

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

This UK legislation slipped under the radar - largely deals with terrorism, but the manner in which it's written suggests any car, plane or boat either crossing the Border or travelling to GB could be stopped and searched at will:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/3/schedule/3/enacted

The UK has a lot of EU opt-outs.

But they've been rolling out things that are fundamentally against the spirit of EU citizen's rights. Stuff like the Snooper's Charter. Using Henry the Eight's laws to take back power from the devolved parliaments.

And now May is trying to get changes in a treaty that under existing UK law would need 21 sitting days of parliament before they can be approved, but they want to fast track it past that if they stay with a new deal.

On the other hand if they Hard Brexit there are so many laws to rush through that they won't get the full scrutiny they need. This may lead to broken laws or sneaky sections.


Bypassing their own checks and balances can't be a good thing.

Capt'n Midnight

joeysoap wrote: »

That will, if acted upon, effectively move the border 20 miles from the actual border. Without massive British army backup ( and there won’t be) there’s nobody that brave (or reckless) to stop cross border traffic on or near the border. The lady from Enniskillen excepted.

That lady full well knows that even a 10 mile zone would cover most of her voters.


See the 10 mile map here.
https://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2018/06/02/news/border-buffer-zone-dismissed-as-fantastical--1345822/
A 20 mile buffer would include all of Fermanagh , most of Armagh and half of Tyrone. It would touch Lough Neagh so would include most of the population West of the Bann.

Scroll down here to see how many police stations would need to be reopened to support it.
https://www.thedetail.tv/articles/loss-of-more-than-40-of-border-stations-prompts-questions-over-future-policing-of-eu-uk-frontier

Havockk

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

That lady full well knows that even a 10 mile zone would cover most of her voters.


See the 10 mile map here.
https://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2018/06/02/news/border-buffer-zone-dismissed-as-fantastical--1345822/
A 20 mile buffer would include all of Fermanagh , most of Armagh and half of Tyrone. It would touch Lough Neagh so would include most of the population West of the Bann.

Scroll down here to see how many police stations would need to be reopened to support it.
https://www.thedetail.tv/articles/loss-of-more-than-40-of-border-stations-prompts-questions-over-future-policing-of-eu-uk-frontier

Areas that are all mostly nationalist. Having all the old stations reopen is very bad optics in those communities.

downcow

Calina wrote: »

Attitudes like this annoy me. You don't get to say what the EU does within its single market just so you can avoid hard decisions about your obligations. We didn't get a vote and you are the ones leaving.

But most importantly, you freely admit you do not have even the remotest clue what needs to be done here.

It is hand wavey ignorance.

I was asked how the French could possibly tell the difference in USA and Brit chickens. I said I have no idea But the question is irrelevant as to where the checks would happen.
I am not calling for checks at France. I am trying to help you. You feel you must have borders and you are saying the borders can’t be in Ireland or it will kick off the trouble. So I am saying you could consider having them in France.
UK don’t want borders and even they are necessary I don’t have any fear having them on the island. But it would be an option to ease your concerns

Calina

downcow wrote: »

I was asked how the French could possibly tell the difference in USA and Brit chickens. I said I have no idea But the question is irrelevant as to where the checks would happen.
I am not calling for checks at France. I am trying to help you. You feel you must have borders and you are saying the borders can’t be in Ireland or it will kick off the trouble. So I am saying you could consider having them in France.
UK don’t want borders and even they are necessary I don’t have any fear having them on the island. But it would be an option to ease your concerns

What the UK wants is irrelevant to what their new status imposes on them. This is the part you clearly do not or do not want to understand.

We do not want borders in Ireland. If you do not agree a formal way of not having borders, neither side has any real choice here. If the UK chooses not to enforce its borders it won't be able to negotiate any trade deals because it won't be enforcing any regulations or tariffs on imports.

Maybe you don't care about this. Quite a lot of farmers and small businesses do.

You are calling for checks between Ireland and France so you can avoid reality of your decision.

murphaph

downcow wrote: »

I was asked how the French could possibly tell the difference in USA and Brit chickens. I said I have no idea But the question is irrelevant as to where the checks would happen.
I am not calling for checks at France. I am trying to help you. You feel you must have borders and you are saying the borders can’t be in Ireland or it will kick off the trouble. So I am saying you could consider having them in France.
UK don’t want borders and even they are necessary I don’t have any fear having them on the island. But it would be an option to ease your concerns

Be honest. You'd probably welcome a border like an awful lot of DUP types. Yeah yeah, you're just a neutral observer or whatever. Anything that says "look we really are British" is to be welcomed from that section of society.

If it's no deal you'll get your border. You can wryly smile at us down in Mexico, as viable NI private enterprise moves south to regain access to a market that can afford its goods and services. GB will become significantly poorer. That market will shrink.

It'll last 20 years max before the scorched earth policy that is Brexit results in a united Ireland. It's a ready-made emergency exit from the madness. Scotland will go its own way too of course, but has a less obvious escape route. There will be no United Kingdom. Just the Kingdom of England.

Brexit was a terrible mistake and NI unionists voted for it in large numbers. Their votes were important given the tight outcome. Congratulations.

Calina

downcow wrote: »

Why is it if I make any suggestions then it’s trolling. Look back at the level of derogatory stuff being said post after post about British and then look at my respectful comments and suggestions.

I’ll say again I was suggesting it as a good idea rather an option to solve your concerns

You have been told countless times that it is a bad idea. It has even been explained why and the UK's obligations have been spelled out multiple times.

Brexit was a British decision. It is also economically unsound and based on ignorant misunderstanding of its own position in the EU and what being a colony is about.

Your inability or lack of will to pay even the remotest piece of attention to other people's patient explanations is depressing.

Customs checks between Ireland and France are especially not a good idea if suggested by the UK do that the UK can avoid its obligations.

The UK has obligations around the GFA. Whether you like it or it, the EU single market provided the context for that agreement.

RobMc59

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

IIRC Three in a row. So they get to keep the trophy.

Please explain the other two.


Now consider that the UK just accepted the existing EU deal with the Faroe Islands , CBA looking it up but I'm guessing the Danes were pulling out the stops on that one, without receiving any concessions on the Faroese side. And it's presented as a UK win.

That deal puts 12 Tory seats at risk at the next election. It also undermines any creditability Michael Grove had left. Because fishing.

The UK has 113 larger trading partners out there who can use this as leverage. It could cost them billions in future trade negotiations.


Who in the UK benefits from that deal ?

And there's this too.
Shetlanders flirt with independence after Brexit vote


Brexit is a complete omnishambles.

The more you dig the worse it gets.

Can you explain your point about the cod wars?-As I remember it there was a lot of pushing and shoving-the British naval vessels were totally inadequate for this type of confrontation whereas the smaller,more agile Icelandic vessels ran rings around them-rather like the English fleet against the Spanish armada.
It was more of an embarrassment than anything else but ultimately the result hinged on Iceland's threat regarding NATO access to routes around its territorial waters which meant the UK backing down-you could say it put the interests of NATO before its own domestic interests.

Junkyard Tom

downcow wrote: »

I guess we will just dig in like the Irish and become even more proud of our independence.

You think that the majority in the north will 'dig in' with unionists after how they've been sneered at and disregarded by them?

Forget that.

Professor Moriarty

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

You think that the majority in the north will 'dig in' with unionists after how they've been sneered at and disregarded by them?

Forget that.

It's like the DUP speaking for "The people of Northern Ireland".

Daemonic

downcow wrote: »

I was asked how the French could possibly tell the difference in USA and Brit chickens. I said I have no idea But the question is irrelevant as to where the checks would happen.
I am not calling for checks at France. I am trying to help you. You feel you must have borders and you are saying the borders can’t be in Ireland or it will kick off the trouble. So I am saying you could consider having them in France.
UK don’t want borders and even they are necessary I don’t have any fear having them on the island. But it would be an option to ease your concerns

The obvious place for the borders are in the Irish Sea. As much as you don't want to diverge from the UK, we don't want to diverge from the EU.

I'm probably in the minority, but a EU super nation is not something to fear if the regional governance is correctly implemented.
And if some time in the distant future this comes to pass, I'll be a proud European and just as proudly Irish. They're not mutually exclusive, just as a Texan can be intensely proud of the state they're from and be fiercely proud of being an American.

Professor Moriarty

Daemonic wrote: »

The obvious place for the borders are in the Irish Sea. As much as you don't want to diverge from the UK, we don't want to diverge from the EU.

I'm probably in the minority, but a EU super nation is not something to fear if the regional governance is correctly implemented.
And if some time in the distant future this comes to pass, I'll be a proud European and just as proudly Irish. They're not mutually exclusive, just as a Texan can be intensely proud of the state they're from and be fiercely proud of being an American.

I certainly wouldn't want to cut loose from the EU and be dependent on Britain again. Not only for historical reasons but because Britain is becoming a basket case.

Jizique

Daemonic wrote: »

The obvious place for the borders are in the Irish Sea. As much as you don't want to diverge from the UK, we don't want to diverge from the EU.

I'm probably in the minority, but a EU super nation is not something to fear if the regional governance is correctly implemented.
And if some time in the distant future this comes to pass, I'll be a proud European and just as proudly Irish. They're not mutually exclusive, just as a Texan can be intensely proud of the state they're from and be fiercely proud of being an American.

And even in "despotic" Germany, Bavarians are proud Bavarians first; the same for each of their states, which have important regional governments with control over most aspects of life including education and justice

CelticRambler

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Bypassing their own checks and balances can't be a good thing.

c.f. Trump's "emergency" ...

downcow wrote: »

you are saying the borders can’t be in Ireland or it will kick off the trouble. So I am saying you could consider having them in France.

A border in the Irish Sea would be a much better idea. Easier to police; procedures and infrastructure are already in place; no challenge to the integrity of the EU; gives the UK complete control of a testing ground for a future technology-dependent frictionless border.

Third time asking: right now, what's your preference
- No Deal
- May's Deal (as is, no renegotiation)
- No Brexit
?

FrancieBrady

CelticRambler wrote: »

Third time asking: right now, what's your preference
- No Deal
- May's Deal (as is, no renegotiation)
- No Brexit
?

That's the bottomline in what's on offer here. They can go on about borders in France and other unicorny ideas but the above is the choice facing the UK ultimately.
And each one will lead to further division/spliting of the union, such is the disaster they have negotiated their way into.

Imreoir2

downcow wrote: »

On the basis that they don’t cure about gfa enough to swallow there pride and have a discussion how checks can be shared out at various points. I’m not saying they should
, I’m just saying it seems fact that their pride is being put ahead of gfa and yet they claim the gfa is paramount

Pride or the economic wellbeing of the nation? Full access to our single market is of paramount importance to the Irish economey. We will not be making any changes of policy that lead to a breach of the GFA, that would be the UK if they leave with no-deal.

A Dub in Glasgo

downcow has been running away from answering that basic question for weeks (probably months) now

tuxy

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

downcow has been running away from answering that basic question for weeks (probably months) now

Not really, he has already said he would take no deal over a dael with a backstop and would take WTO terms only over no brexit.

downcow wrote: »

I regard myself as moderate, but I would absolutely go WTO rather than consider a fool (predictive text can be Freudian sometimes LOL, I considered correcting this to what I meant i.e. full, but thought I would just leave it as it may be an appropriate slip), indefinite, backstop.
We have interesting days ahead. Fair play to Ireland, they have been uncompromising to this point, but I am confident Italy, Germany, etc will begin to lean on them shortly

A Dub in Glasgo

No deal over the best of both worlds for NI or stay as is... that is something for a 'neutral'

Infini

Truthfully as I said before if theres a no deal crash the only thing we need to do is impliment temporary customs checks foe a few months as likely the UK will have to deal with us and that deal will be on our terms. The likes of clorinated chicken etc is something that will take many months or years to happen and events in that time might move much quicker than that.

Remember the likes of a UI is the likelies possibility in the event of a No Deal, SF will definately push for it and some in the UK would like to lose NI because it removes the land border from them as well. On top of that we know theres more than enough people on the ground between buisnesses and farmers and even normal people whod prefer it in the event of a hard brexit. Downcow might disagree but no deal and the fallout from it might say otherwise.

As for France checking irish goods it's only likely if it happens in significant quantities lets face it our own revenue and customs arent gonna be sitting by and letting dodgy UK produce be funneled through Ireland though and like I said before it will be years before thjs becomes an issue.

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

She was standing in Arlene's constituency office, and is representative of a bigoted DUP minority in Fermanagh. Fast dying out and I would imagine the journalist had to work a bit to find her.

So I can’t find the post that encouraged me to watch that video. But it was abosolute tosh. My goodness. The young woman who said she was unionist but her friends were nationalist and she wanted a UI LOL A unionist that wants a UI. that’s like a vegetarian who wants to eat meat. Although in fairness to her she said she was pretty much unique.
And the lady on Arlenes office. Well lol just sums it up.
What a load onf nonsense contained in that video.
I am curious what the original poster of it thought it was informing us of ???? Help me. Let me know.

downcow

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

You think that the majority in the north will 'dig in' with unionists after how they've been sneered at and disregarded by them?

Forget that.

The majority of the north are unionists so I am not sure what you are asking.

CelticRambler

tuxy wrote: »

Not really, he has already said he would take no deal over a dael with a backstop and would take WTO terms only over no brexit.

It was (still is) an attempt to find out if he's reviewed and/or redefined his position in the light of the machinations in Westminster, the EU's repeated assertion that there will be no renegotiation and our discussion here.

But I'm not holding my breath in anticipation of an answer. :pac:

Imreoir2

downcow wrote: »

So I can’t find the post that encouraged me to watch that video. But it was abosolute tosh. My goodness. The young woman who said she was unionist but her friends were nationalist and she wanted a UI LOL A unionist that wants a UI. that’s like a vegetarian who wants to eat meat. Although in fairness to her she said she was pretty much unique.
And the lady on Arlenes office. Well lol just sums it up.
What a load onf nonsense contained in that video.
I am curious what the original poster of it thought it was informing us of ???? Help me. Let me know.

She said she was from a Unionist background and that given a choice between Brexit and UI, she would take UI. I doubt she is all that unique these days.

A vegetarian may prefer to eat meat that starve to death.

downcow

CelticRambler wrote: »

It was (still is) an attempt to find out if he's reviewed and/or redefined his position in the light of the machinations in Westminster, the EU's repeated assertion that there will be no renegotiation and our discussion here.

But I'm not holding my breath in anticipation of an answer. :pac:

I am still very confident the wa will be tweaked to allow a deal. That’s my preference.
It’s the way negotiations work.

downcow

Imreoir2 wrote: »

She said she was from a Unionist background and that given a choice between Brexit and UI, she would take UI. I doubt she is all that unique these days.

A vegetarian may prefer to eat meat that starve to death.

Well apologies. Maybe not unique. But living here 50 years I haven’t met her like yet.