Hard border/single customer union protection and the Good Friday Agreement

sexmag

As it's a very likely scenario that the UK will leave the EU without a deal and the EU pressuring Ireland to protect the single market, where does that leave the good Friday agreement, legally does one supersede the other? What are the likely legal outcomes for Ireland with the border if there is a no deal Brexit?

RayCun

The northern Ireland border will be the EU border. Customs checks will be required, just as at any other border.

Dr Brown

RayCun wrote: »

The northern Ireland border will be the EU border. Customs checks will be required, just as at any other border.

Didn't our EU "friends" tell us that there would be no hard border under any circumstances ?

troyzer

Dr Brown wrote: »

Didn't our EU "friends" tell us that there would be no hard border under any circumstances ?

Not that I remember. They made it clear that they were doing everything in their power to prevent it. And they are.

They can't stop Britain from crashing out though. And they can't just ignore WTO rules and the laws that govern the single market. It would literally unravel global trade.

Dr Brown

troyzer wrote: »

Not that I remember. They made it clear that they were doing everything in their power to prevent it. And they are.

They can't stop Britain from crashing out though. And they can't just ignore WTO rules and the laws that govern the single market. It would literally unravel global trade.

They could make a special case for the north if they wanted to under a no deal.

troyzer

Dr Brown wrote: »

They could make a special case for the north if they wanted to under a no deal.

This is the special case. They're trying to create a situation where the North is in two customs areas at once.

It's not up to the EU if the Brits crash out. Every country in the world would immediately file a case against the EU in the WTO if they chose to simply ignore the border. And they'd be doing the same if Britain did the same thing.

Your sentiments are misdirected. The Brits talk a good talk but ultimately they'd have to put up a border too if they wanted to be let into the WTO. They're the ones dumping this pile of ****e on the north.

Dr Brown

troyzer wrote: »

This is the special case. They're trying to create a situation where the North is in two customs areas at once.

It's not up to the EU if the Brits crash out. Every country in the world would immediately file a case against the EU in the WTO if they chose to simply ignore the border. And they'd be doing the same if Britain did the same thing.

Your sentiments are misdirected. The Brits talk a good talk but ultimately they'd have to put up a border too if they wanted to be let into the WTO. They're the ones dumping this pile of ****e on the north.

You can't be 2 custom areas at once. It's either in or out of the single market.

troyzer

Dr Brown wrote: »

You can't be 2 custom areas at once. It's either in or out of the single market.

The single market is completely different. You can be in a customs union and not in the single market. Like Turkey.

You can also be in the single market but not the customs union. Like Norway.

The customs union is the most important part. The current backstop proposal effectively allows business in the north full access to both European and British markets (plus whatever FTAs they sign in future). This might require checks in British ports but most voters in the north said they'd be happy enough with that. It wouldn't be as intrusive or difficult to solve.

Business owners in the north have been screaming at the DUP that is an absolute win of a deal and they need to stop being idiots.

Dr Brown

troyzer wrote: »

The single market is completely different. You can be in a customs union and not in the single market. Like Turkey.

You can also be in the single market but not the customs union. Like Norway.

The customs union is the most important part. The current backstop proposal effectively allows business in the north full access to both European and British markets (plus whatever FTAs they sign in future). This might require checks in British ports but most voters in the north said they'd be happy enough with that. It wouldn't be as intrusive or difficult to solve.

Business owners in the north have been screaming at the DUP that is an absolute win of a deal and they need to stop being idiots.

The problem for the DUP is that the backstop could keep the north in the EU and cut it off from the UK.

troyzer

Dr Brown wrote: »

The problem for the DUP is that the backstop could keep the north in the EU and cut it off from the UK.

That's not what it's designed to do and they know it.

They refuse to accept any settlement that treats the north differently and they admit it. They want the north to be treated no differently than Norfolk. Except gay marriage, corporate tax, abortion, language acts etc.

Their own voter base is against them on this according to the polls

Peregrinus

Dr Brown wrote: »

They could make a special case for the north if they wanted to under a no deal.

They do want to. It's the UK that doesn't.

Peregrinus

Dr Brown wrote: »

The problem for the DUP is that the backstop could keep the north in the EU and cut it off from the UK.

Ironically, it's the other way around. Not having the backstop will do more to cut NI off from the rest of the UK. The bulk of NI/GB trade crosses the Irish border; only a minority is ferried directly between NI and GB ports. Which means that controls on the land border will be a greater impediment to NI/GB trade than controls at NI ports would be.