Brexit discussion thread XIV (Please read OP before posting)

Leroy42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118003646#Comment_118003646

There is also the even bigger issue of Scotland hanging over the NIP. If, as appears to be the case, NIP is actually a positive for NI, then Scotland will be calling for them to get similar exemptions and failing that that they return to the EU, which of course means leaving the UK.

Now, I think there is very little change of that happening, but even the threat of continued rancour from Scotland puts the Union at risk and as such NI cannot be seen to be at any advantage. So this isn't about not caring about NI, they don't but it is more to do with reducing possible contagion to Scotland that is the real issue.

ambro25

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118003731#Comment_118003731

These quotes would tend to support Yorkshire Bylines’ own analysis, that what proposals the EU just made are effectively “it”, i.e. the next EU step could be retaliatory. And non-trivial.

Retaliatory measures would not be “a silly micro line-by-line tariff retaliation”, but the “suspension of the entire zero tariff/zero quota deal”. The trade and cooperation agreement contains termination clauses that can be triggered unilaterally and Brussels believes a “big simple move like this would be needed for UK to finally understand”.

https://yorkshirebylines.co.uk/news/brexit/britain-heads-for-final-showdown-with-brussels-over-northern-ireland-protocol/

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118003733#Comment_118003733

I wouldn't be so sure. Sturgeon has proven herself to be a canny political operator. She's on her third Tory leader now and they're only giving her more ammunition. As this goes on, we're only going to see more and more shortages along with desperate attempts to patch them with public money which of course will entail higher taxes. I think "tax and spend" is a popular derisory phrase beloved of opponents of the Democratic party in the US and it now fits Johnson's Tories quite well.

Scottish Nationalism just isn't going away, much as Johnson might wish it to. I don't know what can be done about his having the final say in a referendum. Very little may actually change but this would be a godsend for Scottish nationalists.

PeadarCo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118003760#Comment_118003760

What in practice could the EU do? I know that they can retaliate with tarrifs and stuff like that. But how specific or broad can the EU retaliation be? The reason for my question is that when it comes to the whole process the details have tended to be far more impactful long-term than the immediate headline

Podge_irl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118003859#Comment_118003859

There has been discussion that any attempt to undermine the NIP would result in the EU deciding to simply cancel the trade agreement full stop. The NI issue was handled before trade for a very good reason, so reneging on the NIP would imperil the entire TCA. Hard to know, but patience seems thin.

fash

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118003859#Comment_118003859

It depends on what they want to do: they can target particular exports - Nissan, whiskey, salmon etc. They can drop the tariff & quota free thing entirely. If they wish, they can stop flights landing & stop electricity being sent to UK (5% of GB supply, 95% of Jersey).

Outside the TCA, they can stop data adequacy decisions & UK bank access.

They could target doing permanent damage to the UK - supporting Scottish independence (through targeted sanctions on Scottish products where the blame would be placed on Tories)

They can also coordinate with allied third party countries (e.g. US, Japan) in putting diplomatic pressure on UK.

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118003859#Comment_118003859

They'll have had this in mind when negotiating the deal. Clearly they're well equipped with contingencies based on the hysteria Frost & Co are trying to whip up.

peter kern

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118002903#Comment_118002903

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117883354#Comment_117883354

thanks for posting this

i wonder is there a full video for this as this seems to be a good discussion.

Sam Russell

I think the best advice to he Tories wold be - don't poke the bear and make him really angry - he is not called grizzly for nothing.

J Mysterio

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118003997#Comment_118003997

...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FGilef-gDjM

Strazdas

It was strongly rumoured at the time that Johnson and Frost signed the Protocol with every intention of reneging it on it (reports that Johnson explicitly told the ERG this for example, in order to secure their support).

You really are just dealing with a bunch of chancers.

ambro25

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118003859#Comment_118003859

fash noted one of the killer measures short term: suspend data adequacy.

Because, to the extent that they include or process EU personal data, whatever services the UK still manages to export to the EU27 now, mostly of a digital nature (or at least their input and/or output data), would be strangled overnight.

salonfire

Is there any link between Brexit and the soaring costs of energy in the UK at present? Seems to be the only country threatened with industrial shutdown due to the cost of energy.

Seth Brundle

The UK left the EU's Internal Energy Market and is now left having to buy energy at higher prices. All other European countries are able to buy energy in advance in bulk so therefore at cheaper rates than what the UK are able to get it at. The high cost of sovereignty, I guess!

gaming_needs90

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118006867#Comment_118006867

This doesn't actually appear to be the case.

https://fullfact.org/online/gas-prices-brexit/

Panrich

Would it be possible in the event of the UK government triggering article 16 to try to cut the legs out from under them?

I'm just thinking outside the box here and this may be totally off the wall but here goes.

Rather than suspending the whole agreement or targeting certain sectors with tariffs, could the EU temporarily suspend the agreement and introduce tariffs for all UK businesses EXCEPT those that voluntarily sign up to adhere to EU standards and practises by applying for an emergency UK/EU trading licence.

Now it might be totally impractical and legally impossible but if businesses in NI voted with their interests to comply with EU laws and standards, it would cut the legs off the Tories and DUP.

briany

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118007243#Comment_118007243

Sounds like what May's government suggested back in 2018 where businesses in the North would operate via a Trusted Trader scheme.

Capt'n Midnight

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118007243#Comment_118007243

The UK have phased out full controls on EU imports until July 2022 Which is the same time equivalence ends.

Except that the Commission can unilaterally withdraw equivalence decisions with 30 days’ notice.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118003859#Comment_118003859

The range of what the EU can do is quite wide, but in other ways quite restrictive. Some steps can be taken immediately; others only after court proceedings, further UK defaults, etc. But the key thing is that exactly what the EU can do, and what it will want to do, depends first and foremost on exactly what the UK does; the EU actions are a response to the UK actions. And, on the UK side, we here a lot of bluster about "invoking Art 16", but what exactly does that mean? What safeguards, exactly, does the UK intend to introduce in reliance on Art 16? We have no idea, because the UK isn't saying. And without knowing that, it's hard to say exactly what the EU can do in response; still less what it would do.

You can be sure that the EU have been wargaming this for a while now, thinking about various measures the UK might take, and what the appropriate response to each might be. They'll also have been asking themselves strategic questions, such as "What is the point of counter-measures? What are we trying to achieve? Bring the UK to heel? Avoid a total collapse of relationships? Protect IRL and NI? Protect the SM? Protect the EU's legal order? Its credibility? How to we prioritise these objectives, to the extent that they are in tension with one another?"

In short, when you consider what actions from the UK you might be facing, what remedies the treaties provide, and what the EU's strategic objectives might be, there's a huge range of combinations and permutations and possibilities for EU action. Which means we can have a lot of fun speculating, but our speculations are not really grounded in a lot of reality.

rock22

Perigrinus wrote

"The range of what the EU can do is quite wide, ...."

Can all these actions be initiated by the Commission or do they require decision by the Council?

Also, as a matter of interest, anyone know what meeting Frost is speaking at in Portugal today?

Peregrinus

Again, it depends on what the UK does. But, mostly, the Commission.

If the UK invokes Art 16 to adopt "safeguards" to remedy "serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties that are liable to persist, or . . . diversion of trade" , and if those safeguard measures create "an imbalance between the rights and obligations under this Protocol", then the EU can "take such proportionate rebalancing measures as are strictly necessary to remedy the imbalance", giving priority to "such measures as will least disturb the functioning of this Protocol". That would be a matter for the Commission. The precise measures to be adopted by the Commission would be in response to the UK's measures, so we can't say what the Commission might do until we know what the UK does first.

In parallel with the UK's safeguard measures and the EU's balancing counter-measures, there'd be negotiations with a view to finding an agreed solution to the problem. These would be conducted in the Joint Committee. The EU side of the Joint Committee mainly reports to the Commission, but if any "agreed solution" being considered involved an amendment to or replacement the Protocol (which is what the UK currently say they want), that's not within the powers of the Commission to agree, so that would have to go to the Council of Ministers and ultimately to the Member States.

If there's a dispute over whether the UK is entitled to invoke Art 16, that also gets discussed at the Joint Committee and, if not resolved there, the EU may take court action. That would be a matter for the Commission, as would the scope of any measures taken to enforce any judgment that the court might award (if the UK did not comply). However if things reached that stage I suspect the Council of Ministers would become involved.

If, instead of invoking Art 16, the UK simply repudiates the Protocol, or parts of it, as some of the madder Brexiters want, then the Commission will act immediately, but I would expect the Council of Ministers to become involved very quickly, because of the political significance of the UK's move.

[No idea what the meeting in Lisbon is, I'm afraid.]

Seth Brundle

[No idea what the meeting in Lisbon is, I'm afraid.]

All I can find is that he is giving a speech to "the diplomatic community" - https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/britain-ireland-argue-twitter-over-brexit-deal-2021-10-10/

rock22

Listening to morning Ireland and an interview with a UK based journalist ( sorry missed the name)

He suggested that the UK strategy would be to invoke article 16, suspend all cehcks between GB and NI. Then after a period of time, say that all is working fine without checks and there is no need the protocol. Of course it depends very heavily on the Eu agree that all is working well. If that suspension exists for anything over three months then it might be harder to argue to re-impose checks.

Not sure how accurate or informed he might be . But a real danger for Ireland , and the SM is that the suspension will become the accepted norm and a blind eye will be turn to any 'leakage' over the border.

Retr0gamer

The UK can say it's working well but it would be a catastrophic failure for the SM. It calls into question the integrity of the rest of the EU's borders on the continent. Also I'd rather the brits keep their chlorinated chicken to themselves.

I image the EU would much rather a land border than that.

fash

UK is trying to establish a new (or "old" status quo prior to the 2024 NI decision.

Of note, the issue with the UK & NI is what happens as standards diverge. The UK saying "see that wasn't so bad" while UK standards are in line with EU isn't the point.

It wouldn't be a "catastrophic" failure for the SM - the SM is quite large - but yes, there needs to be a land border if UK reneges.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118007699#Comment_118007699

EU doesn't want either. Plus, Art 16 itself says that any EU counter-measures need to be such as will not disrupt the working of the Protocol - i.e. will not lead to a hard border in Ireland.

It's likely that, if UK suspends checks on GB>NI trade, EU response will not be checks on NI>RoI trade but rather measures intended to lead the UK to see the wisdom of complying with the treaties it has made, and seeking to make changes to the by agreement rather than unilaterally.

Sue de Nimes

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118007614#Comment_118007614

I don't understand how "the real danger" for Ireland is that suspension becomes the accepted norm. If any "leakage" is minor then I don't see any real danger. Surely there is only a real danger, if there is widespread use of the border to dodge border controls.

It seems that if (and this is a big if) there is a suspension and things work reasonably well, then it is best for everyone on the island of Ireland? Surely we all want a situation where both sides in NI are happy enough with how things work?

Sam Russell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118007614#Comment_118007614

That was George Parker, FT Political correspondent. He is usually quite good.

I doubt that the EU would let the UK continue to avoid any inspections for goods going from GB to NI. If they do, then it lets the UK off the hook. They need to get their retaliation in first.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118007745#Comment_118007745

The danger rock22 is pointing to, I think, is of a view that thinks are working "reasonably well" which rests on a view that the level of cross-border leakage is acceptable. That's an unstable situation since the latter view could change, and there would then be pressure to do something to reduce the leakage. And the UK would certainly resist that something being the reimpositon of GB>NI checks after a long period of not having them.

Ireland doesn't want an unstable solution here, since that presents risks. A stable solution is one which effectively protects the Single Market, rather than depending on the acceptance of leakage.

Seth Brundle

More spin by London (so much for the UK holding all the cards!)...

https://twitter.com/deirdreheenan/status/1447686244964655104

The response...

https://twitter.com/BBCNewsnight/status/1447689939282448389