Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

Brexit discussion thread II

1…3132343637…305

Comments

  • #992
    Blowfish
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,112 ✭✭✭Blowfish


    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. 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.
    It's pretty obviously only up to the UK what relationship it wants with the EU in the future. Brussels isn't going to force the UK to leave the customs union, but if the UK wants to leave it, that's their decision and will require some sort of border put in place.


  • #993
    solodeogloria
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,739 ✭✭✭solodeogloria


    Blowfish wrote: »
    It's pretty obviously only up to the UK what relationship it wants with the EU in the future. Brussels isn't going to force the UK to leave the customs union, but if the UK wants to leave it, that's their decision and will require some sort of border put in place.

    Good evening!

    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.

    Much thanks,
    solodeogloria


  • #994
    Junkyard Tom
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,115 ✭✭✭✭Junkyard Tom


    Jim2007 wrote: »
    I think it is only at this point that voters will really start to realize what BREXIT really means.

    And what then? Do the British public blame the EU? Do they blame the Tories? Boris Johnson? Do the young blame the old? Some combination of all of the above?

    Someone's going to have to drop the anchors sooner rather than later.


  • #995
    Jim2007
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 11,054 Mod ✭✭✭✭Jim2007


    solodeogloria wrote: »
    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.

    Well it you think they are so clear on what they want, why are we still waiting for the positions papers on this?
    solodeogloria wrote: »
    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.

    No it is not up to the Commission, other than to react to the actions of the UK. If the UK goes a head and sign a trade deal with the US along the lines being suggested. Then they will not have a FTA with the EU. Because the two are not compatible. Neither the US or the EU are going to allow the UK to become some kind of backdoor between the two trading blocks.


  • #996
    Jim2007
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 11,054 Mod ✭✭✭✭Jim2007


    Junkyard Tom wrote: »
    And what then? Do the British public blame the EU? Do they blame the Tories? Boris Johnson? Do the young blame the old? Some combination of all of the above?

    Hard to say, but it will come to ahead at the latest for the GE in 2022 or possibly sooner...


  • Advertisement
  • #997
    Jim2007
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 11,054 Mod ✭✭✭✭Jim2007


    PeadarCo wrote: »
    That's assuming the UK government continues with its current mess of Brexit negotiation(or lack of)

    I think they will because I suspect their expectation is that the EU's No does not really mean No and if they hang on they will eventually get what they want, some how...

    But when a European says No, they really mean No and that is what the UK does not understand.


  • #998
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 95,993 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Finally some concrete plans from the UK .

    £50K , and a 2 year fixed contract is not huge money considering how important this is

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-40803267
    The government has revealed through a job advert how it plans to tackle unfair trade after Brexit.

    ...
    "This is a brand new function in the UK and delivering a fully functional and fit-for-purpose organisation by October 2018 is a huge challenge," read the advert.

    The job offers a salary of between £48,483 and £56,370.
    https://www.civilservicejobs.service.gov.uk/csr/jobs.cgi?owner=5070000&ownertype=fair&jcode=1550924&posting_code=0&language


  • #999
    murphaph
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,072 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    Capt'n Midnight wrote: »
    Finally some concrete plans from the UK .

    £50K , and a 2 year fixed contract is not huge money considering how important this is

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-40803267
    https://www.civilservicejobs.service.gov.uk/csr/jobs.cgi?owner=5070000&ownertype=fair&jcode=1550924&posting_code=0&language
    By the time they have replicated all the functions currently shared among the other member states, they will spend more than their EU contribution. That's my prediction anyway.


  • #1000
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 95,993 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Just a reminder that if the UK actually knows what it wants it hasn't even told it's negotiators.

    Politics is the art of the possible, the attainable — the art of the next best
    Otto Von Bismark

    Or to put it another way, a good compromise leaves both parties equally dissatisfied. However, the UK still hasn't made it clear what compromises, if any, it will make.



    concerns about Brexit talks
    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-40655843
    One source told me "I've got nothing to say" when talking to EU counterparts, because ministers haven't got to the stage yet of being clear about the detail of what they want. They are still focused on generalities rather than giving directions on the nitty gritty. On the Brexit "divorce bill" for example, I'm told the expectation across Whitehall is that it will be somewhere between 30 and 50 billion euros. But rather than the UK actually putting forward what they think might be acceptable, they are hanging back, rather than digging in.



    EU data protection rules will kick in if the UK drops EU privacy rights.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-40788180 UK Home Secretary
    “We want [technology companies] to work more closely with us on end-to-end encryption, so that where there is particular need, where there is targeted need, under warrant, they share more information with us so that we can access it.”

    http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-40798623
    Apple boss Tim Cook has defended his company’s decision to comply with the Chinese government’s demand it remove VPN software from the App Store.


    Yes I know ECHELON has been harvesting data for yonks but trend in the UK and Oz is for more general surveillance.


  • #1001
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 95,993 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    murphaph wrote: »
    By the time they have replicated all the functions currently shared among the other member states, they will spend more than their EU contribution. That's my prediction anyway.
    Here's one cost to add to the list.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-news-european-medicines-agency-move-london-eu-cost-bill-520-million-nhs-europe-a7873226.html
    Brexit: UK faces £520m bill for moving the European Medicines Agency from London to the EU

    ‘We could end up having to pay large amounts of money to lose highly skilled jobs and research capacity from the UK. It really is that crazy’


  • Advertisement
  • #1002
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,859 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    The Liberal Democrats said the huge sum for relocating the agency – considered a jewel in the EU‘s crown, because it attracts businesses and experts – was among the most “crazy” aspects of withdrawal.
    Well, Gove did say that the UK has had enough of experts.


  • #1003
    Enzokk
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,074 ✭✭✭Enzokk


    Wait, please solo, tell me if the UK wants to control immigration? How do you do that without a border? The talk of trade is secondry to controlling immigration. First the UK decides where it stands regarding controlling immigration through border control, then we see what type of trade arrangement can be done. If the UK wants to limit EU immigration then the talks can start what type of deal can be done regarding trade.

    Next the UK then has to decide what it wants for NI. Do they want to include it in the UK trade deal and cease the CTA, or will they be open to the idea of sea borders only and no land border with the EU. This will preserve CTA between NI and Ireland but will allow the UK the control they crave for immigration. This will also allow NI to be somewhat shielded from Brexit, which they didn't vote for, and allow minimal disruption of trade between NI and Ireland. Northern Ireland will get their cake and eat it, they will still be part of the UK but will still enjoy the benefits of the EU they rely on. The price is border checks with mainland Brittain.

    In these choices I have given its always the UK that decides, not as you would like us to believe the EU.

    But you haven't really commented on what the UK wants. They want to have EU membership without the 'drawbacks' of immigration. They also want to negotiate their own trade deals while in the customs union. This is not possible, do you agree?


  • #1004
    johnnyskeleton
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 14,568 Mod ✭✭✭✭johnnyskeleton


    Mod note:

    Discussion of the Irish/Uk border moved to this thread, as it seems to be a discrete enough issue:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057768793

    General UK immigration, shengen, flights etc in this thread, issues concerning GFA, hard land borders and other Ireland specific issues in the other thread please!


  • #1005
    sondagefaux
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,443 ✭✭✭sondagefaux


    Remember a couple of weeks back when Michael Gove decided that the UK would withdraw from the 1960s London Fisheries Convention, and commentators said that it would mean that only UK fishing vessels would be allowed to fish within UK fishing waters?

    Guess what?

    He's gone to Denmark and indicated that Danish fishing vessels could continue to have access to UK fishing waters.


    http://finans.dk/protected/erhverv/ECE9758061/britisk-minister-giver-danske-fiskere-nyt-haab-fortsat-adgang-til-britiske-farvande-efter-brexit

    Stick this article through Google translate and you get:
    British minister gives Danish fishermen new hope: Continued access to British waters after Brexit

    One of the most prominent ministers in the British government has been in Denmark to hold meetings with representatives of Danish fisheries and food industry. For Danish fishing, the meeting offered surprisingly positive news.


  • #1006
    Jim2007
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 11,054 Mod ✭✭✭✭Jim2007


    sondagefaux wrote: »
    Remember a couple of weeks back when Michael Gove decided that the UK would withdraw from the 1960s London Fisheries Convention, and commentators said that it would mean that only UK fishing vessels would be allowed to fish within UK fishing waters?

    Guess what?

    He's gone to Denmark and indicated that Danish fishing vessels could continue to have access to UK fishing waters.


    http://finans.dk/protected/erhverv/ECE9758061/britisk-minister-giver-danske-fiskere-nyt-haab-fortsat-adgang-til-britiske-farvande-efter-brexit

    Stick this article through Google translate and you get:

    It also shows how stupid the man is! Denmark cannot conclude any deals with the U.K. and the EU will require the same access for all. And if the new U.K. strategy is to try and divide the 27 all that will happen is that they will waste more time on it and get no where.


  • #1007
    Bit cynical
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,338 ✭✭✭Bit cynical


    Jim2007 wrote: »
    It also shows how stupid the man is! Denmark cannot conclude any deals with the U.K. and the EU will require the same access for all.
    Hmmm. Well the Danes seem to think otherwise.


  • #1008
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 95,993 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    sondagefaux wrote: »
    Remember a couple of weeks back when Michael Gove decided that the UK would withdraw from the 1960s London Fisheries Convention, and commentators said that it would mean that only UK fishing vessels would be allowed to fish within UK fishing waters?

    Guess what?

    He's gone to Denmark and indicated that Danish fishing vessels could continue to have access to UK fishing waters.
    This from Tuesday 18 April 2017
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/18/denmark-to-contest-uk-efforts-to-take-back-control-of-fisheries
    The British government’s plan to “take back control” of its waters after leaving the EU is about to be challenged by a claim from Denmark that its fishermen have a historical right to access to the seas around Britain dating back to the 1400s.

    Looks like the UK might not be able to take control since it allowed others
    Copenhagen plans to point to the UN convention on the law of the sea, which instructs states to respect the “traditional fishing rights” of adjacent countries within sovereign waters. The UK and Denmark are both signatories.

    Or the other way of looking at is that if the UK is serious about leaving the London Fisheries Convention it's going to be messy because it predates the UK's entry into the EU, the original being from 1882 .

    Not sure if the UK can apply this article as they signed up to the Common Fisheries Policy
    http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/entri/texts/acrc/fish64.txt.html
    Article 15

    The present Convention shall be of unlimited duration. However
    at any time after the expiration of a period of twenty years
    from the initial entry into force of the present Convention, any
    Contracting Party may denounce the Convention by giving two
    years' notice in writing to the Government of the United Kingdom
    of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The latter shall notify
    the denunciation to the Contracting Parties.

    At best it just means that the Governments of Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg ! , the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and Sweden might have more reasons to make hints about voting against a new trade deal later on.


  • #1009
    joeysoap
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,264 ✭✭✭joeysoap


    I thought the Belgians also had fishing rights ( maybe confined to Brugge?) in British waters?


  • #1010
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    Bit cynical wrote: »
    Hmmm. Well the Danes seem to think otherwise.
    The can think all they like the ECJ will say differently


  • #1011
    Bit cynical
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,338 ✭✭✭Bit cynical


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    The can think all they like the ECJ will say differently
    I don't think the EU can stop boats of a particular country fishing in a non-EU country's waters. If, for example, Canada said that Ireland could fish in their waters, I don't think the EU could stop Irish boats from making their way there and fishing.

    What the EU might be able to do, on the other hand, is prevent, for example, Ireland entering an arrangement whereby a non-EU country is allowed to fish in Ireland's waters since our waters are under EU control.


  • Advertisement
  • #1012
    First Up
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,823 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    Bit cynical wrote:
    I don't think the EU can stop boats of a particular country fishing in a non-EU country's waters. If, for example, Canada said that Ireland could fish in their waters, I don't think the EU could stop Irish boats from making their way there and fishing.

    Of course not, but Ireland could not reciprocate by granting Canada preferential terms for something outside the terms of the EU - Canada trade agreement.


  • #1013
    Bit cynical
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,338 ✭✭✭Bit cynical


    First Up wrote: »
    Of course not, but Ireland could not reciprocate by granting Canada preferential terms for something outside the terms of the EU - Canada trade agreement.
    That is true but I think in the case of Denmark, the UK is honoring a pre-existing arrangement. If the Danish side of the arrangement violates EU rules in some way then the EU can put a stop to the Danish part of it, but the EU can't stop the Danish fishing fleet from leaving EU waters (which I think is what is being disputed). As far as I'm aware, the EU have no powers in this matter, and the UK - shortly to be a non-EU country - will have no obligation to deal with the EU as a whole rather than individual member states.


  • #1014
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 95,993 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Bit cynical wrote: »
    That is true but I think in the case of Denmark, the UK is honoring a pre-existing arrangement.
    No.

    The UK tore up the pre-existing deal. And Denmark reminded them of an older deal.

    In negotiations trust and consistency are important. Unilaterally exiting long term treaties and then U-turning doesn't display either.


  • #1015
    solodeogloria
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,739 ✭✭✭solodeogloria


    Good evening!

    Whilst acknowledging that there will be continued challenges in the months ahead it is fascinating to read that Mark Carney suggested that the financial sector in the UK could be double the size in 25 years according to this article in the Guardian.

    If that's the outcome the UK will remain Europe's investment banker. The challenge will be to get back to manufacturing and to increase other areas of the economy after Brexit.

    There's challenges with Brexit but the sky won't fall in.

    Much thanks,
    solodeogloria


  • #1016
    listermint
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 34,217 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    solodeogloria wrote: »
    Good evening!

    Whilst acknowledging that there will be continued challenges in the months ahead it is fascinating to read that Mark Carney suggested that the financial sector in the UK could be double the size in 25 years according to this article in the Guardian.

    If that's the outcome the UK will remain Europe's investment banker. The challenge will be to get back to manufacturing and to increase other areas of the economy after Brexit.

    There's challenges with Brexit but the sky won't fall in.

    Much thanks,
    solodeogloria


    Double the size based on what specifically?


  • #1017
    Billy86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,495 ✭✭✭✭Billy86


    solodeogloria wrote: »
    Good evening!
    Did you ever get back to those who were asking you how the UK would manage to have an open border with Ireland while having tight immigration controls?


  • #1018
    solodeogloria
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,739 ✭✭✭solodeogloria


    Billy86 wrote: »
    Did you ever get back to those who were asking you how the UK would manage to have an open border with Ireland while having tight immigration controls?

    Good evening!

    I read a post from one of the moderators that suggested that should be moved to a different thread. There's not really much to comment. For proposals that the British government suggested you can look at some of the options James Brokenshire suggested last year.

    Immigration isn't primarily the issue with the border. The issue is trading terms and customs. Immigration controls don't necessarily require a hard border in Northern Ireland. This can be handled with controls through employment or through registering for national insurance numbers.

    The UK Government have been clear about preserving the CTA and working with the Irish government on immigration. They seem to have accepted that the border would be porous but there are ways to handle this.

    I'd suggest continuing the conversation on the thread but the UK government haven't proposed a hard border.

    Edit - listermint just read the article. You'll see everything you need to answer that question in it.

    Much thanks,
    solodeogloria


  • #1019
    Junkyard Tom
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,115 ✭✭✭✭Junkyard Tom


    listermint wrote: »
    Double the size based on what specifically?

    Presumably world GDP. Perhaps he meant 'all things being equal GB's financial sector should double, in line with projected world growth, in 25 years'.

    'All things being equal' is unlikely, if there's one thing that's predictable about the future it's that it is inherently unpredictable.


  • #1020
    View
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,872 ✭✭✭View


    solodeogloria wrote: »
    Good evening!

    Whilst acknowledging that there will be continued challenges in the months ahead it is fascinating to read that Mark Carney suggested that the financial sector in the UK could be double the size in 25 years according to this article in the Guardian.

    If that's the outcome the UK will remain Europe's investment banker. The challenge will be to get back to manufacturing and to increase other areas of the economy after Brexit.

    There's challenges with Brexit but the sky won't fall in.

    Much thanks,
    solodeogloria

    His comments are based on the very big IF that the EU countries decide that, after Brexit, they want London to be the EU's financial centre - but completely "offshore" and out of their jurisdiction - thus allowing London to be get all the "reward" while, no doubt, all the "risk" would go to the EU countries.

    The EU countries could, of course, agree to that just like they could agree to all sorts of other one-sided arrangements that favour the UK but it isn't very likely, is it?


  • Advertisement
  • #1021
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 95,993 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    solodeogloria wrote: »
    Good evening!

    Whilst acknowledging that there will be continued challenges in the months ahead it is fascinating to read that Mark Carney
    ...
    said "Households have cut spending since Brexit"

    Not much good news there.

    I'd be scared of consumers borrowing more. Interest rates are very low at the moment. People who are borrowing to survive will have a very hard time if interest rates go up. But it's OK because their assets will be snapped up by the rich then.

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/feb/20/one-in-four-uk-families-have-less-than-95-in-savings-report-finds
    In a sign of growing financial strain, low-income families had just £95 of savings and investments, excluding pensions, this winter, compared with £136 in the same period last year. That figure jumps to £62,885 among high-income families, up from £50,208 a year earlier.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement