Brexit discussion thread II

solodeogloria wrote: »

If you're a national not permitted to enter Ireland, you can enter the UK via another border, or fly in if you are eligible. Again, this doesn't have an impact on who can enter the UK. The UK will have full control over who can enter the UK after Brexit.

The problem, solo, is not the nationals who are not permitted to enter Ireland. It's the nationals who are permitted to enter Ireland. The existence of a CTA covering the UK and Ireland means that there's no effective mechanismfor keeping them out of the UK. Why is this so hard to grasp?

solodeogloria wrote: »

Claiming that Ireland has control of its frontier and that means only people who are eligible to enter Ireland can enter the UK through the Ireland border is an obvious fact that I am well aware of.

But whose implications you are determined to ignore. Take the extranous word "only" out of your sentence above and read this bit back to yourself:

". . . people who are eligible to enter Ireland can enter the UK through the Ireland border . . ."

Given that the UK has no control over who is eligible to enter Ireland, and given your own statement just quoted, how can you say that the UK will effectively control who enters the UK?

solodeogloria wrote: »

My point is that the EU will have no control whatsoever over who is entitled to enter the UK after Brexit. That will be a matter for Parliament.

The EU may have no control over who is entitled to enter the UK, but as long as as the CTA is maintained, it will have some control over who can enter the UK. EU law may confer a right to enter Ireland, and the CTA will enable someone who has exercised that right to enter the UK.

solodeogloria wrote: »

It isn't hard to grasp at all!

I've mentioned specifically that the UK will permit free travel into the UK on every border from the European Union after Brexit. The checks for eligibility to work will be secondary employment checks.

As for how effective these checks are, that is a matter for the UK Government and Parliament. It isn't a matter for the European Union.

Why is that position so hard to grasp?

That position is easy to grasp but, unfortunately, wrong.

The truth is otherwise. The UK proposal is that, post-Brexit, EU nationals will be free to enter the UK on every border from the EU. Others arriving at those borders will not necessarily be free. This means that (a) everyone arriving at the border will be liable to inspection to establish whether they hold a nationality which gives them a right of entry, and (b) those who don’t hold such a nationality (and don’t hold an appropriate UK visa) are liable to be turned away.

So, not “free travel into the UK on every border from the European Union” at all, then.

solodeogloria wrote: »

Please read what I have said above. I've repeated this several times to you and others on the thread. There is no point repeating it yet another time.

There wasn’t much point in saying it the first time, if it wasn’t true.

solodeogloria wrote: »

It isn't true to say that Ireland has control over who can enter the UK. If someone enters the UK illegally from Ireland they can and will be deported. It is a secondary employment check rather than a travel check because the UK has decided to continue allowing free travel into the UK from the European Union.

If you work illegally in the UK and if you're caught by the UK Border Force and you will be removed irrespective of how you entered.

Why is this so difficult to grasp?

It’s quite easy to grasp. It’s just completely different from controlling the border, which was your initial claim, and which is a common Brexity slogan.

What you’re now saying is that the UK won’t be controlling its borders (at all!); it will be relying on labour market regulation to identify and remove those who work without authorisation (and, by implication, it won’t be bothered about those who don’t work, or who work informally).

We could have an entirely separate discussion about how effective that’s likely to be. But, disregarding that, there’s a couple of points that we could make at this stage.

First, it’s absolutely not border control . It’s an alternative to border control. If you think Brexit voters voted to “take back control of our borders”, then you’ll expect them to be spitting with fury at this.

Secondly, it would be a complete volte-face for the UK which, historically, as an island nation has always found border control to be the most effective way to control migration. Even while in the EU, the UK polices its borders with other EU countries (except Ireland). The notion that they would stop doing this at Brexit is a startling one.

Thirdly, as will already be apparent, I don’t think the UK intention is as you say. The UK will police its borders, and will turn away at the border those whom it does not wish to admit (pretty much as it does at present). It will supplement this by endeavouring to identify those who infringe the conditions of their admission to the UK (e.g. by taking up employment). It does this at present as well, but obviously the task becomes more challenging if the population of those admitted to the UK but not permitted to work, settle, etc becomes larger. And identifying these people if they have crossed by the Irish border and the UK doesn’t even know they have entered in the first place is obviously going to be trickier. And deporting them is fairly pointless if they can fly to Dublin and come right back in again.

solodeogloria wrote: »

The UK are proposing visa-free travel for all EU citizens, on any UK border.

Non-EU nationals will be subject to the same controls as today.

Th ebit that I have bolded makes this statement radically different from your earlier claim:

". . . the UK will permit free travel into the UK on every border from the European Union after Brexit . . ."

The won't be permitting free travel into the UK on every border from the EU; just on the Irish border (if the CTA is maintained). On every other border, there'll be passport controls.

And pointing out that EU citizens will have visa-free travel to the UK does nothing to address the issues raised by the CTA. I pointed out earlier that the CTA principally raises issues with respect to third-country nationals who have a right to enter the EU but not a right to enter the UK. (Though, since you make the point that EU nationals who engage in work will be liable to deportation, it does raise issues with respect to them to. Having been deported, it will be very easy for them to return.)

When has the UK said that they would permit free travel to all EU Citizens? And would that mean free travel on their ID cards without a passport? I've read nothing of the sort, in fact, the opposite has been posted here.

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Just to return to BoJo and his article in the Telegraph. It's an interesting strategy he's playing to get the leadership. First of all, the reason he was brought in as Foreign Sec was to stop him plotting from the back benches - the idea being he would spend so much time in the air and at meetings that he wouldn't have time. Now he sees his chance to get out of that role. So we have TM going to make a speech where it is expected in some quarters that she will soften her stance on the bill land transition. Now that BoJo has put down his marker and she's been too weak to sack him, if the above softening transpires he will resign (in glory) and go for the leadership at the conference.

Interestingly, the bookies seem to have Corbyn (average 4/1) and Davies ( average 5/1) ahead of Johnson (average 8/1) as the next PM.

In the interim, Johnson can do what he likes. May is a lame duck without authority, gravitas or support. If ever a politician proved the Peter Principle, it is May.

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Just to return to BoJo and his article in the Telegraph. It's an interesting strategy he's playing to get the leadership. First of all, the reason he was brought in as Foreign Sec was to stop him plotting from the back benches - the idea being he would spend so much time in the air and at meetings that he wouldn't have time. Now he sees his chance to get out of that role. So we have TM going to make a speech where it is expected in some quarters that she will soften her stance on the bill land transition. Now that BoJo has put down his marker and she's been too weak to sack him, if the above softening transpires he will resign (in glory) and go for the leadership at the conference.

I'll buy that, and I can see May flat-footing all such expectations with another Brexit-means-Brexit hardline speech in Florence, to try and head off the domestic challenge.

briany wrote: »

Oh, how I'm sure Cameron would like to go back and do things differently.

Did he not try to stack the deck a bit by specifying that the referendum be passed through a supermajority, given its apparently irrevocable nature, and long-lasting consequences? Or can this not happen under UK referendum law?

There is no "UK referendum law". Each referendum they've had is conducted under a special Act of Parliament passed for the purpose. They can provide for it to be conducted however they like.

They have used qualified majorities before, and they could have done so on this occasion if they thought it desirable. I think, however, that Cameron was confident that he would win on a simple majority.

murphaph wrote: »

You're ignoring the salient points.

Currently the UK doesn't have a huge problem (it's still a big enough problem I'd say) with third country nationals working illegally because the UK border force or the Irish Immigration Service are looking out for potential illegal economic migrants and refuse leave to land if they have the slightest suspicion the person is not a genuine visitor.

This ability will be removed from the UK border force for approximately 430 million people who will in the future be able to sidestep these checks via Ireland. That is a massive cohort of people, like 1/16th of the world's population!

Put it another way. If every 16th third country visitor was simply allowed land in the UK today, rather than face questions, do you believe there would be no increase in illegal working?

The ID cards issued to settled Poles etc. will be worthless. Pole A looks and sounds like Pole B. Both Claim to be naturalised British citizens. British citizens don't have to carry ID. You can't start racially profiling which British citizens you ask to identify themselves. That won't fly as it's blatant discrimination. So, either all Brits get ID cards or you have a big problem.

Currently this isn't a huge problem because all third country nationals get checked at the border (British or Irish) but post Brexit 1/16th of the world's population will be able to enter the UK unchecked.

Do you get that EU nationals post Brexit won't be like third country nationals today because they won't necessarily be checked at the border.

A taste of how that particular problem might impact post-Brexit: The notorious and elusive arch criminal Prawo Jazdy.

solodeogloria wrote: »

View wrote: »

This is incorrect.

The first formal mention of the CTA in an international treaty was in the Treaty of Amsterdam. Even there it just gets a brief mention in Protocol 20 (the Schengen opt-out one). As such the court that gets to decide future cases in relation to it is the CJEU and if they rule that it is incompatible with EU law, then that's the end of it.

And, no, it doesn't matter what the UK promises as the UK is fully aware that, under EU law, it has no legal authority whatsoever to make promises about how EU law will or will not be applied.

Good morning!

This is pedantry. The arrangements existed before the EU even if they weren't referred to by this title. Free movement existed between Ireland and Britain since the early 1920's. This wasn't dependent on the EU.

Law deals in pedantry whether you like it or not.

The only basis for the continued existence of the CTA now is because Protocol 20 of the EU Treaties allow it. Equally the only basis for it to continue to exist after Brexit is if the EU Treaties allow it.

solodeogloria wrote: »

Ireland's position in UK law is based on the Republic of Ireland Act which dealt with the implications in UK law for Ireland ceasing to be a crown dominion.

This act is also the reason why Irish citizens have more rights in the UK than other EU citizens.

So?

Neither Ireland nor the EU have to care two hoots about UK law now, much less after Brexit. It has no legal force whatsoever outside the UK. And, after Brexit, the CJEU is going to pay as much heed to some ancient UK law, back from the twilight days of their Empire, as they would to a comparable act by the Mongolian or Peruvian Parliaments.

breatheme wrote: »

Never mind the fact that EU Citizens are basically undeportable from an EU country, so if someone is deported from the UK, they can just enter again through Ireland.

EU citizens are deportable from EU countries and this is routinely done. EU countries basically operate a relaxed immigration system for each other's citizens - they haven't dispensed with the system altogether though.

demfad wrote: »

Just a comment:

I think there is no chance of an exit being negotiated on time. Infact there is no chance of a transition being negotiated on time. There must be an extension or suspension of A50.
Article 50 is the legal way for exit but it is not the only way. It is not fit for purpose. I saw it described today as an ornament rather than a tool: it was never meant to be used. Written by diplomats not lawyers.
Of all the huge blunders in Brexit to date the all emcompassing one was triggering A50 to begin with. Technically the UK needed to have the ability to leave with no-deal to improve their negotiating position. That would have required being ready for that before triggering A50.
They can't leave with no-deal now. There isnt time and it kills their economy.
Perhaps agreeing with the other a way to leave: Leaving and trade deal all in one and ratified by all 27?
May be too late now. But the mistake, the giant mistake was triggering A50 too soon.

Hubris is a terrible thing and is very much part of Tory thinking.

View wrote: »

breatheme wrote: »

Never mind the fact that EU Citizens are basically undeportable from an EU country, so if someone is deported from the UK, they can just enter again through Ireland.

EU citizens are deportable from EU countries and this is routinely done. EU countries basically operate a relaxed immigration system for each other's citizens - they haven't dispensed with the system altogether though.

I said "basically" undeportable. They can only be deported for public policy or public security reasons. Furthermore, a criminal record is not reason enough to deem an EU Citizen deportable. The point being: The UK can deport them, but they will still have a right to enter Ireland, and thus, the CTA.

breatheme wrote: »

View wrote: »

breatheme wrote: »

Never mind the fact that EU Citizens are basically undeportable from an EU country, so if someone is deported from the UK, they can just enter again through Ireland.

EU citizens are deportable from EU countries and this is routinely done. EU countries basically operate a relaxed immigration system for each other's citizens - they haven't dispensed with the system altogether though.

I said "basically" undeportable. They can only be deported for public policy or public security reasons. Furthermore, a criminal record is not reason enough to deem an EU Citizen deportable. The point being: The UK can deport them, but they will still have a right to enter Ireland, and thus, the CTA.

That's partially true. A person with a criminal record can be deported under public security grounds but it must be based on solid grounds in their specific case for it to happen. In other words, a person who has turned over a new leaf can't be deported "just because", a person with a continuing involvement in crime could be.

Gerry T wrote: »

Agh but the UK will write their own laws, so might bring one in to deport a person "just because" one of the perks of brexit.

I think the point is that if they continue with the cta in some form and the person has the right to be in the EU then they can simply come to Ireland and walk across the border back into the UK.