Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Brexit discussion thread II

1…127128130132133…305

Comments

  • #3872
    Samaris
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,544 ✭✭✭Samaris


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    The EU commision is investigating the UK over treatment of EU citizens, including deportation and detention.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/sep/30/brussels-uk-deported-eu-citizens?CMP=fb_gu

    Aarrrgh. Why do the UK keep shooting themselves in the foot? Why was it necessary to ratchet up deportations while trying to carry out these delicate negotiations? What message does this give, especially when other countries are registering concerns that these deportations are not necessarily being carried out with due process (or semblance of humanity in some cases). Isn't there plenty of time for organised deporting or y'know, not deporting when plainly unreasonable after the whole thing has been dealt with and Britain is actually no longer under the auspices of the agreements that ban this sort of carry-on?

    Every time it looks like the UK leadership might finally have removed heads from rectal regions and started acting like a grown-up country, something happens to indicate that heads have been solidly reinserted again.

    This is insane. It really is. There is no sensible logic for this method.


  • #3873
    strandroad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,676 ✭✭✭strandroad


    Samaris wrote: »

    Every time it looks like the UK leadership might finally have removed heads from rectal regions and started acting like a grown-up country, something happens to indicate that heads have been solidly reinserted again.

    This is insane. It really is. There is no sensible logic for this method.

    Some of their voters will only be delighted to hear about it though. There's a method to it, for them it shows how Brexit starts to deliver.


  • #3874
    Enzokk
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,997 ✭✭✭Enzokk


    Samaris wrote: »
    Aarrrgh. Why do the UK keep shooting themselves in the foot? Why was it necessary to ratchet up deportations while trying to carry out these delicate negotiations? What message does this give, especially when other countries are registering concerns that these deportations are not necessarily being carried out with due process (or semblance of humanity in some cases). Isn't there plenty of time for organised deporting or y'know, not deporting when plainly unreasonable after the whole thing has been dealt with and Britain is actually no longer under the auspices of the agreements that ban this sort of carry-on?

    Every time it looks like the UK leadership might finally have removed heads from rectal regions and started acting like a grown-up country, something happens to indicate that heads have been solidly reinserted again.

    This is insane. It really is. There is no sensible logic for this method.


    This is the same Home Office and Amber Rudd that defied a court order from a judge recently. Do you think they will listen to the EU? It seems increasingly like the UK government will do what they want. If anything I would be very scared if I was a EU citizen in the UK. I don't think even the "special" relationship between Ireland and the UK will be of any use in the end.

    I mean the fact that Boris is still in his job after openly criticizing the PM and then using the Foreign Office premises for an event for a non-governmental think tank says a lot. They are in such disarray its actually not funny. Imagine if Jeremy Corbyn had been defied like this? The UK press would be having a field day with the situation but its par for the course for this government.

    Boris Johnson accused of breaching ministerial code over thinktank launch


  • #3875
    Samaris
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,544 ✭✭✭Samaris


    I am thoroughly relieved that I made the choice to move back to Ireland just before all this went down, I'll tell you that. Half-English or no, Irish-citizen or no, I wouldn't particularly trust this government to not screw me over and right now, I wouldn't trust the emboldened actual racists* to exempt me from their dislike. Especially since I've been mistaken (admittedly by idiots) for either southern European or not European at all in looks. Besides, once everyone else is out or stamped down on, I don't think the Irish will be particularly beloved or accepted either.

    My impression of Johnson's intelligence is not good (excellent education, impressed he can recite Kipling from memory, does Eton maybe need to focus on drilling in common sense as well as recitations?) so I'm not surprised at his antics. It is a bit remarkable that someone as young as he is with a good education and a high standing in British public affairs could be ..well, Boris Johnson, but there you go. And that he's the favourite for the next Tory leader/PM? God help Britain.

    May's incredibly weak. Both in character and in political position. Either of those would be difficult to work around, but both? She's a dead duck in this climate. She is silent when she should speak and it makes her out both cold and unfeeling -and- slow and indecisive (i.e. Grenfell). Her silence scores her badly in two sets of metrics appealing to different sectors of the population, and that's rarely a good outcome. That on top of the general impression of a clown brigade (mostly Johnson's fault) and the lack of respect earned by Davis in the negotiations and really, how has this government survived this long?

    *No, not "all Brexiters" or "all British", just the actual racists who are undoubtedly emboldened by any excuse that leans their way, which Brexit undoubtedly does.


  • #3876
    Jim2007
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 10,877 Mod ✭✭✭✭Jim2007


    solodeogloria wrote: »
    The UK have made a lot of very reasonable compromises but the EU are insisting that unless the UK 100% agree with their position on three issues that the EU will not move forward.

    The U.K. has not put a single workable solution on the table in respect of any of the three issues. You're either totally delusional or simply tell porkies.
    If Britain leaves with no deal it will be simply because the EU have been unreasonable. I don't see any point in continuing these discussions unless the EU are willing to come to a middle ground on all three of these issues and a prospective deal.

    If the U.K. leaves with no deal that will be a situation entirely of their own making. It has taken over 40 years of negotiation, compromise and in the case of the U.K. opt outs to get the EU to where it is today. And to expect that the EU states would put that at risk by compromising on it's fundamental principles for the sake of a third country is just dumb!


  • Advertisement
  • #3877
    ambro25
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,986 ✭✭✭ambro25


    Nody wrote: »
    And here is how the businesses will respond.

    You see the businesses don't give a damn about the game and who wins or losses; they need a deal or they are out of there and the Tories can stand around crying how unfair it is all they want. That is why EU has the upper hand over UK in the negotiations; no deal they get more companies coming over, deal and they get less interruption in existing export. However for UK it's no deal and the businesses leave, deal and only some of the business leaves.
    And that is just UK businesses.

    I was at a luncheon event on Thursday, hosted by one of the local 'big 3' law firms, and just happened to be sat next to their head of HR (-legal practice).

    We were -of course- comparing notes on Brexit, and I recounted how I had witnessed a shift in my caseload makeup since the referendum (accelerating for the past 3-4 months) which was beginning to mirror the 2008 GFC aftermath: new filing activity reducing way off-trend, but new contentious activity increasing way off-trend in proportion (representative of businesses doing less innovation and focusing on enforcement to husband market share and profit line ).

    As she thought about it, she considered that her own department's caseload was likewise starting to take shades of post-2008 GFC, and recounted how, soon after the referendum, she had heard across her clientele, that EU27 firms (mostly German) with local UK subsidiaries/presence were reassuring staff with 'nothing will change', 'we are committed to our UK operations' <etc.>.

    But how, in the past 6 months, she has started taking instructions from EU27 HQs directly, to get started with hatchet jobs on those local jobs amongst the local UK subsidiaries/presence which represent the highest overheads (i.e. senior management).


  • #3878
    solodeogloria
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,739 ✭✭✭solodeogloria


    Samaris wrote: »
    Can anyone actually enumerate the compromises that the UK has offered? Solo, you seem to know the most about them, what compromises are there and how do they differ from initial positions (as others have asked too).

    It's a straight-forward question based entirely on your claims, so it should be fairly easy to answer.
    mickoneill31 wrote: »
    +1 to that. Looking forward to the next post from Solo where he/she answers the question with an answer, rather than

    a) going off on a tangent
    or
    b) saying "I've said it frequent times on this post and won't type it again".

    The quote was


    So we should get a list of at least 4 or 5 I'd say.

    Good afternoon!

    I've specifically listed them here in the quoted section of my post.

    In fact there are 5 there. It's a bit irritating when you're implying I've not done this when I have clearly. It's not constructive to lie about what other posters have said.
    Samaris wrote: »
    I am thoroughly relieved that I made the choice to move back to Ireland just before all this went down, I'll tell you that. Half-English or no, Irish-citizen or no, I wouldn't particularly trust this government to not screw me over and right now, I wouldn't trust the emboldened actual racists* to exempt me from their dislike. Especially since I've been mistaken (admittedly by idiots) for either southern European or not European at all in looks. Besides, once everyone else is out or stamped down on, I don't think the Irish will be particularly beloved or accepted either.

    The idea that Britain is heaving with racists is manifest nonsense.

    I'm glad that I'm staying here and I'm glad that the UK is leaving the European Union. The behaviour in respect to the weasel term "sufficient progress" doesn't make me want to crawl back to being a member it rather makes continued membership less appetising as you see how unreasonable they are being. The audience in Wolverhampton on Question Time were right.

    Much thanks,
    solodeogloria


  • #3879
    Samaris
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,544 ✭✭✭Samaris


    solodeogloria wrote: »
    Good afternoon!

    I've specifically listed them here in the quoted section of my post.

    In fact there are 5 there. It's a bit irritating when you're implying I've not done this when I have clearly. It's not constructive to lie about what other posters have said.
    Right. For expediency, here is your list;
    - continuing contributions for transition
    - joint arbitration
    - rights for EU nationals to seek recourse through the Supreme Court if the agreement rights are reneged upon
    - customs partnership in the border
    - (visa?)free travel for EU citizens into the UK.

    Added visa there as your claim didn't quite make sense. I don't think anyone's running a platform of free travel for EU people into the UK or vice versa. Was it visa-free you intended?


    https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/631038/Joint_technical_note_on_the_comparison_of_EU-UK_positions_on_citizens__rights.pdf

    Here are the positions as of July, the first meeting where positions were debated (the first meeting was more of an introduction).

    Trying to find positions as at the second meeting currently, but you're indicating that certain positions have moved since these stances were taken, so ...okay, feel free to continue backing it up.
    solodeogloria wrote: »
    The idea that Britain is heaving with racists is manifest nonsense.
    Quite, so it's just as well that no-one said it then, isn't it?


  • #3880
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,565 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    solodeogloria wrote: »
    Good afternoon!

    I've specifically listed them here in the quoted section of my post.

    In fact there are 5 there. It's a bit irritating when you're implying I've not done this when I have clearly. It's not constructive to lie about what other posters have said.



    The idea that Britain is heaving with racists is manifest nonsense.

    I'm glad that I'm staying here and I'm glad that the UK is leaving the European Union. The behaviour in respect to the weasel term "sufficient progress" doesn't make me want to crawl back to being a member it rather makes continued membership less appetising as you see how unreasonable they are being. The audience in Wolverhampton on Question Time were right.

    Much thanks,
    solodeogloria

    No need to get so sensitive. You didn't list compromise, you listed positions.

    Crawl back to being a member? You said you were Irish, you are a member of the EU.

    No one thinks the EU are being unreasonable except you, except when you voted remain.


  • #3881
    Enzokk
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,997 ✭✭✭Enzokk


    solodeogloria wrote: »
    I've specifically listed them here in the quoted section of my post.

    In fact there are 5 there. It's a bit irritating when you're implying I've not done this when I have clearly. It's not constructive to lie about what other posters have said.


    Ok, I will bite. How does continuing paying into the EU for access to the single market mean they have moved and the EU have to compromise? Do you think that the EU should now give the UK a concession where they only have to pay half the cost for a transition period? Do you think that is how it works? Who is asking for access to the single market and for a deal? If its the UK then they will have to take what they get given, whether you like it or not. Life's not fair, ask the people of Scotland that were told if they voted to stay in the UK they would stay in the EU.

    I think it is bloody obvious that the UK has to pay for access during a transition period. If you think this is not the case then you have no common sense, in my opinion.


  • Advertisement
  • #3882
    Samaris
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,544 ✭✭✭Samaris


    Actually, yeah, concluding that the UK paying contributions during the transition period is a concession is a bit silly. I am not making a concession to someone else if all I'm doing is paying what's owed. That's not really a concession, it should be a normal starting point.

    Did they really start off from the position that they would pay nothing but expected a transition period? If not, why is this listed as a concession or compromise? If they did, well, I suppose by the standards of low expectations, paying what's owed is a glorious compromise. >.<


  • #3883
    murphaph
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,997 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    The very notion that solo thinks paying continuing contributions during a transitional period (granted by the EU if at all) is some sort of compromise explains a lot.

    The UK can count itself lucky if it gets to pay the proper amount (no rebate of course) and not double!


  • #3884
    The Rape of Lucretia
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,440 ✭✭✭The Rape of Lucretia


    Samaris wrote: »
    Right. For expediency, here is your list;
    - continuing contributions for transition
    - joint arbitration
    - rights for EU nationals to seek recourse through the Supreme Court if the agreement rights are reneged upon
    - customs partnership in the border
    - (visa?)free travel for EU citizens into the UK.

    So :

    - while we are still effectively members, we will contribute as if we were a member
    - if we can agree to agree, then we will agree
    - if there is a disagreement, our court will be judge
    - some undefined border controls
    - visa free travel for EU citizens into the UK (and of course visa free travel for UK citizens into the EU)



    Whoop de doo, I think would be the diplomatic response.

    What are they a concession on ?
    - during the transition we will retain free trade rights but wont pay anything
    - we will decide everything
    - if there is a disagreement there will be no agreement
    - other undefined border controls
    - that UK citizens have visa free travel to the EU, but EU citizens do not have it to the UK.


    I think I will go into my boss tomorrow and tell him I want a revised job contract : one days work per year, and a salary of one million.
    If he doesnt agree I will propose that he pay me 950k and I will do two days work per year. If he doesnt agree to that I will say he is being unreasonable. From my opening proposal I have doubled the work I am willing to do for him, and cut what he would have to pay me by €50k! I am making serious concession and being reasonable. If he doesnt agree to that then he is just being vindictive.


  • #3885
    Enzokk
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,997 ✭✭✭Enzokk


    I will try to be fair to solo, here is a part of his quote where he shows the compromises from the UK so far,

    solodeogloria wrote: »
    I've seen a lot of reasonable compromises proposed by the British government. I've seen movement on all three issues from Davis. For example continuing contributions for transition, joint arbitration, rights for EU nationals to seek recourse through the Supreme Court if the agreement rights are reneged upon, customs partnership in the border, free travel for EU citizens into the UK. I could probably even list more.

    I've not seen any form of movement from Brussels on anything however. This will need to change if we're to see a good outcome.


    Just in case he is not getting his point of view across properly, what do you mean by joint arbitration? Was the position before that only the UK will decide on arbitration but they now have compromised to allow the EU a say?

    As for rights of EU nationals that can seek recourse to the Supreme Court, was the position before that they would have no recourse in case their rights were infringed?

    What about the customs partnership is a compromise on their previous position?


    This is what others were asking you for, details on why you think there has been compromises. I think if you were able to show that there has been compromises people would agree with you, but you seem to be as short on details as the UK is on their Brexit plans right now.

    Edit: I mean compromising from one unreasonable position to another may be seen as compromise by some but not by others.


  • #3886
    Roanmore
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,801 ✭✭✭Roanmore


    The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »
    Indeed. But it doesnt. The Brexit black cloud hanging over it is truly colouring their view of everything and is an imminent calamity for them. But that the EU does not have the same cloud over it, is really not understood. Brexit is one of many issues the EU is dealing with. And, whatever the details of Brexit, will pretty much carry on as before. Which is not the case for the UK. The self-obsession is understandable - it has not faced such a crisis since June 1940. The tragedy is, this time it is totally self inflicted, so interest in helping them out is minimal.
    The UK does not appreciate that Brexit news is not headline news on a daily basis in Europe. It is minor article update stuff, buried within the papers, that most people arent really following at all. Ireland, as the country that truly is vulnerable to the resulting turbulence, and being a bit of a UK press follower anyway, is the only one following the tragic show.

    Sky News to be fair alluded to that last week, said the EU27 had other things to worry about.


  • #3887
    The Rape of Lucretia
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,440 ✭✭✭The Rape of Lucretia


    Roanmore wrote: »
    Sky News to be fair alluded to that last week, said the EU27 had other things to worry about.

    While there are parties for who a hard brexit would be a problem - particular businesses, or residents in the UK, there are many for whom it would be an opportunity, many other businesses, financial institutions.
    And for a great majority it will have little or no impact.
    So while the EU administration must deal with the process, as a whole, nobody in Europe has much interest in Brexit, nor any concerns that life and business will continue as heretofore whatever deal is done.
    The UK still thinks Europe is as worried about the detail of the Brexit deal as they are, and that it really is two parties with a serious stake in the outcome. The UK is the one with various grades of everything to lose here.It does seem some of their civil service and EU staff understand this. But the political class doesnt want to hear it while it plays internal politics instead. And they are not hearing the tick-tock tick-tock.


  • #3888
    Jim2007
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 10,877 Mod ✭✭✭✭Jim2007


    The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »
    - that UK citizens have visa free travel to the EU, but EU citizens do not have it to the UK

    The problem with that is that it is not a decision the EU can make on their own, under any circumstances! For visa free travel in Europe, you are covered by the EU/EEA/CH agreement or by Schengen. Any agreement there will also require the agreement of the non EU members as well. And needless to say the non-EU states such as Switzerland are concerned about the status of their citizens in the UK and so far this has not even been considered.

    I expect there will be strong opposition to anything other than the UK joining Schengen. To do otherwise would mean that they would need to setup a special scheme for the UK and I doubt there will be much support for that.


  • #3889
    Jim2007
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 10,877 Mod ✭✭✭✭Jim2007


    solodeogloria wrote: »
    The behaviour in respect to the weasel term "sufficient progress" doesn't make me want to crawl back to being a member it rather makes continued membership less appetising as you see how unreasonable they are being. The audience in Wolverhampton on Question Time were right.

    You could not crawl back even if you wanted to! A50 provides no provision for it's revocation, nor is there any other provision to do so. The only people making that claim are UK jurists and that rests solely on UK Law allowing the UK government to change it's mind. Noting to do with the ECJ accepting it.


  • #3890
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 20,399 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    solodeogloria wrote: »
    The behaviour in respect to the weasel term "sufficient progress" doesn't make me want to crawl back to being a member it rather makes continued membership less appetising as you see how unreasonable they are being.

    The term 'sufficient progress' could mean 'any progress' or 'genuine progress'. None of these substitute terms can apply to the current position.

    No progress is certainly an accurate description so far. Another few weeks for the miracle.


  • #3891
    Thargor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,211 ✭✭✭✭Thargor


    I think we're starting to see the final collapse starting for May now, disaster of an interview on Andrew Marr this morning and stories about her losing it appearing in the papers:

    Link looks broken but it works if you press play:


    ci5FKWA.jpg
    Fury in Palace and panic at No 10 as premier wept

    Buckingham Palace was left infuriated with Theresa May's behaviour after her general election disaster plunged the Prime Minister into a personal "crisis of confidence".

    Senior courtiers were exasperated that May misled the Queen by saying she had a deal with the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) only to take another 17 days to nail it down, and then went on to breach protocol in the way she announced her intention to form a government.

    The delay led to irritation at May's lack of "courtesy", as the Queen's speech was delayed for two days, meaning the state opening of Parliament disrupted plans for Royal Ascot.

    Following the inferno at Grenfell Tower the week after the election, Downing Street staff became so worried about the prime minister's welfare that one suggested sending for an SAS officer to give her a pep talk to boost her resilience.

    May's problems led to tensions with Buckingham Palace, where the Queen's private secretary was unable to get answers from No 10 about the status of the DUP deal or about rumours that May was on the verge of resigning.
    Details of the post-election period are contained in a new book, Fall out: A Year of Political Mayhem, Serialised in the Sunday Times today.

    It reveals that the Prime Minister repeatedly broke down in tears after surrendering the Conservative majority and went in to a spiral after she faced widespread criticism for failing to meet victims of the Grenfell Tower fire.
    She had to have her makeup redone before she visited the Queen because she had been crying. Aides grew concerned that she might not be able to go on. "She looked tired and I didn't think she was thinking straight", one said.
    By the Friday after the week of the election, a senior political appointee decided help was needed, saying "she was absolutely beaten, grey-skinned. I've seen people with shell shock and she looked worse than that".

    The official suggested to Gavin Barwell, May's new chif of staff, that he get member of the SAS to speak to May about "resilience".
    The aide said "I can get you former special forces commanders ... people who have been in crunching encounters. They will realise it is in the national interest to keep her on track and keep her going". The offer was not taken up.
    According to a Tory who has discussed the events with a senior member of the Royal Household: "There was a high degree of uncertainty about whether Theresa May would survive".

    May had been to see the Queen the day after the election, an encounter the monarch appears not to have relished(?). In the private audiences between the Queen and Mrs May, I don't think the Queen finds any easier company than anyone else", the source said.


  • Advertisement
  • #3892
    Tropheus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,947 ✭✭✭Tropheus


    'There is NO cliff edge' Farage reveals Brexit plan to give UK the upper hand OVER Barnier

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/861019/Nigel-Farage-Tice-Brexit-UK-Barnier-Theresa-May

    A real gem from the Express. "Farage reveals Brexit plan". It's about three paragraphs long and tells us nothing. The farce continues and the cliff edge beckons.


  • #3893
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,565 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    Tropheus wrote: »
    'There is NO cliff edge' Farage reveals Brexit plan to give UK the upper hand OVER Barnier

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/861019/Nigel-Farage-Tice-Brexit-UK-Barnier-Theresa-May

    A real gem from the Express. "Farage reveals Brexit plan". It's about three paragraphs long and tells us nothing. The farce continues and the cliff edge beckons.

    I don't see Farage should get special treatment. Boris is just as bad. Self serving, bumblimg and a liar.


  • #3894
    Enzokk
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,997 ✭✭✭Enzokk


    Tropheus wrote: »
    'There is NO cliff edge' Farage reveals Brexit plan to give UK the upper hand OVER Barnier

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/861019/Nigel-Farage-Tice-Brexit-UK-Barnier-Theresa-May

    A real gem from the Express. "Farage reveals Brexit plan". It's about three paragraphs long and tells us nothing. The farce continues and the cliff edge beckons.


    It seems to me that these 2 are even more out of touch than anybody else. It must be nice not to be in a position of power where you don't have any responsibility to be accurate. Some of the gems from the article,
    The pair suggested that Remainers were scaremongering about massive tariffs after Brexit.

    They claimed going to WTO rules would even cut the weekly bills for Britons.

    Mr Tice explained: "The average tariffs are 3 per cent, and we have had a currency devaluation of 12 per cent so businesses are already making an enhanced profit.

    "I hope Liam Fox and his department are progressing at great speed to engineer trade deals.

    "If we go to WTO, we can unilaterally reduce tariffs from Africa, on goods we don’t produce - oranges, coffee, and so on - that would reduce people’s weekly bills."


  • #3895
    Nody
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 18,522 CMod ✭✭✭✭Nody


    Enzokk wrote: »
    It seems to me that these 2 are even more out of touch than anybody else. It must be nice not to be in a position of power where you don't have any responsibility to be accurate. Some of the gems from the article,
    I guess someone forget to tell them how imports are affected by the pound becoming worth less vs. exports being affected by the same... That's of course before the whole thing about importing the materials to produce the goods etc. but I have to agree with Farage that's it not an upcoming cliff edge if they don't get a deal; it's closer to jumping into an active volcano.


  • #3896
    murphaph
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,997 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    Jim2007 wrote: »
    The problem with that is that it is not a decision the EU can make on their own, under any circumstances! For visa free travel in Europe, you are covered by the EU/EEA/CH agreement or by Schengen. Any agreement there will also require the agreement of the non EU members as well. And needless to say the non-EU states such as Switzerland are concerned about the status of their citizens in the UK and so far this has not even been considered.

    I expect there will be strong opposition to anything other than the UK joining Schengen. To do otherwise would mean that they would need to setup a special scheme for the UK and I doubt there will be much support for that.
    My understanding of Schengen is that it is nowadays completely regulated by EU law, not treaty, so the non-EU member states basically have to like it or lump it. The EU alone legislates for Schengen. That's what the Schengen wiki seems to suggest anyway.


  • #3897
    Jim2007
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 10,877 Mod ✭✭✭✭Jim2007


    murphaph wrote: »
    My understanding of Schengen is that it is nowadays completely regulated by EU law, not treaty, so the non-EU member states basically have to like it or lump it. The EU alone legislates for Schengen. That's what the Schengen wiki seems to suggest anyway.

    For the EU members yes, it is incorporated into EU law, but for CH etc.. it is still an agreement and we in Switzerland need to vote on changes. This is an example of why the EU has said it never wants to do a Swiss bilateral deal again - it is too complicated.

    Similarly the work permit stuff will cause problems - the Swiss bilateral states that CH will treat all non EU member states as third countries. If now the EU were to come up with a different deal, then the Swiss deal needs to be adjusted as well, so a vote in Switzerland would be required and the whole immigration thing is a sensitive area in Switzerland too.

    The thing is that the bilateral has one very nasty sting to it, it states that if either the EU or CH reject an cause of it, then the whole thing falls! So if a vote on immigration were to fall, it would put at risk the free flow through the north/south trade routes of the EU, Pharma & Chemical certification etc...

    All this stuff was agreed at a time when no one ever gave a thought what would happen if someone walked out.


  • #3898
    ArmaniJeanss
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,858 ✭✭✭✭ArmaniJeanss


    Just a reminder that the Boris/MrKipling doc is on C4 in about 20 minutes.


  • #3899
    The Rape of Lucretia
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,440 ✭✭✭The Rape of Lucretia


    ArmaniJeanss wrote: »
    Just a reminder that the Boris/MrKipling doc is on C4 in about 20 minutes.

    Right after Queen Victoria solves the potato famine in Ireland.


  • #3900
    Water John
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,855 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    Trevelyan is stalking the UK again, I think.


  • Advertisement
  • #3901
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,565 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »
    Right after Queen Victoria solves the potato famine in Ireland.

    Seen that. Apart from Russians I've never seen a people more deluded about their past. We'll see exhibit B On next as Boris sings a colonial poem in a temple.

    Brexit will be an education in how a false sense of one's place in the world can have consequences.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement