Brexit discussion thread II

Jim2007 · 02-10-2017 04:41PM

murphaph wrote: »

That's why border controls on the Irish border would need to be an order of magnitude more rigorous than the EU-CH border.

I don't think so, because in the case of the EU/CH border, you have to identify three categories: goods that can flow freely, goods that must be inspected and tariffs applied and goods that are just in transit through Switzerland to another part of the EU. Remember that most north/south goods end up going through Switzerland, so there is a very big volume.

Enzokk · 02-10-2017 04:54PM

Calina wrote: »

Solo, do you actually understand the problem with the border is?

The UK wants the EU to believe that the UK regulatorily identical to the EU while simultaneously retaining the right to cut out a load of regulations in order to sign other trade deals?

Did you not understand the brouha about chlorinated chicken?

If the UK is changing regs to suit itself, the border and transit of goods jas to be policed. The UK's contributions have been 'turn a blind eye to SMEs' and or vapour ware with drones and blue sky thinking.

You might call this reasonable. I call it delusional. The most reasonable solution is to stay in the SM.

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

According to the EU this discussion is premature. We're not there yet unless the EU wants to discuss trade and customs terms.

At present it is blocking discussion of trade terms unreasonably.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

I am including the post you are replying to here. That is extremely childish of you to reply like this. The question wasn't the UK position on the border it was whether you understood the problems that there will be with a border.

The fact that you replied like that shows you aren't really interested in debate or to learn anything here, even if it is just for yourself as we aren't going to sway the negotiations one way or another. We are mainly commenting on the progress of the talks and how each of us see it and maybe learn something new in the process.

But that you don't want to engage in a direct question on how you see the border working just makes it hard for anyone to reply to you.

So I will ask the questions again, do you understand the complexities of the border?

Do you understand that the UK cannot expect to have an open border with the EU when they have different standards than the EU?

Do you understand that if the UK wants to import chlorinated chicken from the US it cannot have a open border as the EU doesn't allow this?

murphaph · 02-10-2017 06:08PM

Water John wrote: »

I don't think Ireland should be in any hurry to set up borders, anywhere.
We don't want them. That's our clear message.

We don't want them but we're not children. We understand that it's a choice between membership of the single market or not. It's just as much our responsibility to protect the integrity of the single market as our other EU partners. If the UK crashes out, we either police the external frontier or we will find our own exports to the rest of the single market will face inspections as if they came from the UK itself.

flutered · 02-10-2017 07:04PM

murphaph wrote: »

We don't want them but we're not children. We understand that it's a choice between membership of the single market or not. It's just as much our responsibility to protect the integrity of the single market as our other EU partners. If the UK crashes out, we either police the external frontier or we will find our own exports to the rest of the single market will face inspections as if they came from the UK itself.

will the eu allow your worst fears to happen?

murphaph · 02-10-2017 07:11PM

flutered wrote: »

will the eu allow your worst fears to happen?

These aren't my worst fears. There are far worse things in the world than the unfortunate requirement to police the border with NI.

I don't see how the EU would be "letting it happen" however. If one big baby of a country decides to throw its toys out of the pram there's not much we or the rest of the EU can do about it. The single market doesn't work with a great big hole in the external frontier. Simple as that.

First Up · 02-10-2017 08:17PM

murphaph wrote:

The single market doesn't work with a great big hole in the external frontier. Simple as that.

And just watch how that will be clamped firmly shut.

mickoneill31 · 02-10-2017 08:22PM

flutered wrote: »

will the eu allow your worst fears to happen?

What are the options?
If the UK crashes out what should be done with the border?

LeinsterDub · 02-10-2017 09:18PM

EU's Brexit NIGHTMARE: Euro firms have £20TRN of contracts under threat if UK walks away
BANKS are facing seriously complex talks to in order to protect £20trillion worth of crucial financial contracts once Britain leaves the European Union.

When one of the ultimate pro brexit anti eu papers are running a story like this you know the UK is in trouble. Even the most hardened brexit supporter should see the writing on the wall

http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/861264/EU-Brexit-news-UK-economy-financial-contract-risk-derivative-Bank-of-England-Mark-Carney

blanch152 · 02-10-2017 09:50PM

LeinsterDub wrote: »

When one of the ultimate pro brexit anti eu papers are running a story like this you know the UK is in trouble. Even the most hardened brexit supporter should see the writing on the wall

http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/861264/EU-Brexit-news-UK-economy-financial-contract-risk-derivative-Bank-of-England-Mark-Carney

That article reminds me of the famous headline: "Fog in the Channel - Continent Cut Off"

Water John · 02-10-2017 09:56PM

Yeah the pro Brexit MP idiot's comment is priceless. A real wake up call from Carney.

Jim2007 · 02-10-2017 10:00PM

LeinsterDub wrote: »

When one of the ultimate pro brexit anti eu papers are running a story like this you know the UK is in trouble. Even the most hardened brexit supporter should see the writing on the wall

http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/861264/EU-Brexit-news-UK-economy-financial-contract-risk-derivative-Bank-of-England-Mark-Carney

But this is exactly the stuff the EU wants highly regulated, taxed to build up a bailout fund and preferably leave the UK taxpayer on the hook for it! So there is not chance of a deal that would not result EU courts and regulators having jurisdiction.

steddyeddy · 02-10-2017 10:09PM

Jacob Rees Mogg, has suggested that the UK have to do nothing in relation to the Irish border.

“We won’t have to,” he told a ConservativeHome event. “I don’t care if a few hundredweight of beef is smuggled across the Irish border. It will make no odds to the British economy. We have no obligation to put any border up. Full stop."

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-01/u-k-should-defy-demands-for-irish-brexit-border-lawmaker-says

Professor Moriarty · 02-10-2017 10:12PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

Jacob Rees Mogg, has suggested that the UK have to do nothing in relation to the Irish border.

“We won’t have to,” he told a ConservativeHome event. “I don’t care if a few hundredweight of beef is smuggled across the Irish border. It will make no odds to the British economy. We have no obligation to put any border up. Full stop."

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-01/u-k-should-defy-demands-for-irish-brexit-border-lawmaker-says

That's Barnier put in his place then. Jacob Rees Mogg. A man of the people. Tally ho.

Water John · 02-10-2017 10:13PM

Mogg has such time for the British people that they can eat any ould tripe from any country and that is the logical result of not having an external border.

Enzokk · 02-10-2017 10:46PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

Jacob Rees Mogg, has suggested that the UK have to do nothing in relation to the Irish border.

“We won’t have to,” he told a ConservativeHome event. “I don’t care if a few hundredweight of beef is smuggled across the Irish border. It will make no odds to the British economy. We have no obligation to put any border up. Full stop."

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-01/u-k-should-defy-demands-for-irish-brexit-border-lawmaker-says

Ah, the old if you ignore a problem it will go away. If he ignores the problem of the Irish border and Brexit then it will just not be an issue.

Samaris · 02-10-2017 10:55PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

Jacob Rees Mogg, has suggested that the UK have to do nothing in relation to the Irish border.

“We won’t have to,” he told a ConservativeHome event. “I don’t care if a few hundredweight of beef is smuggled across the Irish border. It will make no odds to the British economy. We have no obligation to put any border up. Full stop."

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-01/u-k-should-defy-demands-for-irish-brexit-border-lawmaker-says

And that is why this man should not be prime minister of the country. He not only doesn't understand, he doesn't understand why anyone thinks he should understand the issue of a land border between his country and a neighbouring one when there is the possibility of very different standards between UK and EU Ireland and a deeply contentious history of said border.

A statesman, a statesman, my kingdom for a statesman. All Britain has at the moment is politicians and god knows, it's a pretty low caliber of politicians at that.

Nody · 02-10-2017 10:59PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

Jacob Rees Mogg, has suggested that the UK have to do nothing in relation to the Irish border.

“We won’t have to,” he told a ConservativeHome event. “I don’t care if a few hundredweight of beef is smuggled across the Irish border. It will make no odds to the British economy. We have no obligation to put any border up. Full stop."

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-01/u-k-should-defy-demands-for-irish-brexit-border-lawmaker-says

Someone better explain to him how many billions the VAT scams alone would cost UK's treasury...

Then again he's against abortion in all cases but owns shares in a company selling abortion pills "because it follows local legislation". The man is a hypocrite of the first degree and being in UK that's saying something.

steddyeddy · 02-10-2017 11:05PM

Samaris wrote: »

And that is why this man should not be prime minister of the country. He not only doesn't understand, he doesn't understand why anyone thinks he should understand the issue of a land border between his country and a neighbouring one when there is the possibility of very different standards between UK and EU Ireland and a deeply contentious history of said border.

A statesman, a statesman, my kingdom for a statesman. All Britain has at the moment is politicians and god knows, it's a pretty low caliber of politicians at that.

I think Vince Cable is being the most honest with the British people right now.

murphaph · 02-10-2017 11:26PM

It's not even an option for the UK to turn an obvious blind eye to the border. WTO most favoured nation rules mean tariffs must be applied and if your country has an open border this is impossible to ensure unless you levy no tariffs on any country's goods!

Sam Russell · 02-10-2017 11:30PM

I think that the 2 Sisters Group scandal with the chicken (re)dating slaughter dates and putting returned product (from supermarkets) back into the production lines should sound alarm bells in the British body politic.

Now, we are worried about chlorinated chicken from the USA while the UK cannot even keep their eyes on EU food standards in their own factories. It was Channel 4 that uncovered this particular scandal.

The horse meat scandal was discovered here by our own surveillance system, and it was an organised crime involving many countries in Europe, not originating here in Ireland.

Talking of chlorinated chicken, there are two philosophies of tackling hygene in food production - the EU one and the US one. The EU insist that all production facilities are kept pathogen free at all times with proper oversight at all times, while the US system allows no particular oversight providing there is a clean up afterwards by dunking in a chlorine wash (and insisting it is up to the consumer to cook the product safely).

We need to begin looking at a closed border being necessary for NI because there is no way the UK will do anything to enforce it. We could not keep foot and mouth out, even though we had the full weight of the state enforcing it and the support of the NI devolved administration. What hope is there if the other side does not care?

Water John · 02-10-2017 11:34PM

We didn't keep Foot and Mouth out because we were turning a blind eye to lorry loads of sheep coming in from Scotland, through Larne.

Rain Ascending · 03-10-2017 01:19AM

Hmm, some weird signals coming out from the Tory party conference.

From the Guardian yesterday, they reported on some comments from the immigration minister, Brandon Lewis, at a Conservative fringe meeting:

Lewis confirmed that the final version [of the government white paper on post-Brexit immigration policy] will include a commitment that freedom of movement for EU migrants will end in March 2019 – on Brexit day

Also, on Newsnight on BBC2, Chris Grayling refused to confirm that the ECB will have supremacy over UK courts for the operation of the Single Market.

The latter might possibly prove to be true, by re-using for example, the Norwegian model of an independent arbitration panel, albeit reusing a lot of ECB case law. However, it seems a little improbable that this would be set up just for a transition period. By far the simplest approach would be to accept the ECB's jurisdiction for a temporary period and this is the most likely outcome given the slow progress of negotiations.

As for abrogating freedom of movement during the transition period -- forget that, it's a complete non-runner from the EU side. There may be some restrictions arising from the expectation that freedom of movement ends in 2021, but the basic principles will still apply.

I can think of a number of theories for such rather incredible positions being signalled ... and none of them reflect favourably on the current Conservative government.

I'd hate to be in a business trying to make Brexit go/no-go decisions on the run-up to March 2019. All this might be posturing for the Conservative party conference, but in that case, it will take months to roll back these public pronouncements that jeopardize the transition period being agreed to by the EU. The uncertainty levels are rising again...

Capt'n Midnight · 03-10-2017 01:51AM

steddyeddy wrote: »

I think Vince Cable is being the most honest with the British people right now.

Including the bit about him being the next PM with just 7.4% of the national vote ?

Problem is with both major parties hell bent on Brexit to appease slightly more than half of each of their respective electorate for opposite reasons.

FrancieBrady · 03-10-2017 08:07AM

Water John wrote: »

We didn't keep Foot and Mouth out because we were turning a blind eye to lorry loads of sheep coming in from Scotland, through Larne.

It was generally accepted that a good job was done on F&M. But it cost astronomical amounts of money and caused untold amount of hassle.
And even after that it probably only worked because there was a large degree of compliance and understanding.

You cannot hope to secure a border in the same way or to have the same resources to do it.
As I asked before, what happens after a dissident attack on one post? (which will surely happen)

You will have a quickly escalating descent into having to have an armed and provocative border again, and all bets are off after that imo.

Nody · 03-10-2017 08:17AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

As I asked before, what happens after a dissident attack on one post? (which will surely happen)

You will have a quickly escalating descent into having to have an armed and provocative border again, and all bets are off after that imo.

Well for starters you limited the number of allowed border crossings for road traffic and ensure the other points are not usable (digging a hole, concrete blocks etc.). Then you ensure the border crossings you keep open (and once again these will be limited) are heavily reinforced with concrete walls and buildings and a few suitable towers. Put them about a km in on Irish soil (with concrete walls from the border to avoid people turning off and spreading along the wall) with open fields around it to allow snipers a good long view around the point.

Can it still be attacked? Of course but it's going to be a hell of a lot harder...

murphaph · 03-10-2017 08:18AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It was generally accepted that a good job was done on F&M. But it cost astronomical amounts of money and caused untold amount of hassle.
And even after that it probably only worked because there was a large degree of compliance and understanding.

You cannot hope to secure a border in the same way or to have the same resources to do it.
As I asked before, what happens after a dissident attack on one post? (which will surely happen)

You will have a quickly escalating descent into having to have an armed and provocative border again, and all bets are off after that imo.

A dissident attack on an Irish customs post in the Republic you mean? I don't see that quickly escalating tbh. Where would the popular support for such attacks come?

blanch152 · 03-10-2017 09:15AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It was generally accepted that a good job was done on F&M. But it cost astronomical amounts of money and caused untold amount of hassle.
And even after that it probably only worked because there was a large degree of compliance and understanding.

You cannot hope to secure a border in the same way or to have the same resources to do it.
As I asked before, what happens after a dissident attack on one post? (which will surely happen)

You will have a quickly escalating descent into having to have an armed and provocative border again, and all bets are off after that imo.

The world is different today than in the 1970s.

Social media would ensure that the full horror of any dissident activity would be publicised. Not even the hard men in Sinn Fein would be able to avoid condemning it. There would be overwhelming public condemnation of any such violence.

The only need for an armed border would be if there were republicans stupid enough to commit violent acts. Of course, there will be "good republicans" like Slab who will want to protect their criminal smuggling rackets and may well sponsor "dissident" activity.

Zubeneschamali · 03-10-2017 09:25AM

Nody wrote: »

Well for starters you limited the number of allowed border crossings for road traffic and ensure the other points are not usable (digging a hole, concrete blocks etc.).

The border is 500 km long, and does not follow any natural boundary like a river or mountain range.

There are more than 200 roads crossing the border. Many were blocked or blown up by the British Army during the troubles, and then quietly re-opened by locals. Many, many times.

There are roads that cross and recross the border multiple times going from A to B. There are farms that straddle the border. There are probably farm sheds that have a door either side.

It simply isn't a border that can be closed without huge, huge investment: compulsory purchases, land clearance, wholesale road closures, destruction of the livelihoods of people, farms and whole towns. And the locals will not co-operate with any such efforts.

Nody · 03-10-2017 09:49AM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

The border is 500 km long, and does not follow any natural boundary like a river or mountain range.

Which makes it a short border that's easier to control.

There are more than 200 roads crossing the border. Many were blocked or blown up by the British Army during the troubles, and then quietly re-opened by locals. Many, many times.

500km means a single patrol can drive the whole distance in a day to check for that.

There are roads that cross and recross the border multiple times going from A to B. There are farms that straddle the border. There are probably farm sheds that have a door either side.

So put up the concrete wall 3m high 50m in on Irish side of the border with a road next to it with a patrol driving down the road once a day.

It simply isn't a border that can be closed without huge, huge investment: compulsory purchases, land clearance, wholesale road closures, destruction of the livelihoods of people, farms and whole towns. And the locals will not co-operate with any such efforts.

Well NI then gets to petition their government to move the border checks as proposed by EU to the water edge to avoid exactly that; if not then yes that is exactly what Brexit means and welcome to the reality folks. As for huge investments we're talking about mandatory forced buying of land on the Irish side only (NI gets to ask the UK government for funds) for a 75m x 500km road implementation basically; same way they would go for a new highway. That is not going to be an excessive cost esp. with EU funded support to implement it.

FrancieBrady · 03-10-2017 09:49AM

murphaph wrote: »

A dissident attack on an Irish customs post in the Republic you mean? I don't see that quickly escalating tbh. Where would the popular support for such attacks come?

Entirely possible, if the Irish Gov are seen to be implementing partition, then god only knows where it could end up.

Brexit discussion thread II

Comments