Brexit discussion thread II

murphaph · 14-11-2017 09:52AM

Peregrinus wrote: »

That is what our government is doing right now.

But I disagree that the EU has made it a realistic option. I don't think the EU can make it a realistic option; NI's dependent status within the UK is not something the EU can change. The EU can offer a sea border as an option, but they can't make it be in NI's interests to accept it.

Agree entirely. They have offered it as an acceptable solution to them to the Irish border problem.

I have no problem putting the British government right over a barrel on this one.

solodeogloria · 14-11-2017 09:56AM

Peregrinus wrote: »

All that this tells us, solo, is that you personally agree with the red lines that Teresa May has set. Unless you are claiming some unique authority for yourself, though, that doesn't mean very much. May chose the red lines, and she was under no political or legal compulsion to choose red lines which appeals to solodeogloria. She could, for instance, just as well have chosen red lines which appealed to other Brexit campaigners, who during the referendum campaign warmly advocated the "Norway option".

None of this matter to anyone outside the UK. Whether the British people voted for Brexit fully intending that it would mean no-single-market, no-customs-union, etc and thereby leaving May no option, or whether the British people voted for Brexit leaving it up to May or to Parliament to determine what that meant and these are the choices that May has made, or whatever, is an internal UK matter. Either way, these are choices made by and on behalf of the UK, and the UK must wear the responsibility for making the choices. If these choices result in damage to Northern Ireland, the UK has done the damage. The UK has chosen to do the damage.

Good morning!

I don't accept this philosophy as you know. Both parties have a responsibility in respect to the outcome. The EU has a responsibility to Ireland as a member state. The UK has a responsibility in respect to Northern Ireland. Part of that responsibility includes maintaining the integrity of the union.

Britain needs to seek the best deal in its interests. Long term this is a free trade agreement which honours the terms of the referendum with bilateral terms in other areas and which allows more liberal trade terms with a wider world.

The only way I would accept the single market option would be if the EU were willing to compromise on immigration. The terms of customs union membership are too restrictive on trade policy.

I agree that Brexit is largely a British matter. It has an impact on other member states, particularly Ireland. It is in Ireland's interests to get the best deal possible for its goods. The EEA option is off the table because it doesn't honour the referendum result.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

ambro25 · 14-11-2017 09:59AM

solodeogloria wrote: »

<...>

Brexit must lead to a genuine taking back of control in respect to migration, trade policy, laws and an end to indefinite payment to the EU for it to have been worthwhile.

<...>

Posted this before, but the fast-cumulating anecdotal evidence is that the UK doesn't even need Brexit for that one anymore: the UK government's enduring prevarications and testiculations over Brexit are slowly but surely delivering on May's 100k/year promise, as masses of EU/EEA nationals are making serious and effective preparations to leave and are leaving (including yours truly).

Both those at the lower end of the pay scale, due to the FOREX situation of the GBP and the national mood they perceive in their daily life (to say nothing of newly-booming home country economies), and those professionals towards the top end of the pay scale, for restoring stability and predictability to their life plan in the face of the uncertainty maintained by the UK.

Not that the UK ever needed Brexit for 'regaining' that control over EU immigration (which is what "control of immigration" we're talking about here, as the UK has always had full control over non-EU immigration): all it ever needed to do (and which it was fully entitled to do under existing EU legislation), was to implement existing EU immigration rules. Like most of the other EU27 had long done.

But then, there was that problem of the shambolic and wholly-unfit-for-purpose UK immigration system to begin with, which needed Himalayan levels of public investment to accommodate such an implementation. And still does.

And that other problem, perhaps ever more fundamental than the above, that such an implementation would run counter to the national business model.

Of course, that brain drain is going to cause problems for the UK, some of which likely to have particularly serious short-term consequences for those left behind, others of which will only come out gradually over time as the UK's domestic economy begins to lag ever more. History is littered with evidence of the medium- and long-term economic consequences of large-scale brain drain (to say nothing of oversize capital flight).

But well. Omelettes, eggs and all that. "Price worth paying", isn't it?

Peregrinus · 14-11-2017 10:22AM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

I don't accept this philosophy as you know. Both parties have a responsibility in respect to the outcome. The EU has a responsibility to Ireland as a member state. The UK has a responsibility in respect to Northern Ireland. Part of that responsibility includes maintaining the integrity of the union.

Britain needs to seek the best deal in its interests. Long term this is a free trade agreement which honours the terms of the referendum with bilateral terms in other areas and which allows more liberal trade terms with a wider world.

The only way I would accept the single market option would be if the EU were willing to compromise on immigration. The terms of customs union membership are too restrictive on trade policy.

I agree that Brexit is largely a British matter. It has an impact on other member states, particularly Ireland. It is in Ireland's interests to get the best deal possible for its goods. The EEA option is off the table because it doesn't honour the referendum result.

But the referendum result is a UK choice, solo. Ireland does indeed want a close economic relationship with the UK, but all of the barriers to that, all of them, without exception, are being put up by the UK.

Ireland is trying, by proposing something like the sea border option. The UK is knocking it back. As it happens, I understand why the UK is knocking that particular solution back. But the bottom line is that the UK has come up with all these red lines, every single one of them freely chosen by the UK, and if nobody manages to find a way around them that will protect the interests of Ireland or of Northern Ireland that is the UK's responsibility.

When you "take back control", you have to be accountable for the way you exercise that control. So far, that control has been exercised in a manner entirely destructive to the well-being of both the Republic and Northern Ireland. If Brexiters are not willing to wear that, to take responsibility for it, it tends to reinforce the view that they don't have the political maturity to be trusted with control.

FrancieBrady · 14-11-2017 10:31AM

murphaph wrote: »

Would it make any difference to you either way? Even if the data proved the NI economy would be much worse off with a sea border than a land border, would you opt for the land border?

No, because I think it has huge implications above and beyond economic considerations.
I would think the difference economically is not that big.
I think it is important to show if ruling out a sea border is just a sop to unionists or not, going forward.

murphaph · 14-11-2017 11:17AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

No, because I think it has huge implications above and beyond economic considerations.
I would think the difference economically is not that big.
I think it is important to show if ruling out a sea border is just a sop to unionists or not, going forward.

It's all about a united Ireland and nothing else to you. You are ideologically opposed to a land border. It's like a Brexiteer is opposed to the EU. There's no reason for it. Just this belief.

Why do you even ask about the different economic implications for the land versus sea border? It's disingenuous because you are opposed to the land border on ideological grounds.

FrancieBrady · 14-11-2017 11:20AM

murphaph wrote: »

It's all about a united Ireland and nothing else to you. You are ideologically opposed to a land border. It's like a Brexiteer is opposed to the EU. There's no reason for it. Just this belief.

Why do you even ask about the different economic implications for the land versus sea border? It's disingenuous because you are opposed to the land border on ideological grounds.

Actually, I am opposed to it on practical grounds. It never worked at any time here, except during F&M/disease precautions when it was supported by voluntary compliance.

I think it is important to know just how economically different a sea border and land border are.

Is it wrong to ask for facts? Seems it is.

mickoneill31 · 14-11-2017 11:20AM

http://pca.st/l6kd

That's a link to this week's FT podcast on Brexit. They talk about the affect its having on immigration now and what that means for companies.

They mention that when companies were asked what they'd do when they can't get low paid workers to fill their jobs. The answer isn't to increase wages. They know that many UK workers don't want the low paid jobs so the increase required is more than the companies can afford.
So the alternative for many is to leave the job open and expect other workers to take up the slack.

This probably is reflected in what we can see happening. Unemployment is low but wages aren't increasing.

14-11-2017 11:29AM

After listening to so much Brexit stuff this is my considered opinion. Brexit will happen, it will be a hard Brexit, The UK will walk away without a deal and leave the EU to implement the border in Ireland.

Sterling will crash, but within months sterling will rebound by 25 percent as the world cops on that the UK is the worlds fifth biggest economy before Brexit and still is the world fifth biggest economy after Brexit.

I actually think if you have spare cash put it into sterling as it will be undervalued and will gain 25 percent.

listermint · 14-11-2017 11:29AM

mickoneill31 wrote: »

http://pca.st/l6kd

That's a link to this week's FT podcast on Brexit. They talk about the affect its having on immigration now and what that means for companies.

They mention that when companies were asked what they'd do when they can't get low paid workers to fill their jobs. The answer isn't to increase wages. They know that many UK workers don't want the low paid jobs so the increase required is more than the companies can afford.
So the alternative for many is to leave the job open and expect other workers to take up the slack.

This probably is reflected in what we can see happening. Unemployment is low but wages aren't increasing.

So basically work harder, for longer, for less with no EU worker protections

Sounds like the future utopia solo describes.

All this so some tories and their chums can get richer playing on the markets and devaluing labour.

Excellent stuff where do I sign.

View · 14-11-2017 11:29AM

The following table shows total NI sales & exports from 2015:

https://www.nisra.gov.uk/sites/nisra.gov.uk/files/publications/NI_Total_value_of_sales_and_exports_0.xlsx

listermint · 14-11-2017 11:30AM

6541 wrote: »

After listening to so much Brexit stuff this is my considered opinion. Brexit will happen, it will be a hard Brexit, The UK will walk away without a deal and leave the EU to implement the border in Ireland.

Sterling will crash, but within months sterling will rebound by 25 percent as the world cops on that the UK is the worlds fifth biggest economy before Brexit and still is the world fifth biggest economy after Brexit.

I actually think if you have spare cash put it into sterling as it will be undervalued and will gain 25 percent.

Terrible bet. The UK relies on the EU access for the bulk of its service. It won't have that in your hard brexit scenario

blanch152 · 14-11-2017 11:30AM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

It's obvious that the in the EU by the back door model (Norway) isn't going to work. I've explained why I'm opposed to it. It offers no benefit to the status quo. In fact less. The referendum isn't honoured. There will be calls to finish off the job into the future (I'd support these calls personally). There are obvious reasons why this is unacceptable.

However, a third country deal is still a very real option. Seeking a progressive third country arrangement is in the UK's interests and in the EU's interests. It is by far a harder option than the no deal or EU by the back door option.

Brexit must lead to a genuine taking back of control in respect to migration, trade policy, laws and an end to indefinite payment to the EU for it to have been worthwhile.

I understand in full that costs would be paid in other ways for this freedom but it is the best long term option for the UK.

A third country arrangement that preserves the UK economy would require the UK to effectively become a vassal state of the EU.

solodeogloria wrote: »

I won't be coming home due to Brexit. I've explained why if the horror stories are true I stand to lose a substantial amount. However at the time of writing things are looking good long term both in terms of my job and what I've got.

But on a more serious note - you don't care if Britain leaves without a deal and if that substantially affects Ireland's economy? No deal isn't something the UK would have to live with. I agree that is loyalty to the Euro-federalist project but it's not actually beneficial to anyone. This is why it's in Ireland's interests to secure the best deal possible.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Nobody in Ireland wants the UK to leave the EU (except for some deluded Republicans who believe it will advance the cause of a united Ireland and don't care it would be based on impoverishment). We know that Ireland will suffer if there is a hard Brexit. We want the UK to remain part of the Single Market and the Customs Union as well as keeping the four movements. That is the best solution for Ireland so excuse us if we are not helping with the Tory delusion.

blanch152 · 14-11-2017 11:34AM

View wrote: »

The following table shows total NI sales & exports from 2015:

https://www.nisra.gov.uk/sites/nisra.gov.uk/files/publications/NI_Total_value_of_sales_and_exports_0.xlsx

Basically, that table shows that 40% more of NI exports go to the UK than to the rest of the world.

Exports to the rest of the UK are five times the value of exports to the South.

Losing access to the UK would cripple Northern Ireland.

steddyeddy · 14-11-2017 11:49AM

blanch152 wrote: »

Basically, that table shows that 40% more of NI exports go to the UK than to the rest of the world.

Exports to the rest of the UK are five times the value of exports to the South.

Losing access to the UK would cripple Northern Ireland.

But a sea border would benefit us. Why would we not push for it?

FrancieBrady · 14-11-2017 11:50AM

blanch152 wrote: »

A third country arrangement that preserves the UK economy would require the UK to effectively become a vassal state of the EU.

Nobody in Ireland wants the UK to leave the EU (except for some deluded Republicans who believe it will advance the cause of a united Ireland and don't care it would be based on impoverishment). We know that Ireland will suffer if there is a hard Brexit. We want the UK to remain part of the Single Market and the Customs Union as well as keeping the four movements. That is the best solution for Ireland so excuse us if we are not helping with the Tory delusion.

I think the point is that the only way to ensure some measure of prosperity for northern Ireland is to do whatever is feasible to keep them in the EU, surely?

ancapailldorcha · 14-11-2017 11:53AM

steddyeddy wrote: »

But a sea border would benefit us. Why would we not push for it?

It's a red line for Theresa May and it violates the Supply & Confidence agreement between the Conservatives and the DUP.

solodeogloria · 14-11-2017 11:54AM

blanch152 wrote: »

Nobody in Ireland wants the UK to leave the EU (except for some deluded Republicans who believe it will advance the cause of a united Ireland and don't care it would be based on impoverishment). We know that Ireland will suffer if there is a hard Brexit. We want the UK to remain part of the Single Market and the Customs Union as well as keeping the four movements. That is the best solution for Ireland so excuse us if we are not helping with the Tory delusion.

Good morning!

If that doesn't happen (and it probably won't) then what?

The choice is pursue a decent bilateral arrangement between the UK and the EU outside of the single market and the customs union or advocate no deal.

That seems to be the choice. I'm of the mind that the negotiated bilateral third country arrangement is better than no deal.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

blanch152 · 14-11-2017 11:54AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I think the point is that the only way to ensure some measure of prosperity for northern Ireland is to do whatever is feasible to keep them in the EU, surely?

Eh no, Northern Ireland is in big trouble.

A border with the South causes some economic problems.

A sea border with the rest of the UK causes huge economic problems.

The order of preference for Northern Ireland would be as follows:

(1) All of UK stay in the Single Market
(2) Land border with the South
(3) Sea border with the UK

For the South (and the rest of the EU) the preference would be as follows:

(1) All of UK stay in the Single Market
(2) Sea border with the UK
(3) Land border with the North

The difference being that option (3) for the North would be an absolute economic disaster.

First Up · 14-11-2017 11:55AM

blanch152 wrote:

Exports to the rest of the UK are five times the value of exports to the South.

They wouldn't lose access, nor would intra-UK trade be subject to tarriffs or restrictions. It would however be subject to checks to ensure that goods originating in or destined for the EU were not evading UK/EU terms.

The bigger obstacle to a sea "border" is political. Britain cannot be seen to put up barriers of any sort with N.I.

blanch152 · 14-11-2017 11:56AM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

If that doesn't happen (and it probably won't) then what?

The choice is pursue a decent bilateral arrangement between the UK and the EU outside of the single market and the customs union or advocate no deal.

That seems to be the choice. I'm of the mind that the negotiated bilateral third country arrangement is better than no deal.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

I just cannot see a deal happening.

The UK will not be able to accept the terms of any deal that the EU will be able to put forward.

FrancieBrady · 14-11-2017 11:56AM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

It's a red line for Theresa May and it violates the Supply & Confidence agreement between the Conservatives and the DUP.

Which implies that the DUP are dictating Brexit policy for their own political gain. That is clear signal that the UK government is no longer neutral on northern Ireland does it not?

ancapailldorcha · 14-11-2017 11:57AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Which implies that the DUP are dictating Brexit policy for their own political gain. That is clear signal that the UK government is no longer neutral on northern Ireland does it not?

That's a topic for a different thread, but yes. The DUP has a hugely disproportionate influence on how the Brexit negotiations will proceed.

FrancieBrady · 14-11-2017 11:59AM

blanch152 wrote: »

Eh no, Northern Ireland is in big trouble.

A border with the South causes some economic problems.

A sea border with the rest of the UK causes huge economic problems.

The order of preference for Northern Ireland would be as follows:

(1) All of UK stay in the Single Market
(2) Land border with the South
(3) Sea border with the UK

For the South (and the rest of the EU) the preference would be as follows:

(1) All of UK stay in the Single Market
(2) Sea border with the UK
(3) Land border with the North

The difference being that option (3) for the North would be an absolute economic disaster.

You still have to provide data on the economic differences between a sea border and a land one.
Export data doesn't suffice.

steddyeddy · 14-11-2017 12:02PM

Peregrinus wrote: »

Neither did NI.

That's very true but if/when their economy crashes it will be the DUP and other Brexiters to blame, not the Republic of Ireland for looking after its interests.

blanch152 · 14-11-2017 12:03PM

First Up wrote: »

They wouldn't lose access, nor would intra-UK trade be subject to tarriffs or restrictions. It would however be subject to checks to ensure that goods originating in or destined for the EU were not evading UK/EU terms.

The bigger obstacle to a sea "border" is political. Britain cannot be seen to put up barriers of any sort with N.I.

That is wrong. Think about it.

The EU impost a 50% tariff on UK widgets.

Under your scenario Business A's Northern Ireland subsidiary could import those widgets tariff-free and restriction-free from the UK. Then, because the North has remained in the Single Market and the Customs Union, Business A's Northern Ireland subsidiary could move the widgets to Business A's German subsidiary tariff-free and restriction-free.

As a consequence, the EU's 50% tariff on UK widgets would be completely useless. Within a month, every EU business would have a paper subsidiary in Northern Ireland.

The reality is that a sea border means tariffs and restrictions on inter-UK goods and services. That would be economic disaster for Northern Ireland before you consider the political consequences.

demfad · 14-11-2017 12:05PM

blanch152 wrote: »

I keep hearing this argument that Brexit and the Tories are in breach of the Good Friday Agreement. At the same time, nobody has ever pasted a link to the exact clause or paragraph or section of the GFA that is being broken.

Yes, at one level it can be argued that the spirit of the GFA is being broken (but that is an argument rather than a fact) but you cannot take legal action based on that.

So my question is, what exact legal action do you want taken, and on what basis to what court?

Your statement in bold is untrue:

demfad wrote: »

A question debated here often is the compatibility of Brexit with the Good Friday Agreement. Well the principle barriers on both sides of the border have given their verdict: Not compatible.

The heads of the barrister profession on both sides of the Irish border have warned that Brexit is not compatible with the Good Friday Agreement.

Paul McGarry SC, chairman of The Bar of Ireland, and Liam McCollum QC, chairman of The Bar of Northern Ireland, made the remarks at the Annual Bar Conference in London, The Brief reports.

The pair were speaking alongside four other UK legal figures in a panel discussion examining “Brexit and the Bar”.

Mr McGarry told conference delegates that “the Good Friday Agreement and Brexit are incompatible for a number of reasons”.

He said one was the guarantee on free movement in the Good Friday Agreement, which was not compatible with the imposition of a post-Brexit border; another the entitlement of people born in Northern Ireland to Irish citizenship, which would mean a direct route to EU citizenship.

Mr McCollum described it as “an insoluble an issue as you could possibly imagine”, and agreed Brexit would “undermine” the Agreement.

He pointed out that the Agreement could not be amended and would therefore have to be renegotiated.

First Up · 14-11-2017 12:10PM

blanch152 wrote:

Under your scenario Business A's Northern Ireland subsidiary could import those widgets tariff-free and restriction-free from the UK. Then, because the North has remained in the Single Market and the Customs Union, Business A's Northern Ireland subsidiary could move the widgets to Business A's German subsidiary tariff-free and restriction-free.

I didn't say the North would remain in the Single Market or CU. It won't.

The checks on NI/British trade would be to prevent the Island of Ireland being used as a transit route.

blanch152 · 14-11-2017 12:18PM

First Up wrote: »

I didn't say the North would remain in the Single Market or CU. It won't.

The checks on NI/British trade would be to prevent the Island of Ireland being used as a transit route.

Well then we will have to have a land border with Northern Ireland, that is required under Single Market and CU rules.

Water John · 14-11-2017 12:18PM

So Demfad, any NI person could legally challenge a No Deal Brexit, Govn't policy, that limits their present rights and choices under the GFA?

Brexit discussion thread II

Comments