Brexit discussion thread II

steddyeddy · 20-11-2017 07:41PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

Good for Amsterdam and hopefully Dublin gets the EBA.

This is a logical outcome of Brexit. I'm not particularly sad at the loss of these agencies it's just a part and seal of the UK moving out if the European Union. Britain will do just fine outside just like other countries do.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

No you wouldn't be. You're a sometimes Irish (depending on the thread) remain voter who's campaigning for a hard Brexit. I can't think of many Brexit related events that would actually affect you.

I'm not wasting time explaining why the UK leaving a regulatory body is bad for the UK.

steddyeddy · 20-11-2017 07:46PM

Bad news as Dublin loses out to Paris for European banking authority.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/paris-beats-dublin-for-european-banking-authority-1.3298881

solodeogloria · 20-11-2017 07:52PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

No you wouldn't be. You're a sometimes Irish (depending on the thread) remain voter who's campaigning for a hard Brexit. I can't think of many Brexit related events that would actually affect you.

I'm not wasting time explaining why the UK leaving a regulatory body is bad for the UK.

Good evening!

I'm not quite sure what the bold is meant to mean. I don't think it's appropriate to say that my political views should make you question my nationality. Being Irish isn't contingent on thinking the EU is wonderful. I've never said I'm anything but.

The UK will be able to build up its own competences in these areas. That'll be good for the UK. Considering that about 75% of employees wanted to quit at the thought of a move as soon ago as the summer there may be jobs for them at a British regulator. (Edit: Most of the EBA jobs should be easily enough filled through the Bank of England's PRA and FCA at Threadneedle Street)

I honestly wish the rest of the EU27 the best in their endeavours, but I think the UK has definitely made the right decision to come out.

I simply disagree with you.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

ancapailldorcha · 20-11-2017 07:55PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

Bad news as Dublin loses out to Paris for European banking authority.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/paris-beats-dublin-for-european-banking-authority-1.3298881

Was going to post that I was expecting this. Macron seems quite assertive and this would be an excellent opportunity for him to claim a quick win and to set the tone for his government. Can't say I'm happy about this but fair play to him.

solodeogloria · 20-11-2017 08:02PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

Hey Solo, no I'm saying that your story and background change depending on the thread you read. You change the facts to suit the thread.In other words I don't believe you believe your posts.

Good evening!

It really isn't OK to say that I'm not Irish because of my politics.

I've consistently said I voted remain and I changed my mind.

You might disagree with me on Brexit, express that disagreement but leave the ad-hominems at home.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Calina · 20-11-2017 08:04PM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Was going to post that I was expecting this. Macron seems quite assertive and this would be an excellent opportunity for him to claim a quick win and to set the tone for his government. Can't say I'm happy about this but fair play to him.

It would be really interesting to know which country abstained in that last voting round though. We know for the EMA it was Slovakia.

To be fair though, I think there's evidence that Irish diplomats are punching far above their weight here which augurs well for the future.

cml387 · 20-11-2017 08:04PM

Sir Ivan Rogers (HM ambassador to the EU before he resigned this year) has been speaking at an NFU conference. The Guardian has quotes from his speech, but this is relevant to us:

Sir Ivan Rogers, speaking at the NFU "On the Irish border - we all know this is an insoluble problem. You cannot have a soft border and regulatory divergence at the same time."

He has other very realistic and chilling things to say to British farmers which are worth reading, bearing in mind that farmers voted largely to leave.

Samaris · 20-11-2017 08:05PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

Firstly - it isn't a debt. It's a sum that Britain has agreed to give. That's very different. A commitment isn't the same as a debt.

Secondly - there is a figure beyond which is unreasonable. Going much beyond 3 years of commitments plus assets is going to be beyond the pale and will more likely lead to no deal. There's no appetite in the UK for a punitive deal or to be made an example of for a democratic decision.

I'm hoping for reasonable heads over the next few weeks. £80bn is go whistle territory.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Why is it go whistle territory? What are the calculations that lead you to conclude that X, Y or indeed Z is reasonable or unreasonable other than "the British won't like it"?

And that bolded bit? That is exactly why the bit below will not work.

solodeogloria wrote: »

Needless to say - the logical approach for Ireland should be seeking to get the best trading terms possible with the UK by urging the European Commission to discuss trade and customs terms in phase 2 to find a resolution.

It would not be remotely logical to give away our position for something that affects us and our nearest neighbour (the North) far more than England (who gets the actual say for the most part).

There is too much wild argument that Britain should not honour their commitments, that to do so is the EU being mean to Britain (while refusing to give any standard of calculation bar "what the British people will like" which is an entirely irrelevant metric, btw). It is a sad and shameful thing, but there it is.

Wild talk, incompetence and sneering disregard for deals already made has its consequences. It has only taken a year for Britain to throw away forty years of reputation for honourable dealings.

It is pointless to complain when other countries look out for their own best interests rather than Britain's. Especially when most of the noise coming out of Britain regarding it has been hot air and insults to their neighbours.

solodeogloria · 20-11-2017 08:13PM

Good evening!

Samaris wrote: »

Why is it go whistle territory? What are the calculations that lead you to conclude that X, Y or indeed Z is reasonable or unreasonable other than "the British won't like it"?

And that bolded bit? That is exactly why the bit below will not work.

It's go whistle territory because there is no way that what the UK agreed to give will reach that figure. That's a lot of money that could be put to a lot of good within the UK. If the EU are serious about coming to a reasonable figure that covers what the UK has agreed to give for the budget schedule and other liabilities then we can discuss that. But £80bn / €100bn isn't a reasonable figure. That's quite similar to the war reparations that ambro25 discussed. The UK won't be "punished" or "made an example" of.

Samaris wrote: »

It would not be remotely logical to give away our position for something that affects us and our nearest neighbour (the North) far more than England (who gets the actual say for the most part).

There is too much wild argument that Britain should not honour their commitments, that to do so is the EU being mean to Britain (while refusing to give any standard of calculation bar "what the British people will like" which is an entirely irrelevant metric, btw). It is a sad and shameful thing, but there it is.

Wild talk, incompetence and sneering disregard for deals already made has its consequences. It has only taken a year for Britain to throw away forty years of reputation for honourable dealings.

It is pointless to complain when other countries look out for their own best interests rather than Britain's. Especially when most of the noise coming out of Britain regarding it has been hot air and insults to their neighbours.

A deal with a €100bn "bill" is a rubbish deal. It would be better to walk.

I'm personally hoping for a reasonable, mutually beneficial arrangement. That wouldn't be it.

If Ireland's interested in a good arrangement then it should be arguing for one. Namely a mutually beneficial deal with good trade and customs terms.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

hju6 · 20-11-2017 08:15PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

Bad news as Dublin loses out to Paris for European banking authority.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/paris-beats-dublin-for-european-banking-authority-1.3298881

Good news for the rest of Europe though

Vronsky · 20-11-2017 08:23PM

hju6 wrote: »

Good news for the rest of Europe though

How unlucky, lost after drawing lots

20-11-2017 08:25PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

It's go whistle territory because there is no way that what the UK agreed to give will reach that figure. That's a lot of money that could be put to a lot of good within the UK. If the EU are serious about coming to a reasonable figure that covers what the UK has agreed to give for the budget schedule and other liabilities then we can discuss that. But £80bn / €100bn isn't a reasonable figure. That's quite similar to the war reparations that ambro25 discussed. The UK won't be "punished" or "made an example" of.

A deal with a €100bn "bill" is a rubbish deal. It would be better to walk.

I'm personally hoping for a reasonable, mutually beneficial arrangement. That wouldn't be it.

If Ireland's interested in a good arrangement then it should be arguing for one. Namely a mutually beneficial deal with good trade and customs terms.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Based upon?

Samaris · 20-11-2017 08:34PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

It's go whistle territory because there is no way that what the UK agreed to give will reach that figure. That's a lot of money that could be put to a lot of good within the UK. If the EU are serious about coming to a reasonable figure that covers what the UK has agreed to give for the budget schedule and other liabilities then we can discuss that. But £80bn / €100bn isn't a reasonable figure. That's quite similar to the war reparations that ambro25 discussed. The UK won't be "punished" or "made an example" of.

A deal with a €100bn "bill" is a rubbish deal. It would be better to walk.

I'm personally hoping for a reasonable, mutually beneficial arrangement. That wouldn't be it.

If Ireland's interested in a good arrangement then it should be arguing for one. Namely a mutually beneficial deal with good trade and customs terms.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

The talk about being punished and the rest is childish, Solo. The UK government won't even agree on a metric by which to calculate it, they just chuck out wild figures and argue that they won't pay any more because the British people won't stand for it. That is ridiculous.

Ireland is in no good position if it gives up its only leverage of insisting the UK get its act together and come up with some solid, sound proposals for the border. If we bend over, we will get rogered, because the UK government knows very well that there are no good solutions and are either too cowardly or too incompetent to make more of a stab at it than airy-fairy "maybe we can do something techy to solve it". There will be no movement until the UK actually moves even to the starting line. We've been waiting months and the UK is still dithering in the dressing room. Ireland will protect itself. It's no business of ours to be protecting the UK at its own expense.

And a no-deal and refusal to honour commitments will be appalling for the UK. Because the UK then has to go to the WTO, where the other 27 countries that have just been shafted by the rather malicious incompetence of the United Kingdom have to agree to all of Britain's proposals - or not. Any single one of them (plus the unit of the EU which is also a member as a collective) can make life very, very difficult for Britain afterwards, and that is before all the other countries in the WTO have their say (and they will. They really, really will. The phrase "feeding frenzy" comes to mind, because the protectionism on certain products that has benefited the UK so far has only been won by the strength of the EU bloc behind them.)

The UK has been warned multiple times that it is not as easy as it seems to think it is. Walk. Pay nothing. The country that will ultimately be the worst damaged is Britain. But hey, the EU will suffer too in the form of Ireland, who gets second-worst screwed. I really don't see how this is a consolation, pissing off the nearest neighbour, plus the other 27 nearest neighbours, but apparently in the UK gutter press, it makes it all worthwhile.

Beechwoodspark · 20-11-2017 08:34PM

Good to see Barnier make it abundantly clear to the UK today that they are the ones who are required to propose a solution for the Irish border.

We need specific proposals not airy fairy talk of "imaginative", "creative" pipe dreams.

Calina · 20-11-2017 08:54PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

It's go whistle territory because there is no way that what the UK agreed to give will reach that figure. That's a lot of money that could be put to a lot of good within the UK. If the EU are serious about coming to a reasonable figure that covers what the UK has agreed to give for the budget schedule and other liabilities then we can discuss that. But £80bn / €100bn isn't a reasonable figure. That's quite similar to the war reparations that ambro25 discussed. The UK won't be "punished" or "made an example" of.

Okay.

There is a problem and it is this: the EU has provided a methodology for calculating Britain's liabilities on exit. We won't fight over the terminology one way or the other as that is a waste of time, but in general, there is a methodology. They have not actually put forward a figure although I believe the FT actually looked at the methodology and came up with a figure ball park 60 billion. I don't have the article to hand.

The UK has not responded in kind. Instead, responses like "we'll give you 20 billion" are bandied around, with no indication as to what they are based on, much, although the occasional person pops up with a multiple of the annual contribution which "seems" reasonable

If the UK is serious about moving on, they will stop bandying round figures around and start talking about the line items they are prepared to fund because they committed to them, or because they are pension fund contributions to cater for the staff who have worked on their behalf since 1973.

I go to an antiques fair every couple of weeks here, and sure, there's something I want, and we can haggle. This is not a 30 year old Parker pen to with round figures to be thrown around. There is a methodology to be agreed and that is part of the Article 50 negotiating period. It identifies what the UK has committed to and bases its outcome on that. It's not the throwing out of 20 billion, or 40 billion or whatever numbers you are using. I don't even care what they are. I care that they are not obviously based on an item by item assessment of what the UK has committed to pay for.

In short, the EU is interested in knowing what the UK is willing and prepared to pay for. It is not interested in figures. If the UK is interested in coming to a reasonable agreement, it will start talking about what it is willing to pay for.

You cannot say with any certainty what constitutes a reasonable figure until the items it covers have been enumerated. I'd argue that 100 billion may be well worth it, or may be excessive. It depends on the outcome of a job the UK has shown enormous unwillingness to do. So far.

solodeogloria wrote: »

A deal with a €100bn "bill" is a rubbish deal. It would be better to walk.

I'm personally hoping for a reasonable, mutually beneficial arrangement. That wouldn't be it.

If Ireland's interested in a good arrangement then it should be arguing for one. Namely a mutually beneficial deal with good trade and customs terms.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

I really don't know if it would be better to walk. You're not going to get any sort of a free trade agreement out of Europe for a long time if the UK does that and it is likely that 100 billion would be cheap in the face of that. About 250 billion worth of exports go to the EU from the UK per year - this will vary on trading conditions and on currency fluctuations of course, but the question is, how long would it take to amortize the loss of - say - services trade against coming to an agreement for 100 billion.

This is a good question and it is difficult to answer. In 2015, the UK exported 123 billion pounds sterling worth of services to the UK and this figure does not include transport, banking and travel - source so I suspect it under reports some what.

London First estimated that exiting the EU and negotiating a reasonable MFN set of terms would result in the UK seeing its exports fall by between 67 billion and 92 billion a year. They estimate services exports on their own would fall by 17 billion and note that this is a conservative estimate. They also have some estimates on leaving with no favourable terms See page 17 here. Note that report was written in 2016 by the way. Based on those figures, it would be maybe 2 years before the cost of not paying 100 billion would be felt.

But to be honest, solo, I think it's unlikely the figure would reach 100 billion and I'd much prefer the UK to actually sit down and stop throwing around figures almost randomly and start identifying the things they promised to pay for that they aren't now going to welch on.

MPFGLB · 20-11-2017 09:09PM

IF there is a soft border between ROI and NI (which the DUP and Tories hard liners dont seem to want) the revised border will have to be in the Irish sea and patroled from UK ports and within airports but what stops Scotland asking for the same as NI

Ie a soft border between NI and Scotland to ensure free movement and same trade deal as NI

Surely Scotland with all their protestations would be calling for this ?
And then what would be the argument not to give it to them since they had a majority remain vote

So the previous map may need a dashed line between Scotland and England

hju6 · 20-11-2017 09:09PM

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Good to see Barnier make it abundantly clear to the UK today that they are the ones who are required to propose a solution for the Irish border.

We need specific proposals not airy fairy talk of "imaginative", "creative" pipe dreams.

Yes great to see some unelected European twit making sound bites, the UK has a right to leave the EU as has any other still sovereign state,
the border issue is not just a problem for the UK but a joint problem both for the EU and the UK,

it takes two to make a border.

Samaris · 20-11-2017 09:14PM

Calina wrote: »

But to be honest, solo, I think it's unlikely the figure would reach 100 billion and I'd much prefer the UK to actually sit down and stop throwing around figures almost randomly and start identifying the things they promised to pay for that they aren't now going to welch on.

Entirely agree with your post, and just to reiterate, as has been pointed out many many times before, including in your post - that is all the EU has currently asked the UK to do. Start clarifying their position rather than making up wild numbers and basing them on "what the British people will accept". It is really, really not an unreasonable ask!

MPFGLB · 20-11-2017 09:18PM

hju6 wrote: »

Yes great to see some unelected European twit making sound bites, the UK has a right to leave the EU as has any other still sovereign state,
the border issue is not just a problem for the UK but a joint problem both for the EU and the UK,

it takes two to make a border.

Of course the UK and anyone can leave anytime ....the UK wants a good trade deal with EU...that is the price they will have to pay ..but they can walk away anytime

The exit payment and the border are 2 differnt things and the border needs to be decided by UK as they are the ones who wanted to take back their borders..
Hard or Soft the EU probably dont care ...its what the Irish want that is the issue
ROI and most of NI want soft while DUP seem to want hard

How a hard border works is not an issue

Its what the UK mean when they say they back a soft border ? They must have an idea how it will work otherwise EU just has a hard border

hju6 · 20-11-2017 09:20PM

MPFGLB wrote: »

Of course the UK and anyone can leave anytime ....the UK wants a good trade deal with EU...that is the price they will have to pay ..but they can walk away anytime

The exit payment and the border are 2 differnt things and the border needs to be decided by UK as they are the ones who wanted to take back their borders..
Hard or Soft the EU probably dont care ...its what the Irish want that is the issue
ROI and most of NI want soft while DUP seem to want hard

How a hard border works is not an issue

Its what the UK mean when they say they back a soft border ? They must have an idea how it will work otherwise EU just has a hard border

The border has existed long before the EU,

Leroy42 · 20-11-2017 09:38PM

hju6 wrote: »

it takes two to make a border.

Totally incorrect.

It is the UK that is making this border, by their decision.

That they have little or no idea how to do it or what the impact it will have and have reverted to basically calling the EU meanies for not helping them out is staggering.

In terms of the costs, €60bn sounds a lot but it is relative. The UK keep saying its too much, but why? If they had signed up to $100bn of projects then 60bn is cheap and vice versa.

As Calina said, the UK seemed annoyed that they are being asked for anything. But every divorce costs money, that they seem surprised is the shock.

I have yet to see any justification for them not agreeing with the number, apart from they do't want to.

It is time for the UK to start having a grown up conversation about this. There are negatives to this which seem to be ignored. Whether these negatives are worth it over time does not negate the need to understand the impact.

For too long the UK seem to think they will get everything. Barnier was cleaver today. He turned the simple May line of "Brexit means Brexit" back at them. Yes it does, Brexit means you leave and you can't keep those bits you like and dump the rest.

hju6 · 20-11-2017 09:41PM

Leroy42 wrote: »

Totally incorrect.

It is the UK that is making this border, by their decision.

That they have little or no idea how to do it or what the impact it will have and have reverted to basically calling the EU meanies for not helping them out is staggering.

In terms of the costs, €60bn sounds a lot but it is relative. The UK keep saying its too much, but why? If they had signed up to $100bn of projects then 60bn is cheap and vice versa.

As Calina said, the UK seemed annoyed that they are being asked for anything. But every divorce costs money, that they seem surprised is the shock.

I have yet to see any justification for them not agreeing with the number, apart from they do't want to.

It is time for the UK to start having a grown up conversation about this. There are negatives to this which seem to be ignored. Whether these negatives are worth it over time does not negate the need to understand the impact.

For too long the UK seem to think they will get everything. Barnier was cleaver today. He turned the simple May line of "Brexit means Brexit" back at them. Yes it does, Brexit means you leave and you can't keep those bits you like and dump the rest.

Anyhow all decisions are on hold now until glorious leader Merkel sorts out the German parliament,

Calina · 20-11-2017 09:44PM

hju6 wrote: »

Anyhow all decisions are on hold now until glorious leader Merkel sorts out the German parliament,

Really, they aren't.

flatty · 20-11-2017 09:45PM

I saw an email today from about as senior a UK banking lawyer as there is.
In summary, the brexit process is an absolute, and I mean absolute shambles, with an utterly clueless negotiating team on the British side who have not got an iota of what they have got themselves into. It was the most pessimistic report on the process I have yet read, and that is going some.
I honestly think, that if the UK persist with their current leadership and approach, it will be set back to the seventies.
There will be blood on the streets.

Beechwoodspark · 20-11-2017 09:46PM

hju6 wrote: »

Yes great to see some unelected European twit making sound bites, the UK has a right to leave the EU as has any other still sovereign state,
the border issue is not just a problem for the UK but a joint problem both for the EU and the UK,

it takes two to make a border.

I would respectfully suggest that the uk send their specific proposals to Dublin post haste so that dublin can analyse them.

Once both sides agree,then perhaps the uk can make some progress on phase 2 of the negotiations.

steddyeddy · 20-11-2017 09:51PM

hju6 wrote: »

Yes great to see some unelected European twit making sound bites, the UK has a right to leave the EU as has any other still sovereign state,
the border issue is not just a problem for the UK but a joint problem both for the EU and the UK,

it takes two to make a border.

Well the UK made the border originally under threat of war. Now They're endangering a peace deal proposed to deal with the problems partition caused in the first place. Sounds like it should be the UK's problem to me. If not it's only fair that the EU make it their problem.

hju6 · 20-11-2017 09:53PM

flatty wrote: »

I saw an email today from about as senior a UK banking lawyer as there is.
In summary, the brexit process is an absolute, and I mean absolute shambles, with an utterly clueless negotiating team on the British side who have not got an iota of what they have got themselves into. It was the most pessimistic report on the process I have yet read, and that is going some.
I honestly think, that if the UK persist with their current leadership and approach, it will be set back to the seventies.
There will be blood on the streets.

I saw a vision of “Mary” today,

ambro25 · 20-11-2017 10:02PM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Hmm... I saw a Trainee Patent Attorney opportunity at The Hague I almost went for. The Netherlands has a good history as a free-trading nation, almost as good as the UK's so it's an excellent choice. Fingers crossed Dublin gets the EBA headquarters. Be something of a consolation over the whole border fiasco.

The husband of a pretty vile Greek woman I used to work for worked for the EMA so I can finally point to some good coming from Brexit.

On the assumption that this is either private practice or industry and not an EPO job, The Hague is a great place to learn the ropes, ancapailldorcha

The EPO there (which I'm sure you'd visit very regularly pre-qual) is more 'chilled' than Munich, but just as busy and relevant (and possibly more so in some technical fields, e.g. they have a great telecoms/signals processing team there).

If there's still time, don't put it off: the profession is going to shrink severely in the UK, and I can see the numerus clausus striking for a few years in terms of UK final exams.

But if it's an EPO job: jump on it. Now. Yesterday. The training! the pay! the perks! (OMFG the perks!)

@ steddyeddy: nothing boring about it (solicitor types will tell you that, but really they're just jealous: they can't do the techy bit, so they can't do the job). Especially if you handle contentious stuff as well. I'd argue it's probably the least boring civil legal professional job there is: you never know what each day brings. As in: it could be the next Elon Musk walking through the door

flatty wrote: »

I saw an email today from about as senior a UK banking lawyer as there is.
In summary, the brexit process is an absolute, and I mean absolute shambles, with an utterly clueless negotiating team on the British side who have not got an iota of what they have got themselves into. It was the most pessimistic report on the process I have yet read, and that is going some.
I honestly think, that if the UK persist with their current leadership and approach, it will be set back to the seventies.
There will be blood on the streets.

Topically, on the subject of flatty's post. Yes, I can easily believe that. Can't be any different for your solicitor friend at the UK and EU financial law coalface, than it is for me at the UK and EU intellectual property coalface.

Brexit is a legal process first and foremost and, in legal terms -since we are trained, qualified, competent and experienced in it- the implications of just about every flavour of Brexit upon our respective areas of legal practice (including consequences for client affairs ruled by same) are easily and fully mappable, and have been since long before the referendum. Whence we have been warning and shouting from the rooftops about the oncoming iceberg, and continue to do so...but we might as well pee in a violin to try and get a tune out, because there's still only just static at the other end of the line.

I saw today that Nottingham University recently made a suggestion to have UK attorneys equivalenced as UK solicitors (the insult! the shame!

) so that they can enrol on the Roll of Solicitors in Ireland, with a view to maintain rights of access to the EU intellectual property office. Problem is, that doesn't work under current EU legislation, it would only get them right of access to practice before the Irish Patents Office (but not to enrol on the Irish registers). Now Nottingham University are second only to Queen Mary University in the IP educational stakes in the UK. But that's the scale of the problem. Right there. Even specialists who really should know better, are taking to wish on unicorns...

...unless that was Notts Uni demonstrating that it has already adopted the Brexit "snake oil merchant" economical model, and is just out to flog redundant unicorn courses at great expense :pac:

ancapailldorcha · 20-11-2017 10:02PM

hju6 wrote: »

I saw a vision of “Mary” today,

Don't spam this forum with nonsense please.

MPFGLB · 20-11-2017 11:37PM

hju6 wrote: »

The border has existed long before the EU,

I think like the Tories you dont seem to get it

There was a border thene there was not ..the past is not the issue

What there will be in the future is the issue and how it works given what Ni, ROI and the UK government say they want....this is what needs to be decided
and by the UK who have say ovr NI and say they want a soft border

Brexit discussion thread II

Comments