Brexit discussion thread II

Nody · 21-11-2017 01:30PM

Leroy42 wrote: »

Has there ever been any detailed breakdown of the advantages to Britain of leaving the EU.

There never has been any and that's why all "advantages" are vague "Oh we'll get great trade deals", "Oh we'll save money not spent on EU", "Oh we'll trade more with Asia the fastest growing economy" but if you press them for the hows, the whys etc. they always flounder. Take trade deals as an example; they UK government have now admitted they are not going to negotiate new trade deals but try to push for the same deal they had while part of EU (not realizing that EU offered a significantly larger market for said country to give such a deal) and then somehow down the line improve on it somehow. So remove all trade deals, then go back and negotiate to try to get the same deal you walked away from and that is somehow suppose to improve export?

The Rape of Lucretia · 21-11-2017 02:13PM

Leroy42 wrote: »

Has there ever been any detailed breakdown of the advantages to Britain of leaving the EU.

- we can keep foreigners out. Some of them are dark skinned or poor, and we dont want their kind around here steeling our jobs
- we wont have the Germans (who won the war guys?), or the French (who saved your ass in the war guys?) imposing their dodgy European legislation on us
- we wont have to pay money to Brussels, which they just send on to poor countries in eastern Europe after taking a generous gravy train cut themselves
- bananas will no longer have to be straight, and we will be free to grow our own curvy British bananas what we have been cultivating and enjoying for centuries
- we will be able to play the bagpipe in pubs again without being banged up in jail for breaking crazy European health and safety noise legislation.

LeinsterDub · 21-11-2017 02:13PM

Peregrinus wrote: »

The UK has already signalled a willingness to move close to the EU position on citizens rights (including accepting a degree of ECJ jurisdiction).

This will leave the Irish border as the principal outstanding issue, and the UK may be banking on a hope that that if they meet the EU on Money and Citizens, the EU will meet them on Border.

The UK has signalled a willingness to do many a thing, regardless of whether it's actually physically or technology possible.

It's time for them to actually put pen to paper and commitment .

Gerry T · 21-11-2017 02:27PM

Shelga wrote:

Question- I'm quite confused- EU member states are not allowed to form trade deals with other nations on their own, right? So Ireland, for example, cannot form a trade deal with the USA outside of the EU rules?

The EU negotiates a deal with say Canada, then we IRL trades with Canada under that deal. The deal the EU can strike is most likely far better than the one IRL could get on its own. Plus the EU has the capacity to discuss several deals at the same time with their resource.

Shelga wrote:

So they can come here and set up operations here for tax purposes, but we can't set the tariffs on goods we send to and receive from them? And the same for all of the other EU countries? Correct me if I'm wrong, I find it all quite complicated. How do we negotiate trade with USA, Australia, Canada etc?

If the come to IRL any work generated here is taxed in IRL.

Shelga wrote:

So why couldn't the UK be in the EEC/SM/CU, but then also form their own trade agreements with whatever countries they want? Wouldn't that make the most sense? Is it purely the politics of UK citizens not wanting 'uncontrolled' immigration?

To be in they first need to negotiate a deal and that would most likely require ECJ oversight. That's a red line for the UK.

An Ciarraioch · 21-11-2017 02:39PM

So, Arlene tells Leo he should "know better" than to propose NI remain within the Customs Union. I'd have thought the avoidance of a hard Border was the best means to secure Catholic backing for the Union, and maintain the economic position of floating voters, but that may be too subtle for the DUP!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-42064743

First Up · 21-11-2017 03:09PM

Shelga wrote:

So they can come here and set up operations here for tax purposes, but we can't set the tariffs on goods we send to and receive from them? And the same for all of the other EU countries? Correct me if I'm wrong, I find it all quite complicated. How do we negotiate trade with USA, Australia, Canada etc?

We don't. As part of the EU we are part of a single market, within which everything circulates freely. There is what's called a Common External Tariff that applies to all EU countries. So anything imported from (or exported to) non-EU countries is in the same terms for all EU countries.

US firms setting up here that want to ship stuff back the States will know the terms that will apply and that will be factored into their decision.

But most US firms that set up here do so to supply into the European market.

21-11-2017 03:13PM

Without Single Market membership (EEA at a minimum) there is no non hard border.

I wonder how many times this will need to be pointed out.

Heck, even the border that a 'in-EEA NI' would have is harder than today's.

Ardent brexiteers (but honest merchants) @ eureferendum.com flagged this issue up before the vote was even called. Here's an article from pre referendum on the topic http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=86001

The DUP are walking NI into that scenario, unbelievably willingly!

flaneur · 21-11-2017 04:07PM

You have to remember what you’re dealing with - the DUP.

Pragmatic politics has rarely been a feature of that party and they’re extremely dogmatic about any issue of national identity.

The mistake the Northern Unionists farmers and others made was destroying the UUP and voting in a hardcore party like this.

There’s no point in moaning about them when they bloody elected them because they felt they wanted more aggressive stances against SF.

May is giving them the sense they’ve huge power and that’s going to keep them in. I doubt she’s a great love of them, but she certainly knows how to keep them in position.

An Ciarraioch · 21-11-2017 04:38PM

Meanwhile, Simon Coveney maintains the Government's red lines:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/ireland-warns-theresa-may-increased-40-billion-brexit-deal-cant-buy-you-trade-talks-a3697201.html#comments

Panrich · 21-11-2017 04:46PM

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Meanwhile, Simon Coveney maintains the Government's red lines:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/ireland-warns-theresa-may-increased-40-billion-brexit-deal-cant-buy-you-trade-talks-a3697201.html#comments

The comments underneath that article shows the problem facing EU negotiators.

I particularly like this one

Eddie Crunt
2 hours ago
The South doesn’t want cheaper goods from the North finding their way south. It’s a problem for the South to solve,...not the North. Dublin wants the UK to make the border at Liverpool. The UK should simply tell Dublin to stop trying to annexe the North, and to solve their own problems.

Enzokk · 21-11-2017 04:48PM

Airbus has warned again that while they will not stop production of wings in the UK, future investments will now be fought for if there are tariffs on export items.

Airbus U.K. Warns of Brexit Risk as China Covets Wing Business

Airbus SE’s Chinese arm is clamoring for high-value work building wings currently made in the U.K. as Brexit threatens to blunt the country’s competitive edge, according to the group’s top British executive.

While the design and manufacture of Airbus wings represents one of the “crown jewels” of U.K. aerospace, every part is exported into the European Union and would be affected by any additional border friction and customs costs, Airbus U.K. Senior Vice President Katherine Bennett told British lawmakers Tuesday.

“We do build wings in China now, and believe you me they’re knocking at the door as a result of the situation that we’re in in this country,” Bennett said in front of Parliament’s business, energy and industrial strategy committee. Other Airbus divisions would “dearly love” the contracts, she said.

Chips Lovell · 21-11-2017 04:51PM

I think a hard border is what the DUP is secretly hoping for and is the main reason it campaigned for Brexit. Anything that widens the division between Northern Ireland and Ireland is fine by them. They don't care about the economic consequences since, for a long time now, Northern Ireland's largest industry has been the extraction of subsidies from Westminster by its politicians. Anything they lose from Brexit they can demand from the Exchequer. Keeping the place in a permanent state of tension eases that extraction greatly.

solodeogloria · 21-11-2017 04:52PM

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Meanwhile, Simon Coveney maintains the Government's red lines:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/ireland-warns-theresa-may-increased-40-billion-brexit-deal-cant-buy-you-trade-talks-a3697201.html#comments

Good afternoon!

It's a bit of a silly position. How open the border is depends on trade and customs terms. The UK will see through any attempt to keep it in the customs union and single market and to undermine the integrity of the UK and the deal probably won't get through parliament.

It's hard to see such a position as anything but fruitless. The Republic needs a good deal with the UK more than any other country.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

FrancieBrady · 21-11-2017 04:54PM

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

I think a hard border is what the DUP is secretly hoping for and is the main reason it campaigned for Brexit. Anything that widens the division between Northern Ireland and Ireland is fine by them. They don't care about the economic consequences since, for a long time now, Northern Ireland's largest industry has been the extraction of subsidies from Westminster by its politicians. Anything they lose from Brexit they can demand from the Exchequer. Keeping the place in a permanent state of tension eases that extraction greatly.

They campaigned for Leave just to take an opposite position to SF and to take vote share from the UUP. No other reason.

And they were absolutely wrong footed when the Leave vote won. Arlene started pleading for special treatment almost immediately. The arrangement with the Tories has insulated them somewhat but that is only temporary, they will reap the rewards soon.

Enzokk · 21-11-2017 05:02PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

It's a bit of a silly position. How open the border is depends on trade and customs terms. The UK will see through any attempt to keep it in the customs union and single market and to undermine the integrity of the UK and the deal probably won't get through parliament.

It's hard to see such a position as anything but fruitless. The Republic needs a good deal with the UK more than any other country.

Well the EU obviously doesn't agree with you or any other Brexiteers and in fact David Davis also agrees with the position that the border will need to be discussed first before trade. Otherwise why would he agree to the timeline of talks that was discussed at the first meetings between the UK and the EU?

Professor Moriarty · 21-11-2017 05:04PM

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

I think a hard border is what the DUP is secretly hoping for and is the main reason it campaigned for Brexit. Anything that widens the division between Northern Ireland and Ireland is fine by them. They don't care about the economic consequences since, for a long time now, Northern Ireland's largest industry has been the extraction of subsidies from Westminster by its politicians. Anything they lose from Brexit they can demand from the Exchequer. Keeping the place in a permanent state of tension eases that extraction greatly.

That might be a very risky strategy. As the UK continues to fragment and the economic realities of Brexit kick in, an essentially English parliament under severe fiscal pressure will wonder why it continues to subsidise NI. Especially if a Labour government under Corbyn is in power.

Chips Lovell · 21-11-2017 05:06PM

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

That might be a very risky strategy. As the UK continues to fragment and the economic realities of Brexit kick in, an essentially English parliament under severe fiscal pressure will wonder why it continues to subsidise NI. Especially if a Labour government under Corbyn is in power.

Then you just follow the usual template of Northern politics by subtly threatening a return to violence. Mountains will be moved and the taps will be turned on.

Professor Moriarty · 21-11-2017 05:12PM

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

Then you just follow the usual template of Northern politics by subtly threatening a return to violence. Mountains will be moved and the taps will be turned on.

Indeed. Both sides are adept at that game. I sometimes wonder if the DUP and SF are subconsciously colluding in maintaining and prolonging the divide in order to twist financial arms....

Sam Russell · 21-11-2017 05:12PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

It's a bit of a silly position. How open the border is depends on trade and customs terms. The UK will see through any attempt to keep it in the customs union and single market and to undermine the integrity of the UK and the deal probably won't get through parliament.

It's hard to see such a position as anything but fruitless. The Republic needs a good deal with the UK more than any other country.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

NO. First the UK must guarantee the open border by whatever way they can. That is a prerequisite for talks on trade. It is just as good a red line as no ECJ, no Single Market and No Customs Union, only it has the full backing of the EU27.

The UK are asked to come up with a solution, not anyone else. They have suggested magic beans and 'technology' but have failed to show anything that might have even a small chance of succeeding. The EU suggested special status for NI, like they have with the electricity market and animal vetinary standards, so that is one suggestion that might work.

There are no easy solutions, but talking trade comes after the solution to a 'frictionless' border.

Now you are an expert on the thinking of the brexiteers, so tell us what they intend to do. You were right in that they would go to £40 billion, but that is likely to be not enough, but it might be enough for progress to trade talks, if the other two items are covered. So come on, spill the beans - how can we get to a frictionless border?

Panrich · 21-11-2017 05:13PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

It's a bit of a silly position. How open the border is depends on trade and customs terms. The UK will see through any attempt to keep it in the customs union and single market and to undermine the integrity of the UK and the deal probably won't get through parliament.

It's hard to see such a position as anything but fruitless. The Republic needs a good deal with the UK more than any other country.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

The UK have already started negotiating trade and customs terms by ruling out the single market, customs union and the ECJ. If Ireland and the EU agree to move to phase 2 now, then it is tacit approval of that position and therefore the problem becomes an EU one. The UK will complain long and loud that everyone knew their position prior to phase 2 negotiations and will demand that this is not used to hold up progress.

flutered · 21-11-2017 05:19PM

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

Then you just follow the usual template of Northern politics by subtly threatening a return to violence. Mountains will be moved and the taps will be turned on.

if and when money is scarce the the brexiteers will throw n.i. to the wolves, they are already giving the world a classic example in self centeralism

Junkyard Tom · 21-11-2017 05:20PM

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Meanwhile, Simon Coveney maintains the Government's red lines:

The problem for Britain is that those are EU red lines. Britain isn't dealing with its 'bothersome' little neighbour any more. It's dealing with the world's richest trading bloc.

solodeogloria · 21-11-2017 05:21PM

Sam Russell wrote: »

NO. First the UK must guarantee the open border by whatever way they can. That is a prerequisite for talks on trade. It is just as good a red line as no ECJ, no Single Market and No Customs Union, only it has the full backing of the EU27.

The UK are asked to come up with a solution, not anyone else. They have suggested magic beans and 'technology' but have failed to show anything that might have even a small chance of succeeding. The EU suggested special status for NI, like they have with the electricity market and animal vetinary standards, so that is one suggestion that might work.

There are no easy solutions, but talking trade comes after the solution to a 'frictionless' border.

Now you are an expert on the thinking of the brexiteers, so tell us what they intend to do. You were right in that they would go to £40 billion, but that is likely to be not enough, but it might be enough for progress to trade talks, if the other two items are covered. So come on, spill the beans - how can we get to a frictionless border?

Good afternoon!

This requires us to get to stage 2 and discuss trade and customs terms. Switzerland isn't in the customs union but yet have come to an arrangement whereby 2℅ of traffic needs to be checked. If there's a will there's a way.

You cannot discuss the nature of the border until you deal with customs and trade terms. That's how you resolve how goods will move you can't discuss the border.

Unless you're seriously suggesting that it can be solved without discussing the trade of goods?

The EU never claimed the UK had to resolve all border issues before moving to stage 2. Any attempt to do so without discussing trade and customs is futile.

Panrich wrote: »

The UK have already started negotiating trade and customs terms by ruling out the single market, customs union and the ECJ. If Ireland and the EU agree to move to phase 2 now, then it is tacit approval of that position and therefore the problem becomes an EU one. The UK will complain long and loud that everyone knew their position prior to phase 2 negotiations and will demand that this is not used to hold up progress.

If the negotiations move to trade and customs then the discussion about how goods are traded over the border can be effectively discussed.

Until that happens there can be no progress on how open the border can be.

That's just common sense.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Chips Lovell · 21-11-2017 05:31PM

Making Northern Ireland part of the Stage Two negotiations has never been a goer.

Stage Two is the future trading relationship, i.e. what might happen post-Brexit.

Resolving the Northern Ireland conundrum is something that needs to happen.

To date, all we've heard from the UK regarding the future trading relationship has been wishful thinking and hand waving. You simply can't have Northern Ireland as part of that discussion because, for the moment at least, there's zero chance of it resulting in anything of substance. Which means that when Brexit day finally rolls around, the future trading relationship hasn't been established and nobody has any idea what to do Northern Ireland bar defaulting to a hard border.

flaneur · 21-11-2017 05:37PM

flutered wrote: »

if and when money is scarce the the brexiteers will throw n.i. to the wolves, they are already giving the world a classic example in self centeralism

Well when you talk to quite a lot of people in England, they've literally no idea of what the history of Irish-British relations and tend to either assume that the Republic is somehow in the UK, or that Northern Ireland is a land, far, far away that they've nothing to do with.

I don't know how many times I have had to explain that Northern Ireland *is* their problem and *is* part of the UK. I have even had to insist to a very junior UK HMRC official that the Republic of Ireland is *NOT* part of the UK too.

I've a few Northern Irish friends who are of unionist backgrounds and the one thing that always strikes me is that they're sort of lost between two identities. On the one hand they don't really consider themselves to be Irish in the way the rest of us do, and on the other hand many English people absolutely do not consider them British. I think it's often a wakeup call when they go to live in England and realise that many of the locals don't really know the difference between Belfast and Cork. I even spoke to one guy who thought Ian Paisley was the head of the IRA !

We still encounter tourists in Cork who get off the plane and are surprised that Ireland doesn't use Sterling.

When you ask them where the EU border is, they'd have assumed Dover as they completely forget that the UK has a land border with another EU country because they really don't consider Ireland "abroad".

My view of it is that the way forward long term in Ireland is probably a federal republic, with Northern Ireland as an independent state. There might even be a possibility of creating proper provincial government. You could easily have a 4-state republic.

However, I digress and am drifting OT.

Fundamentally, I think the problem is that the UK is really not a federal state and has never understood how to share power. It's a complete ad hoc mess with a history of extreme centralisation of power that essentially amounts to "England + Others". The same mentality killed their global power, starting with their refusal to allow autonomy in what is now the USA. No taxation without representation? ...

Northern Ireland has always operated a parallel political system and Scotland now effectively is doing exactly the same.

Brexit is very much a creature of English politics and most definitely not Scottish or Northern Irish.

Long term, I can't really see Northern Ireland being a success as a statelet dragged along by and being utterly dependent upon an increasingly unstable and jingoistic England. In the long term, I think you're going to see an increasingly prosperous Republic, with Northern Ireland increasingly sinking into being a UK regional backwater that really has no representation in Westminster. The current situation with the DUP propping up the Tories is just an anomaly. Long term, they DUP, SF, UUP and SDLP are in the "others" category in British political influence.

flutered · 21-11-2017 05:41PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

It's a bit of a silly position. How open the border is depends on trade and customs terms. The UK will see through any attempt to keep it in the customs union and single market and to undermine the integrity of the UK and the deal probably won't get through parliament.

It's hard to see such a position as anything but fruitless. The Republic needs a good deal with the UK more than any other country.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

the uk needs a deal with ireland more than ireland needs a deal with the uk, a deal with ireland is a deal with the eu27

solodeogloria · 21-11-2017 05:45PM

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

Making Northern Ireland part of the Stage Two negotiations has never been a goer.

Stage Two is the future trading relationship, i.e. what might happen post-Brexit.

Resolving the Northern Ireland conundrum is something that needs to happen.

To date, all we've heard from the UK regarding the future trading relationship has been wishful thinking and hand waving. You simply can't have Northern Ireland as part of that discussion because, for the moment at least, there's zero chance of it resulting in anything of substance. Which means that when Brexit day finally rolls around, the future trading relationship hasn't been established and nobody has any idea what to do Northern Ireland bar defaulting to a hard border.

Good afternoon!

How do you propose resolving how open the border should be without discussing how goods should pass through that border?

The EU is trying to cajole the UK into accepting single market and customs union membership for NI which isn't on for two reasons:
1) the UK doesn't want to undermine the integrity of the UK and the DUP don't want to introduce friction between Northern Ireland and the UK. Not to mention that far more trade happens between these two - £14.4bn to £3.5bn. It isn't in Northern Ireland's interests to do this.
2) if it's on a UK wide level it doesn't honour the referendum result which was won on the basis of taking back control of money, borders and laws. EEA membership falls short of this.

The bottom line is this insistence leads us to no deal and no resolution rather than a resolution on the border. There won't be movement on those.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

ancapailldorcha · 21-11-2017 05:46PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Unless you're seriously suggesting that it can be solved without discussing the trade of goods?

Of course it can. We're talking about how goods are transported and checked, not what tarrifs and regulations apply to their manufacture and sale. A trade deal is one which sets out to harmonise tariffs and regulatory standards. There is no reason why this needs to be discussed simultaneously with agreement for establishing and maintaining a border.

Leroy42 · 21-11-2017 05:46PM

It is telling that the UK is almost threatening Ireland over this issue. The standing seems to be that UK don't care and its up to Ireland to come up with a plan and keep its mouth shut otherwise.

Whatever about ones position on NI, it is not exactly the strategy that is going to win them many friends as they embark on signing multiple trade deals over the next few years.

They are basically saying that although they created the problem they really don't care one way or the other.

blanch152 · 21-11-2017 05:46PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

It's a bit of a silly position. How open the border is depends on trade and customs terms. The UK will see through any attempt to keep it in the customs union and single market and to undermine the integrity of the UK and the deal probably won't get through parliament.

It's hard to see such a position as anything but fruitless. The Republic needs a good deal with the UK more than any other country.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

I am not so sure that the Republic needs a good deal with the UK.

The clear first choice for Ireland is the UK remaining in the Customs Union and Single Market. This will preserve the status quo access to the UK market and no border with the North.

After that, it gets murkier. Any other option is bad news for Ireland. Paradoxically then, a hard Brexit with a hard border and no financial or legal passporting, may be the second best option as it offers greater opportunities to offset the definite losses.

Any deal in which British financial and legal firms retain the right to practice in the EU is very bad news for Ireland as it limits the opportunity to gain.

Brexit discussion thread II

Comments