nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Brexit discussion thread III

ancapailldorcha

This thread is for discussing the departure of the UK from the EU. I will move some posts over shortly.

New posters, please read the forum charter before posting.

Regards,

The Politics Mods.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

LeinsterDub

blanch152 wrote: »

This has been done to death on these threads, bit suffice to say that trade with the UK mainland is more important to Northern Ireland than trade with the rest of this island.

Why would that be an issue for nationalists?

If brexit has shown us anything it's that strong emotional arguments can trump economics and if that logic is going to hold true anywhere in the world surely the North would be it.

Charles Babbage

blanch152 wrote: »

This has been done to death on these threads, bit suffice to say that trade with the UK mainland is more important to Northern Ireland than trade with the rest of this island.

The value of trade is not an accurate guide to the effect of paperwork on transactions. More important is: the nature of the products, their timeliness, the bulk of the order, the number of orders made for the same product, the number of orders from the same company, the price sensitivity of the products, the nature of government regulation of the products, the mode of transport used, the origin of the materials in the product, the variety in the products over time.

Consequently, your repetition of the above is a mere distraction.

ancapailldorcha

Sand wrote: »

I'm not sure that image is even that positive. It's still a transactional relationship, encouraging the UK to see a positive relationship as being one where the UK exploits the rest of Europe.

I think a positive message regarding the EU would have focused on the UK's connection to Europe. 'Europe is our home' or similar. I'm not a marketing guru, but defusing the nationalist aspect of Brexit involves accepting people want to return to the stability, which could be represented more by the UK as a European state.

Even British nationalists define themselves by feeling superior to the French and the Germans. They couldn't give a damn about the Kenyans or the Nepalese. Even in their nationalistic tendencies, the British define themselves within Europe, not the world. A positive message focusing on the UK as a traditionally European country could have portrayed itself as a the return to the good old days that Brexit voters were misty eyed for.

As it is, Brexit has increased the pressures on the UK to become a mere economic zone which is open to business for the entire world. That this rejection of globalism was so alien to Tories and Labour alike demonstrates how great the chasm between the British peoples and their political classes has become.

I see what you mean. However, relative to the rest of the material and much of the BSiE campaign, it is positive in that it embraces the idea of the UK leading the EU. If they hadn't been so restrained, I think material based on things like the single market being a Thatcherite idea might have swayed some of the Tory centre. Possibly not though given previous governments' lack of innovation regarding Europe.

I recall prominent leavers saying multiple times that the UK wasn't leaving the continent and taking care to specify that they were talking about the EU. The spiel about German car manufacturers went hand-in-hand with this narrative.

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Better the devil you know.

The bit that continues to amaze me is that those voters believe that Westminster would treat them better.

It's like they've never heard of any of the workers rights that come from the EU, starting with the Working Time Directive.

Of course. However, the only time I've seen the EU flag here to indicate that a project received EU funding has been at scientific conferences. Most people here have no idea that the EU even does anything for them outside safeguarding and building the single market.

There's no way workers' rights are going to improve post-Brexit. It was George Osborne and the Conservatives who led the charge for protecting bankers' bonuses, preventing the 48-hour working week cap and protecting Europe from Chinese steel dumping.

As Sand says, the British public are about to get more globalisation not less.

EdgeCase

I have lived in England and I have had long discussions with perfectly sane, reasonable and sensible English people about Brexit and to be quite honest, I don't think there's any prospect of Brexit being halted. Even if it were, there would be a Brexit 2.0 and the instability would just continue for decades.

For as long as I can remember, they've been fed a false narrative about the EU. They imagine monsters in Brussels and some kind of gargantuan administration, even though the entire EU is probably not much bigger than the UK's Home Office. They ignore facts and claim that the EU is entirely undemocratic - no question of the European Parliament being discussed, or the fact that it's still largely an intergovernmental organisation.

However, facts don't really seem to matter or carry any weight in this debate, they believe what they believe and there's no convincing them otherwise, as it fits all of their cultural biases about Europe and all things foreign. There's really no point in trying to discuss this form an Irish point of view, they don't see the world the same way and never will.

I really think we just need to accept them for what they are - a rather arrogant former empire that thinks its better than everyone else and the world owes it a living. They're not interested in being part of the EU and all we can really do is attempt to somehow work with that on a neighbourly basis and ensure that we're not played for fools or pushed into a position that undermines the Irish or broader EU economies. They're not going to change, and to be honest, forcing the entire EU to change to suit them isn't really an acceptable solution as politically, the neoliberal leanings of the Tories are totally incompatibly with much of Europe's centrist, social democratic kind of tendencies. One could argue that the pushes towards a far more neoliberal Europe (which were driven in a huge part by the UK) have already caused major political problems across the continent.

Also, don't fall for fake friendliness. The Tories couldn't give a toss about Ireland, as long as it's safely out of the way and doesn't impede their glorious Brexit. They would be quite happy to cleave us out of the EU, but you can be sure that in the event that happened, we would be back to being a British-dependent backwater again being bounced along.

Let's not kid ourselves, we're dealing with an ex who we divorced a long time ago and who always treated us as a possession, not a partner.

Charles Babbage

EdgeCase wrote: »

Let's not kid ourselves, we're dealing with an ex who we divorced a long time ago and who always treated us as a possession, not a partner.

An ex who is still living in one room of the house.

Strazdas

EdgeCase wrote: »

I have lived in England and I have had long discussions with perfectly sane, reasonable and sensible English people about Brexit and to be quite honest, I don't think there's any prospect of Brexit being halted. Even if it were, there would be a Brexit 2.0 and the instability would just continue for decades.

Yes, I think Brexit will go ahead as there are too many people on board the Brexit train for it not to.

It should be interesting though to see what happens to British Euroscepticism in the coming years. They have completely defined themselves by their opposition to membership of the EU and all of a sudden they will be outside the union, with no more scapegoats to blame for their own failings.

Nate--IRL--

Strazdas wrote: »

Yes, I think Brexit will go ahead as there are too many people on board the Brexit train for it not to.

It should be interesting though to see what happens to British Euroscepticism in the coming years. They have completely defined themselves by their opposition to membership of the EU and all of a sudden they will be outside the union, with no more scapegoats to blame for their own failings.

The EU will still get the blame.

Nate

flatty

They will die off. This isn't a flippant comment any more than looking at the demographic for a border poll, before I get shouted at in bold print.
They will leave the country in a very bad way, not that they'll care.

EdgeCase

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

The EU will still get the blame.

Nate

Of course it will, it'll be "It's so unfair" "they're bullying us by not granting us the exact same rights we had when we were a member, only without any of the reciprocal arrangements or responsibilities."

First Up

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

Strazdas wrote: »

Yes, I think Brexit will go ahead as there are too many people on board the Brexit train for it not to.

It should be interesting though to see what happens to British Euroscepticism in the coming years. They have completely defined themselves by their opposition to membership of the EU and all of a sudden they will be outside the union, with no more scapegoats to blame for their own failings.

The EU will still get the blame.

Nate

You think anyone in the EU will care?

Nate--IRL--

First Up wrote: »

You think anyone in the EU will care?

Not at all. The point was that the EU will remain as useful "baddie" for the UK establishment.

Nate

flutered

from yesterdays independant.co.uk, a deleated vid of farage thanking particular folk
http://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/breitbart-video-nigel-farage-1-5466536

First Up

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

First Up wrote: »

You think anyone in the EU will care?

Not at all. The point was that the EU will remain as useful "baddie" for the UK establishment.

Nate

To which they will be welcome.

Peregrinus

Charles Babbage wrote: »

The value of trade is not an accurate guide to the effect of paperwork on transactions. More important is: the nature of the products, their timeliness, the bulk of the order, the number of orders made for the same product, the number of orders from the same company, the price sensitivity of the products, the nature of government regulation of the products, the mode of transport used, the origin of the materials in the product, the variety in the products over time.

Consequently, your repetition of the above is a mere distraction.

It may be that the nature of NI's trade with GB is that it will be less affected by border-control-type non-tariff barriers resulting from a sea border than NI's trade with the Republic would be affected by the barriers resulting from a land border. In fact, I think this is probably correct.

But, still, NI's trade with GB is much, much bigger than its trade with the Republic. If a land border would impose, say, an average of 10% additional costs on trade with the Republic while a sea border would impose only 3% additional costs on trade with GB, the latter would still be more damaging to Northern Ireland, at least in purely monetary terms, since the GB trade is about four times bigger than the RoI trade.

Of course, it's not as simple as that. The RoI trade and the GB trade don't exist in separate self-contained bubbles and, whichever border is imposed, the ripples are going to spread through the NI economy and affect businesses that don't themselves trade across that border. You'd need some very careful modelling to work out which strategy is best to minimise the adverse economic impact of Brexit on NI.

Sam Russell

Peregrinus wrote: »

It may be that the nature of NI's trade with GB is that it will be less affected by border-control-type non-tariff barriers resulting from a sea border than NI's trade with the Republic would be affected by the barriers resulting from a land border. In fact, I think this is probably correct.

But, still, NI's trade with GB is much, much bigger than its trade with the Republic. If a land border would impose, say, an average of 10% additional costs on trade with the Republic while a sea border would impose only 3% additional costs on trade with GB, the latter would still be more damaging to Northern Ireland, at least in purely monetary terms, since the GB trade is about four times bigger than the RoI trade.

Of course, it's not as simple as that. The RoI trade and the GB trade don't exist in separate self-contained bubbles and, whichever border is imposed, the ripples are going to spread through the NI economy and affect businesses that don't themselves trade across that border. You'd need some very careful modelling to work out which strategy is best to minimise the adverse economic impact of Brexit on NI.

There are already some controls over trade between NI and GB, mostly to do with agriculture. This has all come about because of BSE and foot and mouth (of the agriculture type rather than political).

If there was a hard border between Ireland and NI, then a lot of trade would just not happen. Milk, pigs, and lamb would just not cross the border if there was any paperwork involved. We might be back to Daisy the cow 'emigrating' and becoming Gertrude the cow, but legal crossings would be rendered useless.

How Aldi and Lidl would operate, with their single all island distribution, will have to be seen. However Tesco and M&S could well leave Ireland if there was a hard border as they are not doing particularly well as it is.

The figures for NI trade both with GB and Ireland are not easy to determine as they are not reported in a way that is transparent. However, it is apparent that there is less trade S-N that the N-S trade. Why this is is difficult to determine, but it appears to be the case. Perhaps a sea border might redress this imbalance.

EdgeCase

I've had these discussions. They won't continue with all island distribution - they'll integrate the NI market with Scotland.

Some stores may also just shutter their operations in NI if the market is too small to service that way. It depends on how the costs work out.

It's a tiny market and these are going to be business, not political decision.

This changes a lot of economies of scale for some businesses.

Donegal is also at risk of issues in that regard as it potentially becomes much more isolated

Econ_

Sam Russell wrote: »

The figures for NI trade both with GB and Ireland are not easy to determine as they are not reported in a way that is transparent. However, it is apparent that there is less trade S-N that the N-S trade. Why this is is difficult to determine, but it appears to be the case.

I know next to nothing about N-S trade but I wonder if there are many hard nosed Unionists that choose to trade with GB more based more ideology rather than convenience.

Given that 44% of NI actually voted for Brexit, it's not hard to conceive that a lot of sub-optimal trade takes place on zealot-like ideological grounds.

Leroy42

EdgeCase wrote: »

I've had these discussions. They won't continue with all island distribution - they'll integrate the NI market with Scotland.

Some stores may also just shutter their operations in NI if the market is too small to service that way. It depends on how the costs work out.

It's a tiny market and these are going to be business, not political decision.

This changes a lot of economies of scale for some businesses.

Donegal is also at risk of issues in that regard as it potentially becomes much more isolated

Wouldn't that put Ireland at risk as well? Without the additional 1.5 million in NI, the economics of dealing in Ireland become less favourable and might that not lead to increased prices for us as well?

EdgeCase

Leroy42 wrote: »

Wouldn't that put Ireland at risk as well? Without the additional 1.5 million in NI, the economics of dealing in Ireland become less favourable and might that not lead to increased prices for us as well?

Possibly, but it's still 4.7 million and integrated into Eurozone systems. Economies of scale are always useful.

Effectively, NI will mostly end up being seen as part of the furherst flung areas of Scotland. It definitely drives business costs up.

There's still very little known about what the final picture will look like as the UK isn't being clear about what's happening.

The biggest risk in both jurisdictions is a shock type situation where everything has to change very rapidly. That would finish off a lot of businesses by giving them no opportunity to plan.

blanch152

Econ_ wrote: »

I know next to nothing about N-S trade but I wonder if there are many hard nosed Unionists that choose to trade with GB more based more ideology rather than convenience.

Given that 44% of NI actually voted for Brexit, it's not hard to conceive that a lot of sub-optimal trade takes place on zealot-like ideological grounds.

I think that is wishful thinking to be honest. People rarely put ideology before profit.

If it was the case, a neighbouring Catholic business which traded with both the UK and the South would quickly out-perform the Protestant business trading "on zealot-like ideological grounds".

FrancieBrady

Econ_ wrote: »

I know next to nothing about N-S trade but I wonder if there are many hard nosed Unionists that choose to trade with GB more based more ideology rather than convenience.

Given that 44% of NI actually voted for Brexit, it's not hard to conceive that a lot of sub-optimal trade takes place on zealot-like ideological grounds.

Look at the debacle when someone wanted a simple cake made. Make no bones about it zealotry will be a factor here.
Might be a wee bit softer 10 years down the road though.

catrionanic

blanch152 wrote: »

I think that is wishful thinking to be honest. People rarely put ideology before profit

The majority of people putting ideology before profit is exactly why we are in this Brexit mess in the first place!

Christy42

blanch152 wrote: »

I think that is wishful thinking to be honest. People rarely put ideology before profit.

If it was the case, a neighbouring Catholic business which traded with both the UK and the South would quickly out-perform the Protestant business trading "on zealot-like ideological grounds".

Economics rarely work so simply. Many companies are run suboptimally and yet manage to remain in business. Having said this I don't know of any businesses that refuse to trade with ROI on ideological grounds.

ancapailldorcha

Mod: Serious discussion only please. Posts deleted.

Capt'n Midnight

Econ_ wrote: »

I know next to nothing about N-S trade but I wonder if there are many hard nosed Unionists that choose to trade with GB more based more ideology rather than convenience.

“Our people may be British, but our cows are Irish…”
- Ian Paisley.

Capt'n Midnight

Why does home insurance always get more expensive?
It's a question that affects every home owner.

But you'll have to longer wait for an answer, and action on it because Brexit is taking £30m funds from the City regulator.

The City regulator has said it is facing a £30m Brexit bill in the year running up to the UK's withdrawal from the EU.

The Financial Conduct Authority will ditch "non-critical" work to find £14m, while the rest will come from reserves and fees from the financial industry.

Brexit has knock on effects.

also
Rise in numbers of Britons becoming EU citizens in 201

Econ_

Labour frontbencher Barry Gardiner shows Kate Hoey and Daniel Hannan how to really bash the GFA;

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-43706473?ocid=socialflow_twitter&ns_source=twitter&ns_mchannel=social&ns_campaign=bbcnews

Surely there'll be huge pressure on Corbyn to sack him from the shadow cabinet after his swift dismissal of Owen Smith for a far lesser offence.

Peregrinus

Econ_ wrote: »

I know next to nothing about N-S trade but I wonder if there are many hard nosed Unionists that choose to trade with GB more based more ideology rather than convenience.

Given that 44% of NI actually voted for Brexit, it's not hard to conceive that a lot of sub-optimal trade takes place on zealot-like ideological grounds.

Couple of thoughts:

1. There's no reason to think that this happens on any material scale.

2. To the extent that it does happen, there's no reason to think that it's only committed Unionists who make commercial decisions on this basis. There could equally be Nationalists who have an ideological preference for trading with the Republic.

3. So, one way or another, this is probably a wash, or close to it.

Hurrache

So David Davis at a conference yesterday claimed he hadn't anticipated dealing with FG would be so tough around the border issue and blames a change in government (?!?) and the fact SF are pulling strings behind the scene. How utterly bizarre someone in his role is still so dumb when it comes to Irish politics, but a lot of it must be purposeful misinformation.

The Irish government was accused by David Davis of bowing to political pressure from Sinn Fein yesterday and allowing the party to encourage its hardline stance on Brexit.

The Brexit secretary said that Leo Varadkar, the Irish prime minister, had allowed republican sentiment to play “a strong political role” in Brexit that had made it harder to resolve the impasse over the Northern Irish border. His claims were rejected by Dublin.

The row threatens to heighten tensions between the two governments amid talks aimed at resolving the border issue.

Five former Northern Ireland secretaries have written to The Times today to warn that a hard border “could threaten the very existence of the Good Friday agreement”.

Speaking at a conference in London, Mr Davis said…

https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/983591658355818497

https://twitter.com/OwenSmith_MP/status/983592690188242944

sink

Hurrache wrote: »

So David Davis at a conference yesterday claimed he hadn't anticipated dealing with FG would be so tough around the border issue and blames a change in government (?!?) and the fact SF are pulling strings behind the scene. How utterly bizarre someone in his role is still so dumb when it comes to Irish politics, but a lot of it must be purposeful misinformation.

It's very Trumpian. Despite the warnings from all sides and the decades of protracted and failed negotiation Trump claim healthcare in the US would be a breeze to solve. As soon as the folio gets put in front of him and he actually has to solve it, he asks 'who knew healthcare was so complicated' and blames everyone else under the sun for not delivering his promises. It's ridiculous Davis is an absolute clown.