seamus wrote: » Realistically we're only concerned about goods anyway, so you pick the major arteries and set up checkpoints to stop and check all southbound commercial vehicles (we don't care about northbound) while allowing passenger vehicles through unchecked on another lane. Some will take back roads to avoid it, but if you're driving an artic on your employer's time you're going to just take the M1 and not try navigate some rural roads. Getting a grip on 80%+ of goods movements should be doable inside a week. That's not to say the queues will move quickly. There'd be several hours spent waiting to be checked. A man with a chipper van could make a good killing.
Get Real wrote: » FrancieBrady wrote: » Not sure what the confusion is about this am. Surely all the posturing, all the negotiating and statements were about the prospect of a hard border if the UK exited without a deal? Surely that was why we needed a 'backstop'? We haven't, as yet got an agreed backstop. Of course there will be a hard border in those circumstances? I agree with you there. I'm just disappointed this morning that I read the EU seems to have put the ball in Ireland's court as they seem to be asking us to accept concessions. Rather than maintain a unified stancehttps://m.independent.ie/business/brexit/eu-now-looks-set-to-ask-ireland-to-accept-concessions-37739911.html In reality, okay, we'd need a hard border in a no deal Brexit. But, by the EU asking *US* for concessions, it puts a UK referendum issue in our court, and gives the UK a chance to deflect blame and say "well, we're waiting on Ireland's decision" Even though Brexit wasn't our idea.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Not sure what the confusion is about this am. Surely all the posturing, all the negotiating and statements were about the prospect of a hard border if the UK exited without a deal? Surely that was why we needed a 'backstop'? We haven't, as yet got an agreed backstop. Of course there will be a hard border in those circumstances?
Get Real wrote: » I agree with you there. I'm just disappointed this morning that I read the EU seems to have put the ball in Ireland's court as they seem to be asking us to accept concessions. Rather than maintain a unified stancehttps://m.independent.ie/business/brexit/eu-now-looks-set-to-ask-ireland-to-accept-concessions-37739911.html In reality, okay, we'd need a hard border in a no deal Brexit. But, by the EU asking *US* for concessions, it puts a UK referendum issue in our court, and gives the UK a chance to deflect blame and say "well, we're waiting on Ireland's decision" Even though Brexit wasn't our idea.
Get Real wrote: » I agree with you there. I'm just disappointed this morning that I read the EU seems to have put the ball in Ireland's court as they seem to be asking us to accept concessions. Rather than maintain a unified stancehttps://m.independent.ie/business/brexit/eu-now-looks-set-to-ask-ireland-to-accept-concessions-37739911.html
EU now looks set to ask Ireland to accept concessions
seamus wrote: » There's nothing in that about asking Ireland to accept concessions. The EU stating that a hard border is inevitable after no deal, is not news to anyone, least of all our Government. For whatever reason the Indo seems to be taking the line that the Withdrawal Agreement is still up for negotiation and that Angela Merkel can change it with the flick of a pen. I guess when the EU position has remained so consistent and unchanged, bad journalists have to invent drama to make interesting stories.
boggerman1 wrote: » Car crash interview by Michael creed on morning Ireland.still troting out the line that we don't want a hard border.everyone knows that there was going to have to be borders reintroduced once Britain decided to walk.if the EU border is now going to be Calais sure we in the south are going to be in the EU but outside the EU border or am I wrong.agriculture will be f**ked so
lawred2 wrote: » what's in it for the Indo to pen such crap? in the business section as well!
prawnsambo wrote: » One thing I took from that article was that Varadkar has met with opposition leaders to discuss the situation. And that's a good move. It cuts down on stupid questions being asked in teh Dail that will only exacerbate the situation and create more clickbaity headlines.
Call me Al wrote: » The easy way out of Britain's mess is for us to accept a time-limited backstop. Then that can gets kicked right down the road. Again. That's where we are being pushed.
EdgeCase wrote: » All this talk of leaving with the UK is insane. 1. The UK does not see us as a partner of any kind of equal status. We would have no say in anything that might impinge their notion of English sovereignty. So we would be begging for crumbs. 2. We have no formal arrangement with the UK beyond a travel area for Irish or UK people which is unaffected by Brexit anyway. 3. We use the Euro. Setting up the IEP again would mean almost certain economic collapse. Particularly given out debt load from 2008 and the likelihood of massive inflation. Even the practicalities of undoing that would make the UK's Brexit seem like a walk in the park. 4. FDI and even domestic companies needing EU access would leave rather rapidly. 5. The economic uncertainty would probably cause a flight of capital and savings to eurozone. Basically Irexit would be economic suicide. You'd pretty much destroy Ireland's economy, set it back to the 1950s and render us utterly beholden to the whims of the UK government. Does anyone (other than maybe the DUP) want that?! My view of it is hold on to what we have and ride this out, while maximizing any upsides to Brexit in terms of grabbing as much fleeing UK trade as we possibly can. Northern Ireland's situation will likely resolve itself too as political pressure in the north inevitably will be brought to bear should a hard border emerge or should the NI economy go into serious decline. An Irexit situation could set Irish independence back decades and turn us back into a de facto UK dependency. Also, if someone's going to drive a car off a cliff, you don't let them lock you into the boot!
RobMc59 wrote: » This whole view is based on NI collapsing and what can be "grabbed "from the UK-I thought it was the UK who was self serving and selfish?
Bob24 wrote: » A couple of months ago I was warning here of the danger of fully relying on the EU and the fact that the Irish border issue was just a way to pressure the UK meaning we would lose EU support on that matter as soon as that pressure point was not required anymore. I remember saying that on the day of a no-deal brexit it wouldn’t be the UK but the Rebublic which would pushed to reinstate border checks first, upon request of the EU. This is what the EC has confirmed and our government is still in total denial:https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/government-rejects-idea-hard-border-needed-in-no-deal-scenario-1.3767245
Russman wrote: » IMO only the very blinkered or stupid would put any "blame" on the Irish govt. if border posts have to go up as a result of a crash out. The world and its mother have known that there can't not be a border if there's no backstop or trade deal. No doubt one party would use it for political point scoring but most reasonable people would know its been foisted upon us by the UK's actions (in reality the DUP). In reality there's no choice, its not a will we or won't we put up a border, we'll simply have to. I think a hard border is by far the lesser of two evils if it comes to choosing between it or staying in the SM & CU. But I'd definitely be flagging our potential use of the veto when the FTA negotiations happen down the line.
Captain Obvious wrote: » We haven't lost EU support though. The hard border in the case of a no-deal exit was always going to be a reality. The EU have stuck by us in insisting any deal must keep regulatory alignment ion the island of Ireland.
Bob24 wrote: » Yes for what I have highlighted and this is what the EC is saying. But our governement is saying the exact opposite. Shows the panic building-up; and the false expectation I was referring to that the EU wouldn’t make any move towards reinstating a border non matter what.
BonnieSituation wrote: » But the blinkered and stupid do still exist. They're are people still angry at FG over VAT on kids shoes in the 82 budget.
Bob24 wrote: » But our governement is saying the exact opposite.
Bob24 wrote: » How sweet.
correct horse battery staple wrote: » Leo should drop the nuclear bomb And make it very clear that if UK leaves with no deal then Ireland will veto any trade deal with UK unless a border poll on reunification is held Keep repeating that from loudspeakers, it also offers a clear way out of Brexit mess for Ireland and Nothern Ireland, and hell with the rest of them
seamus wrote: » Realistically we're only concerned about goods anyway, so you pick the major arteries and set up checkpoints to stop and check all southbound commercial vehicles (we don't care about northbound) while allowing passenger vehicles through unchecked on another lane. Some will take back roads to avoid it, but if you're driving an artic on your employer's time you're going to just take the M1 and not try navigate some rural roads. Getting a grip on 80%+ of goods movements should be doable inside a week.
prawnsambo wrote: » You're parrotting a headline in The Indo where the body of the article doesn't back up the headline. As usual.
seamus wrote: » No, they're not? Our government have been playing it down because unlike Westminster we're intimately aware of the sensitivity about the border issue and that talking incessantly about a hard border will stir up the terrorists, and it will make it look like we're using a hard border as a bargaining chip or a threat. When it's neither. It's off the table. We cannot accept any agreement which contains a provision for a hard border.
