Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

A Narcissist’s Prayer

That didn’t happen.

And if it did, it wasn’t that bad.

And if it was, that’s not a big deal.

And if it is, that’s not my fault.

And if it was, I didn’t mean it.

And if I did…

You deserved it.

I'll try and adapt the above text to Brexit and the border.

The border will stay open

And if it won't, then we'll implement a Trusted Trader scheme

And if we can't then it's the EU's fault

And if it's not then we'll tell Ireland to cop on

If we can't....

But we're a much more important country!

But the comment

Difficult to see Ireland agreeing to make it a bilateral issue now having expended so much diplomatic energy on Europeanising the border.

is from the BBC reporter.

trellheim wrote: »

It's Amber Rudd rubbish supporting Jeremy. This from the politician who had to resign over Windrush and then was sneaked in the backdoor a year or two later.

Rudd and Mordaunt are both backing Hunt. Poor man's head will explode.

Hurrache wrote: »

It possibly could easily have been a hard border of some type from the outset but Ireland helped ensure that it was a priority to keep it frictionless.

This has been a point made over and over, used an example of the great diplomatic work behind the scenes by Ireland, so I don't understand why people are having issue with it now.

You seem to be suggesting that Ireland could for some unexplained reason, have chosen not to take part in discussions about the border as though it were no concern of Ireland's. Ireland simply ensured that the border issue was not ignored as the British may have hoped it would be. But that isn't Europeanising it, the issue was always a European one. Ireland has simply made sure that Ireland led the European side on that particular issue. I expect Spain will do the same over Gibraltar, don't you?

It's amusing actually how the British appear shocked that the EU should side with its own members in border disputes with the U.K. which has chosen to become a third country. I'm a bit puzzled to see (I presume) Irish posters apparently agreeing with them on that.

10000maniacs wrote: »

Sorry to go back to the drugs thing, but Boris Johnson has in the past admitted to snorting cocaine in interviews, notably when he was running for London mayor. I could be wrong but I think he has been in the USA since 2007 which means he has answered the question on the Visa form, Have you used class A narcotics in the past?. If he answered Yes to the question, he wouldn't have gained entry to the USA.

Boris was a US citizen. He only relatively recently renounced his duality.

Shelga wrote: »

Laura Kuenssberg retweeting this rubbish: https://twitter.com/jp_biz/status/1137987535546834944?s=21

Apparently Ireland has ‘used a lot of diplomatic energy in Europeanising the border’- such absolute nonsense. The UK are the ones adding an external EU border right down the middle of our island, and we have no choice but to ‘Europeanise’ it due to our membership of the single market.

How can Kuenssberg claim impartiality?!

I don't read the tweet that way, it is a slight on Hunt thinking that we will decide to move the discussion of the border to bilateral talks with the UK having been able to get the EU behind us before. I don't know if the EU negotiators and Guy Verhofstadt visited the border to speak to the people either side of it, long before the UK side no less, was planned from the start. I would not be surprised if it was at our insistence to get the message across to them on how important the border is, not for trade but for security and peace.

This seems to be the part where the UK politicians and reporters as well fall down. They still don't seem to understand it but I do expect the BBC NI Economics and Business Editor to and it is his tweet. He also tweeted 3 other times to outline the other leadership hopeful positions on the NI border.

brickster69 wrote: »

Smells a bit fishy, buying off Brexiteers !

https://twitter.com/ActionBrexit/status/1137681519282130945

This is not new.

May woos rebel Labour MPs in effort to gain Brexit deal backing

The prime minister has asked two cabinet ministers to consult opposition backbenchers over legislation to protect workers’ rights after Brexit, although there is a fierce debate in Labour about how far to engage with the Conservatives.

Downing Street also confirmed that extra cash for deprived post-industrial areas was also under consideration, to allow “Labour MPs representing Brexit communities to say they have extracted something tangible”, according to a government source quoted in the Times.

So I am not sure what is fishy here, she bought the DUP with a £1bn extra funding for the region that no other region received so it was always on the cards that they would try it again.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

It's a border the EU shares with a soon to be non-EU state. Did Ireland ever have to "Europeanise" it?

We did not and I would love to know how much or hard we had to work to get it to the front of the EU negotiators minds. It doesn't matter, the point is we are not going to make bilateral decisions on what is now an important EU issue and anyone that thinks that is either delusional or a liar or obviously someone hoping to run the country. Seems par for the course.

If they are there are some Conservative MPs who could decide to abstain from that vote if they feel the new PM will be a danger for the country.

Maybe. However the Corbyn alternative would force them to vote the party line in my view since that forces an immediate GE and the implied "My Brexit's harder than your Brexit" contest between the Tories and the Brexit party that would immediately ensure, in the process further wrecking the Conservative party.


Theres also an interesting dynamic here - how far will the members stretch positions given the above alternative , a new PM knows this situation exists.

At some point the government here needs to detail plans of what a border would look like in the event of a No Deal Brexit.

Not having a plan at all is not an option, it would be incompetence.

Peregrinus wrote: »

There is a plan. Leo hopes not to have to use it, and would prefer not to unveil it, because it's not pleasant.

A closed border that splits communities in two policed by EU/Irish personnel is not a very appealing prospect. The fact that nothing has been released is enough to convince me that it’s not going to be pretty no matter how watered down it will be.

Peregrinus wrote: »

It'll be policed by Irish personnel. Also, it won't be rolled out immediately. The expectation (or hope) is that the horrors of no-deal will bring the UK back to reality fairly quickly, before it becomes necessary to introduce serious, effective controls on the Irish border. There'll be considerably sympathy in Brussels to the Irish wish for a bit of leeway on this.

But if there's a no-deal Brexit and, against expectations, it persists, yeah, the Irish border will have to be policed for customs and regulatory purposes. There is no way around this.

I agree. But not planning or not informing the public will result in more pain.
If there is a plan and certain roads are closed, which they will be, then people need to know in advance so they can adjust their lives and business accordingly.

It also takes time to build infastructure and this time needs to be quantified and planned for.

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

The situation at our border will be small beer beside the chaos at Dover and the Channel ports, and that chaos will bring the UK back to the table for a trade deal before Spring, and item 3 on the EUs list of upfront conditions for starting talks will be the backstop, so the border will be gone before we need any infrastructure.

So i've read.
But trade deals with the EU take a long time.
So waiting for the UK to rollover in some way is probably not the best plan here.

In that chaos goods leaving ireland may end up being treated differently due to the lack of customs enforcement on our nothern border.

In fact i am surprised media are not taking Leo to task over lack of planning here.