downcow wrote: » You are missing my point (and ironically making my point) There is an international border on the island of Ireland. Do you really not realise that?
downcow wrote: » You are being shortsighted Tom. Once we get the checks on the Irish Sea minimised and clarity in everyone's minds where the international border is, then we can certainly take advantage of our unique position. This puts any chance of Irish unity off for generations
Seth Brundle wrote: » Currently there is not a physical customs border at the border. There is no border there causing disruption of trade or movement of goods, services, money or people. What your unionist friends are proposing is to move the customs border as proposed and signed off by your UK government, from the Irish sea physically onto the island, knowing full well that will result in restrictions to movement. This in turn will result in violence. These opponents to checks at Lawns are the same people who happily lived with physical checks between NI and GB since whenever. They are content blaming both Dublin and the EU for what their government has done. They were warned that Brexit would cause problems for NI and would likely result in checks on the Irish sea and yet still agreed to them. So in summary, I am not making your point. There might well be a border between the EU and UK on the island but It is a virtual border that does not interfere with people's lives. Unionists want this to change so that it causes interference: something that most people find unacceptable. NI is lucky to now have a privileged position in terms of international trade a position many countries could only ever aspire to have. They can use this to finally make the place economically successful and wealthy for the people or they can remove this privilege and be an economic burden on the UK. However, would removing this elevated privilege be in the interests of the people of NI?
Lucy8080 wrote: » If only you had outlined that strategy to that Kid who caught fire to himself when trying to petrol bomb the P.S.N.I. .
downcow wrote: » You are getting confused with checks and an international border. And I don’t hear anyone saying to put a border in Ireland. You are dreaming that one up.
downcow wrote: » You are getting confused with checks and an international border.
downcow wrote: » We have to get away from any notion or reality of a border within the UK.
Seth Brundle wrote: » Both you and your unionist buddies want the removal of the border in the Irish sea. Where do you propose that the border between the UK and the EU goes?
Peregrinus wrote: » Are not you getting confused yourself. You say: All there is at Larne is checks. Presumably, then, it is perfectly clear that there is no border at Larne and the checks can stay there without in any way calling into question NI's position in the UK.
downcow wrote: » Not a all. We can play with words if you wish. But if anyone is claiming there is an international border in the Irish Sea then you are a fanciful wishful thinking republican. I accept you can call lots of things borders ie there is one between my county council and the neighbouring one. I suppose you could call the line at the tills in Tesco a border, as you need to pay for goods before crossing - but international border it is not
downcow wrote: » If a few of the checks were between Ireland and France, would that call into question Ireland’s position in the Eu ?
downcow wrote: » There is no border in the Irish Sea.
Seth Brundle wrote: » Grand so. Maybe tell that to Poots and the DUP and thr Loyalists who keep referring to the checks as such (my recollection is that you also have referred to it as a border).https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/politics/getting-rid-of-the-irish-sea-border-will-be-my-top-priority-says-edwin-poots-3238503?amp
downcow wrote: » There is no border in the Irish Sea. The border is between the two international states. I think you mean where do I want the checks?
downcow wrote: » The point I am making is that it is a border in the same way as the till at Tesco. That needs removed/minimised and of course we will all talk it up to ensure that happens. It’s politics. But the real border is on the island ie different currency, tax regimes, etc etc.
downcow wrote: »
Peregrinus wrote: » I think you’re asserting a simplistic terminology that you yourself don’t consistently observe, downcow. Obviously, the border between the United Kingdom and Ireland is the land border that runs from just outside Derry to just outside Newry. Nobody suggests otherwise and, if they did, they would be wrong. Northern Ireland is still fully a part of the United Kingdom. The NI Protocol does not change that. Nor could it, given the terms of the GFA. But it doesn’t follow that there is no border in the Irish sea. You yourself point to different tax regimes as something that gives rise to borders. But of course customs tariffs are taxes, and there are different tariff regimes applying in NI and in GB. The checks on GB-NI goods traffic arise precisely because different tariff regimes apply; and tariffs may need to be paid on goods that are brought from one customs regime into the other; that is why the checks are often referred to as a “tariff border”. Similarly it’s a legal border, because different legal regimes apply in England and Wales, in Scotland and in Northern Ireland; the borders between those parts of the UK represent the points at which one legal regime ceases to apply and another begins. This has been the case since the UK was created. And this is another reason for checks at the NI/GB border; goods entering NI are subject to a different legal regulatory regime than applies in GB; the NI/GB border is the border between those two legal regime. The border has become more pronounced as the differences between the customs and regulatory regimes in NI and GB become sharper. This is not because of any change in the NI regimes; they are much as they ever were. It is mainly because of changes in the GB regime. Is this an international border? If you think Scotland is a nation, England is a nation, etc then, obviously, yes. If you see the UK as a multinational state then it has several international borders within it. But what the NI/GB border is not is a border between sovereign states. It’s a border between different parts of a state which is becoming more significant as tax, laws, etc diverge more than they used to.
View wrote: » If a few of the checks were between Ireland and France, would that call into question Ireland’s position in the Eu ?
downcow wrote: » Very eloquently put. Can’t disagree with any of it. The UN is a good organisation to check out where international borders lie. I think they’ll clarify for you that the only border in the Irish Sea is the one between Roi and U.K. Of curse you can refer to the sea between Larne and Stranraer as a border in the same way as the one between Cardiff and Bristol.
downcow wrote: » Checks between Ireland and France on anything other than a very short term basis and for very specific reasons would be completely incompatible with the EU Treaties. If, as is currently the case, the NI protocol isn’t being worked, or proves unworkable, then Ireland will be faced with the choice of implementing a full land border or terminating our EU membership if we are unwilling to do the former.
View wrote: » There are passport checks due to our idiotic insistence on acting as though we are still part of the Empire but, were these challenged in the CJEU, the verdict might be interesting since an open ended commitment to the CTA is incompatible with the commitment in the EU Treaties to the EU being a freedom of movement area.
“There should be no doubt that there is no alternative to the full and correct implementation of the protocol,” Ms von der Leyen told a press conference after the conclusions were reached. “It is important to reiterate that the protocol is the only possible solution to ensure peace and stability in Northern Ireland, while protecting the integrity of the European Union single market,” von der Leyen added. “If we see problems today we should not forget that they do not come from the protocol but result from Brexit, that is the reason why the problems are there.”
View wrote: » There are currently permanent checks between France and Ireland so I have no idea what you are talking about.
Seth Brundle wrote: » No alternative to Northern Ireland Protocol, EU saysDisruptions due to Brexit, not protocol, says von der Leyenhttps://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/no-alternative-to-northern-ireland-protocol-eu-says-1.4574611
downcow wrote: » It’s positive that she has felt the need to say this. It’s like when a football chairman needs to say ‘our manager has the full support of the board’. Usually a sacking follows lol. Cheered me up when I heard her at it.
Seth Brundle wrote: » She reflected the views of the 27 EU members who are in unison on the TCA and NIP. It also seems to have irked the loyalist terrorist and criminal groups.
